Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I have a question to you, and it concerns your ruling which you laid out prior to question time concerning the events in the parliament on 15 February 2007. Part of the concern that I do not think you have addressed goes to the fact, which Hansard will record, of, at about 3.21 pm on that day, my raising an objection about a remark being withdrawn and your directing the Leader of the House: ‘Then the minister will withdraw that last accusation.’ Part of the concern that we on this side of the House raised was the fact that the Leader of the House responded, ‘I am a little confused.’ That was his response to your direction that the remark be withdrawn.

Mr Speaker, as you pointed out in quoting House of Representatives Practice, it is up to the chair to determine whether or not language is offensive or disorderly. In that ruling you clearly indicated that it was disorderly language. You clearly asked the member to withdraw it, and he refused to do so and defied your ruling. Because of that, parliament was disrupted by a number of points of order for at least another 10 minutes. It is still an issue today. I ask you to reflect on that matter and report back to the House. I indicate to you on behalf of the opposition that we certainly do not regard the term that was used as being parliamentary or appropriate in this House. It was used again today.

Tony Abbott (Warringah, Liberal Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It may assist the House if I indicate to the member for Grayndler that, if the Leader of the Opposition finds the term objectionable, I will certainly withdraw it. But, as I have said before, will the real Kevin Rudd please stand up, rather than getting the member for Grayndler to do his dirty work for him.

David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Leader of the House would be well aware that he should refer to members by their electorate or their title.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We are now getting back into a situation whereby your position, as the custodian of the rules and proceedings of this House, is being drawn into question. It is not up to the Leader of the Opposition to object; it is up to you to determine, in accordance with the section of House of Representatives Practice that you read into Hansard prior to question time today, whether indeed language is parliamentary or not. It quite clearly is not parliamentary language. You indicated that. The Leader of the House defied you, as he did just then, in his response.

David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Manager of Opposition Business has raised his question. He is seeking a response from me and I will respond to him now.

Michael Danby (Melbourne Ports, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I want to draw your attention to section 92(b) of the standing orders. It says:

When the Speaker’s attention is drawn to the conduct of a Member, the Speaker shall determine whether or not it is offensive or disorderly.

David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for his assistance. I remind all members that I made a statement at the beginning of question time to cover this specific area. I said, amongst other things, that I had done some research. I said the previous sitting Thursday that, had the individual member found something offensive, I would give consideration to asking that it be withdrawn. I have ruled on the issue and I do not propose to revisit it.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I raise with you a separate question, which is whether or not it is in order for someone, upon being asked to withdraw an offensive comment, in accordance with your ruling, to defy that ruling.

David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I can check the Hansard, but as I recall I said that, if the member found it offensive, I would consider asking for a withdrawal. I do not propose to revisit the issue. I made a statement at the beginning of question time to cover this issue.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Can I take it that that precedent will be followed in future?

David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have given a statement. I refer the member to the statement I made at the beginning of question time and, in particular, to page 499 of House of Representatives Practice. I will reiterate the words. It says:

The determination as to whether words used in the House are offensive or disorderly rests with the Chair, and the Chair’s judgment depends on the nature of the word and the context in which it is used.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, Mr Speaker, and you did that—

David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will not have the point debated. If you wish to raise a question, that is in order, but it is not a matter for debate.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I am raising a question with you. My question is very simple: is that a precedent that you will follow—that is, upon being asked to withdraw by you it is acceptable for a member to not do that?

David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I say to the Manager of Opposition Business that we have discussed this. I have given a statement today. I do not propose to revisit proceedings from a previous day any further.