Michael Forshaw (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

We also know that it is not in the standing orders, but it is a procedure that has been long followed in this place to ensure an orderly flow of questions across the chamber between the government, the opposition and the minor parties and Independents. It is to ensure that senators from the opposition particularly get a majority of the questions and a guaranteed number of questions per day. We also know, of course, that in the Senate, unlike the House of Representatives, we have a specific time laid down for the period of question time. There is no set procedure, because of agreements made some years ago, regarding the way in which question time runs in the Senate. You need to bear that in mind because these fine, technical, legal points—or sophistry, in my view—and interpretive points being made about the standing orders are made without having regard to the fundamental understanding on the way in which question time works.

Senator Abetz, as I said, rose to his feet. No-one else did; it was his side’s turn to ask a question and he clearly was on their list of questioners. He asked his question. It was ruled out of order, as Senator Sherry has said, as other questions have been ruled out of order in this place. I recall a question being asked about a particular political party and its policy and because the wording was not quite correct it was ruled out of order. It happens with supplementaries, as we know. That is the end of the matter. You go on to the next person on the list on the other side of the chamber to ask the next question. That was what was going to happen. But there was a point of order taken by Senator Ellison endeavouring to argue that this supposedly clever question time tactic today was in order—and it clearly was not. The assertion that Senator Abetz, who, after some debate and shouting across the chamber, sought leave, was denied an opportunity to seek leave, is a false assertion. You, Mr President—and this is in the Hansardmade it very clear that the call for the next question was to go to the Greens in accordance with the understandings.