Mr JENKINS (5:06 PM) — Thank you for the guidance and I hope that I can rise to your expectations. The matter that I wish to raise tonight is to do with the Australian Sports Medal 2000, which appeared to be a very worthy initiative of the government during the Olympic year. Regrettably, there has been a bit of discussion about the way in which these have been administered, which in part denigrates the great effect that these awards could have had. I placed on the Notice Paper a question seeking to find out who had actually received these awards and if there were to be a list by electorate. Whilst I was given the number of awards that were presented, I was not given the names of those who received them by electorate. In explaining my concern about this, I indicate that this has been the subject of questioning in the Senate, and it has also been subject of articles in the Age where the question has been asked how in fact these awards were achieved.

This award was set up legitimately under the aegis of the Australian award system. It should be an award that has great credibility. I did not wish tonight to denigrate those that received the award. I think very many people that received the award did so quite deservedly. But, regrettably, the way in which this has been administered and carried out denies the award the proper status it should have been given. For instance, the awards were posted out to recipients, the recipients had no idea why they received the awards, and there were no citations, simply a cardboard box with the medal inside and a certificate that accompanied it. It first came to my attention that this was the way in which they were being distributed when I was contacted on behalf of one of the recipients whose certificate had been ripped. The person was asking how they could get a replacement certificate. There is a famous story that a previous parliamentary colleague the former honourable member for Wills, Phil Cleary, who received an award, had seen the box at his doorway for a couple of days and thought it was an empty pizza box that had been left behind. The boxes—if members have not seen them—are about the same shape as a pizza box.

My concern is that these awards, which were instituted legitimately, should have been of sufficient status that there was formal recognition of the way in which they were to be presented. I am told that in other parts of Melbourne, therefore in other electorates, there were more formal presentations of these awards. That gives me the inkling and feeling that in those places local members may have been provided with lists that enabled them to be involved in those presentations. In the case of my electorate, outside of the ones where I was involved, as were other members upon the invitation that we received in the nominations, I was not told of other recipients. I had local groups contact me to try to investigate how members of those groups were actual recipients of the awards; upon investigation and questioning I was able to find that out. To give some sort of recognition to the recipients, these groups asked whether I would participate in a formal public award presentation, and I did. I saw that as an appropriate way of trying to give proper recognition to these awards.

The answer to my question on notice indicated that these awards would be publicised and that there would be a list. It is now some six to eight weeks since that answer was given to me and there has been no such public recognition of the recipients. I have no way of knowing when that will happen. (Time expired)

Mr Slipper —Mr Deputy Speaker, I seek leave of the House to move the third reading forthwith.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Nehl)—I am sorry, you are ahead of yourself.

Mr Slipper —I was trying to truncate the debate.

Mr Leo McLeay —I raise a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. The member for Blaxland was on his feet seeking the call on these appropriation bills. He wanted to speak. I do not want to refuse leave but—

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER —I thank the honourable member; I know he is endeavouring to assist the House. If there is to be a debate on the consideration in detail, the normal procedure is to go from one side to the other. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance and Administration rose to get the call. I acknowledged him, thinking he was going to speak in response to the member for Scullin. He then sought leave, which was inappropriate at the time.

Mr Leo McLeay —Mr Deputy Speaker, I said that if he is attempting to close the debate we are not giving leave.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER —He is not in order to ask for that.

Mr Leo McLeay —Well, he did. He said, `I seek leave' and we are not giving leave.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER —Member for Watson, I have told him that I am not prepared to hear him at the moment. Resume your seat. The question is that the remainder of the bill be agreed to.

Motion (by Mr Slipper) put: