Mr ALBANESE (3:43 PM) —Mr Speaker, in question time today the member for Richmond asked a question that essentially went to whether Australia’s actions on illegal whaling will be consistent with our current negotiations on tuna, patagonian toothfish, illegal Indonesian fishing boats and a whole range of other issues.

The SPEAKER —The member for Grayndler will come to his question.

Mr ALBANESE —My question goes to the House of Representatives Practice and the impartiality of the chair. You may recall that, when the member for Richmond attempted to ask her question, she had to begin it again three times. She had to repeat the last paragraph—of what was a short question—some four times because of the extraordinary behaviour of those opposite, particularly those on the front bench, in breach of standing order 65(b). We also saw—

The SPEAKER —The member for Grayndler will stick to his question and not debate the issue.

Mr ALBANESE —Mr Speaker, I refer you to page 163 of the House of Representatives Practice—and perhaps I am one of the first people to refer to the fifth edition. It states:

In the circumstances, and I congratulate the member for Richmond on the extraordinary job she did—

The SPEAKER —The member will come to his question and not debate it.

Mr ALBANESE —The question is very clear, Mr Speaker. Do you believe, or will you at least examine the record today, that you acted in an impartial way when I was excluded from the House under standing order 94(a), given the conduct of those opposite?

The SPEAKER —The member has asked his question and is now debating the issue. I will respond to the member when he resumes his seat. I thank the member for Grayndler. I am certainly aware of the passage of that part of the House of Representatives Practice. I think it would be obvious that I was endeavouring to allow the member for Richmond to complete her question. Having said that, I certainly do take very seriously the part of the House of Representatives Practice that the member refers to. But the only way open to him if he wishes to disagree with the subsequent action taken by the chair is by way of a substantive motion.

Mr ALBANESE —Mr Speaker, my question to you is: when we return in the next session, will you behave in a way which treats both sides of this House equally?

The SPEAKER —The member for Grayndler is getting very close to reflecting on the chair.

Mr ALBANESE —Mr Speaker, do you find the behaviour of those opposite today acceptable?

The SPEAKER —The member for Grayndler will resume his seat.