Save Search

Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Ch10 Legislation / PROCEDURAL VARIATIONS FOR PASSAGE OF BILLS / Bills declared urgent



Download WordDownload Word

House of Representatives                                Ch 10                                                 p 384

 

Legislation / PROCEDURAL VARIATIONS FOR PASSAGE OF BILLS

 

Bills declared urgent

There is no set period of time for the length of debate on any stage of a bill during its passage through the House. The length of time for debate on each stage of a bill’s passage may be influenced by such factors as:

  • its subject matter—whether the bill is of a controversial nature, whether it has the general agreement of the House, or whether it is of a ‘machinery’ kind;
  • the nature of the Government’s legislative program;
  • the urgency connected with the passage of the bill;
  • agreement reached between Government and Opposition; and
  • the number of Members from each side who wish to speak on the bill.
  • In some cases, however, the Government may wish to curtail or limit one or more stages of debate on a bill and finds it necessary to move the closure motion (the ‘gag’), which has the effect of curtailing debate on the question immediately before the House. 1 On other occasions the Government may resort to the use of the procedure for the limitation of debate (the ‘guillotine’), prescribed in detail by standing orders 82-85. A guillotine motion is usually passed prior to the commencement of the debate it proposes to limit.

    The guillotine procedure was introduced to the House in 1918. 2 The original standing order, adopted by a division on party lines, permitted an hour for debate on the motion for the allotment of time and ten minutes for individual speeches. These time limits were reduced in 1931 and 1950 to those currently applying (that is, 20 minutes and five minutes respectively). There was also the requirement that the declaration of urgency be approved by an affirmative vote of not less than 24 Members (which in effect then meant that at least a quorum of Members, including the occupant of the Chair, had to be present). This requirement was removed in 1950 on the grounds that it was unconstitutional. 3

    It was not until 1958 that the guillotine was applied to more than one bill in the same declaration of urgency, following the suspension of standing orders. 4 These were related bills debated cognately. The first occasion the procedure was used for unrelated bills was in 1971—strong objection was taken and even government Members spoke against the action. 5 However, this was to become a common occurrence. Statistics for the number of bills declared urgent each year since 1918 are given at Appendix 17. It can be seen that this figure increased considerably, to a record of 132 bills in 1992. The increase was attributed by Governments to the imposition from 1986 of Senate deadlines for the receipt of legislation from the House. 6

    The use of the guillotine declined significantly after the provision of increased debating time with the establishment of the Main Committee. 7 Another contributing factor to the decline in the 37th Parliament was that with the introduction of three sitting periods each year instead of two, the Government could introduce bills during one period with the expectation that they would not pass until the next.

    The preparation of the documentation necessary for use in the Chamber for the process of declaring bills urgent and allotting time and their subsequent passage, requires great care and can be very time-consuming. Also, because of the desirability of giving Members reasonable notice of government intentions in such matters, it is imperative that detailed advice of such intentions be given well in advance.

    The guillotine may not be moved in the Main Committee, but, having been agreed to in the House, may be applied to bills considered in the Main Committee. However, because of the delay involved in moving business to and from the Main Committee, it is likely that in normal circumstances bills needing urgent consideration would be taken in the House.



    For discussion of the closure motion see Ch. on ‘Control and conduct of debate’.



    H.R. Deb. (4.10.18) 6682-5; H.R. Deb. (9.10.18) 6715-53; H.R. Deb. (16.10.18) 6967-78.



    Section 40 of the Constitution states that questions in the House ‘shall be determined by a majority of votes’.



    VP 1958/27.



    VP 1971/577-83; H.R. Deb. (4.5.71) 2477-2508.



    H.R. Deb. (21.11.89) 2558-64.



    H.R. Deb. (9.11.94) 2950.