Save Search
    Prev   Next   Return to results listPrint ListEmail Document Link

Title

Ch14 Control and conduct of debate / RULES GOVERNING CONTENT OF SPEECHES / References to the Queen, the Governor-General and State Governors

Database

House Practice

Date

01-05-2005

Source

House of Reps

Parl No.

41

Chapter

Control and conduct of debate

Chapter No.

Chapter 14

Page

502

Section No.

 

System Id

procedural/practcer/chapter14.30.doc


Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Ch14 Control and conduct of debate / RULES GOVERNING CONTENT OF SPEECHES / References to the Queen, the Governor-General and State Governors



Download WordDownload Word

House of Representatives                                Ch 14                                                 p 502

 

Control and conduct of debate / RULES GOVERNING CONTENT OF SPEECHES

 

References to the Queen, the Governor-General and State Governors

A Member must not refer disrespectfully to the Queen, the Governor-General, or a State Governor, in debate or for the purpose of influencing the House in its deliberations. 1 According to May the reasons for the rule are:

The irregular use of the Queen’s name to influence a decision of the House is unconstitutional in principle and inconsistent with the independence of Parliament. Where the Crown has a distinct interest in a measure, there is an authorized mode of communicating Her Majesty’s recommendation or consent, through one of her Ministers; but Her Majesty cannot be supposed to have a private opinion, apart from that of her responsible advisers; and any attempt to use her name in debate to influence the judgment of Parliament is immediately checked and censured. This rule extends also to other members of the royal family, but it is not strictly applied when one of its members has made a public statement on a matter of current interest so long as comment is made in appropriate terms. 2

Members have been prevented from introducing the name of the sovereign to influence debate, 3 canvassing what the sovereign may think of legislation introduced in the Parliament 4 and referring to the sovereign in a way intended to influence the reply to a question. 5 The rule does not exclude a statement of facts by a Minister concerning the sovereign, 6 or debate on the constitutional position of the Crown.

In 1976 Speaker Snedden prohibited in debate any reference castin g a reflection upon the Governor-General, unless discussion was based upon a substantive motion drawn in proper terms. He made the following statement to the House based on an assessment of previous rulings:

Some past rulings have been very narrow. It has, for instance, been ruled that the Governor-General must not be either praised or blamed in this chamber and, indeed, that the name of the Governor-General must not be brought into debate at all. I feel such a view is too restrictive. I think honourable members should have reasonable freedom in their remarks. I believe that the forms of the House will be maintained if the Chair permits words of praise or criticism provided such remarks are free of any words which reflect personally on His Excellency or which impute improper motives to him. For instance, to say that in the member’s opinion the Governor-General was right or wrong and give reasons in a dispassionate way for so thinking would in my view be in order. To attribute motive to the Governor-General’s actions would not be in order. 7

Some previous rulings have been:

  • it is acceptable for a Minister to be questioned regarding matters relating to the public duties for which the Governor-General is responsible, without being critical or reflecting on his conduct; 8

  • restrictions applying to statements disrespectful to or critical of the conduct of the Governor-General apply equally to the Governor-General designate; 9

  • reflections must not be cast on past occupants of the position or the office as such; 10

  • the Governor-General’s name should not be introduced in debate in a manner implying threats; 11

  • statements critical of and reflecting on the Governor-General’s role in the selection of a Ministry are out of order; 12 and

  • it is considered as undesirable to introduce into debate the names of the Governor-General’s household. 13

    • Petitions have been presented praying for the House to call on the Governor-General to resign, 14 and remarks critical of a Governor-General made in respect of responsibilities he had held before assuming the office, and matters arising from such responsibilities, have been raised. 15



    S.O. 88.



    May , 23rd edn, p. 436.



    H.R. Deb. (24.4.18) 4120.



    H.R. Deb. (20.6.51) 142.



    H.R. Deb. (24.11.36) 2170.



    E.g. VP 1934-37/805-6.



    H.R. Deb. (19.2.76) 131.



    H.R. Deb. (25.2.69) 5-6, 12-13.



    H.R. Deb. (26.2.69) 207. But the rule has been held not to apply to a State Governor-designate, H.R. Deb. (19.8.2003) 18828.



    H.R. Deb. (1.4.30) 705-6.



    H.R. Deb. (10.6.14) 1982.



    H.R. Deb. (15.1.18) 2971, 2992; H.R. Deb. (18.1.18) 3218; H.R. Deb. (9.7.19) 10517.



    H.R. Deb. (14.8.07) 1870.



    E.g. VP 1976-77/577; and see ‘Petitions’ in Ch. on ‘Documents’.



    E.g. H.R. Deb. (14.5.2003) 14487-9 (adjournment debate); H.R. Deb. (13.5.2003) 13961-74 (questions without notice).