Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
 Download Current HansardDownload Current Hansard   

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Monday, 4 May 1987
Page: 2239


Senator HAINES (Leader of the Australian Democrats)(5.04) —Pursuant to contingent notice of motion, I move:

That so much of the Standing Orders be suspended as would prevent Senator Haines moving an amendment to the motion.

I have moved for the suspension of Standing Orders because I ran out of time during the primary debate on this urgency motion of Senator Chaney's-the eminently reasonable Senator Chaney-before I could formally move to insert the words `and employer' after `trade union' in Senator Chaney's motion. Senator Parer indicated in his contribution to the debate that the Opposition will not oppose such an amendment, I suppose essentially because of the neutral nature of the wording of section 45d and section 45e of the Trade Practices Act. In simple terms, section 45d provides that one person shall not conspire with a second person to prevent the supply of goods or services by a third person to a fourth person. If anybody can keep up with that he is doing very well indeed.


The DEPUTY PRESIDENT —Senator Haines, you are getting rather far away from debating the suspension of Standing Orders. Your motion might well go through unopposed.


Senator HAINES —Thank you, Mr Deputy President. I was wandering into that area because during the debate I was asked why we would want to move this amendment and I was going to go on to say that the Laidely case was an instance which showed that there is no reason in principle why an employer cannot be in breach of section 45d. I abide by your ruling and shall not continue along that line. I ask that the motion be supported.