Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
 Download Full Day's HansardDownload Full Day's Hansard    View Or Save XMLView/Save XML

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Thursday, 15 August 1974
Page: 1012

Senator STEELE HALL (South AustraliaLeader of the Liberal Movement) - I thank the Senate for the permission to make a very brief statement. I believe that there are 2 points at issue. It is one thing to meet the convenience of a prospective speaker to a piece of legislation and to adjourn the debate on that legislation, but in my parliamentary experience it is quite another thing to take out of the hands of the mover of the motion the time to which the debate on that legislation will be adjourned. To me, those things are quite separate. This action is dictatorial in the extreme. It is one thing to arrange an adjournment to meet the convenience of the prospective speaker, but to say to the mover of the motion that the debate on the legislation shall be adjourned to a date that the opposing side dictates is quite a separate issue.

I supported Senator Townley, as I probably would support him tomorrow in order to adjourn this legislation again. However, in my short time here I have not seen anyone dictated to as to the date to which the debate on legislation shall be adjourned. I do not think it is a good principle to which to adhere. That is the reason I voted as I did. I wanted to explain that because there seems to be some confusion. I believe it is a parliamentary convention which should be observed even though the numbers are against the particular desire.

Question put:

That the debate be now adjourned.

Suggest corrections