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
Wednesday, 16 October 1974
Page: 1782


Senator WEBSTER (Victoria) -I feel that it is reasonable for me, not having entered into the debate at the second reading stage, to speak on the third reading. I did not enter into the debate at the second reading stage because I thought that senators from Tasmania should have some say in the matter. But Senator Everett has attacked Senator Greenwood in this instance although Senator Greenwood, as the Deputy Leader of the Opposition in this place, had quite rightly risen to point out that on a delicate balance of one vote- and that was the vote of the member of the Liberal Movement in this placethe Government had carried its motion. It carried its motion on the vote of Government senators from Tasmania who voted to deny further funds being allocated to the State of Tasmania, and that is the fact of the situation.

If anyone had a right to speak on this Bill from the outset it was I, being a Taswegian by birth and having worked as a unionist on the waterfront in Melbourne and dealt with cargoes coming from Tasmania. I know very well the shipping problems that were involved with timber cargoes that used to be shipped from Tasmania. In my extra-senatorial duties I am now involved in questions concerning the great problems related to the bulk timber shipments that arrive on the mainland from Tasmania. It is interesting to note that the problems that exist in Tasmania can well be predicted to continue under this Labor socialist Government. I do not know why I mention Senator McLaren when I am speaking, but I think that by interjection to one honourable senator on this side of the chamber he asked: How would you cure it?' Obviously the Labor Government is devoid of any vestige of idea as to how it can cure the dastardly problems that exist in Tasmania at the present time.


Senator Milliner - Hoo, hoo.


Senator WEBSTER - I hear 'hoo, hoo' coming from the Government side. Honourable senators opposite are not interested in this matter. Not one of them mentioned the unemployment problem in Tasmania. Did the Minister for Agriculture (Senator Wriedt), take the side of those who are unemployed in Tasmania and try to give some proper evaluation -


Senator Douglas McClelland (NEW SOUTH WALES) (Minister for the Media) - Mr President,on a point of order I draw your attention to standing orders 213 to 216 relating to motions for third reading. Standing order 2 1 6 states:

On the Order of the Day being read for the Third Reading of a Bill, the Question shall be proposed 'That this Bill be now read a third time. '

If one refers to page 271 of the 'Australian Senate Practice', which was written by Mr Odgers, one finds the following:

The motion for the third reading is open to debate. On this motion it is permissible only to advance arguments why the Bill should or should not be read a third time. During the second reading and other stages there is ample opportunity for discussing everything that is relevant to a measure, and that opportunity is also available on the motion for the third reading; but at the third-reading stage, a Senator is not permitted to revive arguments raised and dealt with earlier in the proceedings on the Bill. Fresh argument may, however, be introduced, and misapprehensions arising from the second-reading debate may be discussed at the third-reading stage.

For the honourable senator to be reviving the debate and discussion at the second reading stage, as I suggest he is- having regard to his reference to the contribution to the debate by my colleague Senator McLaren- is, I submit, completely out of order and you should so rule, Mr President.







Suggest corrections