PARLIAMENTARY REFORM

The Hon. R.B. SUCH (Fisher) (14:41): Thank you, sir. My question is to you. Can you indicate what your level of commitment will be to reforming standing orders and other processes relevant to this house? Will you support a second regional sitting of our parliament?

The SPEAKER (14:42): I thank the member for Fisher for the question. Like you, member for Fisher, I have been here for 23 years so I do have some ideas about improving the place. I am very open to a second regional sitting. We do have all the gear, so there is no extra cost in buying the capital equipment. That said, it will cost the taxpayer money and that is a matter for the executive government. Modern technology is changing the reporting of parliament. Anyone can come into the chamber with a mobile phone, take pictures and put them on Twitter, and I understand someone has this very morning.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: As a matter of fact it is not a breach of standing orders. What it would be, if the person had permission as the television networks do, is a breach of the terms and conditions on which they were permitted to film from the gallery, but of course strangers (individuals) who come into the house are not under that agreement so it is not a breach since they are not required to have permission. My personal view is that the rule that only members on their feet, members in order, are pictured is honoured more often in the breach today than in the enforcement. I do not think we have any realistic means of enforcement, but I am in the hands of the house about that matter.

If Independent members are to have more questions in question time, which I think they should, it is necessary, I think, for them to be filmed by regional media and for filming to take place behind me rather than behind the clock, because if the filming arrangements are maintained as they currently are we will only see the rear of the members for Fisher, Mount Gambier and Frome.

Regarding explanation of questions: explanation of questions was only ever permitted just before I came into this house and it was meant to be the exception rather than the rule. When I was a minister, I lit votive candles at the cathedral in thanks for opposition members who explained their questions, and in particular explained them at length, because that gave me an opportunity to find the correct place in my question time brief or in some cases even ring my office and ask what the question was about and receive the answer. So, I say to opposition members: I think you blunt your attack by explanations, particularly long explanations.

Ms Chapman interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Well, Dorothys are another matter altogether. I am doing my bit to reduce Dorothys by giving the Independent members a go.

Ms CHAPMAN: Point of order: I think you have exceeded the four minutes.

The SPEAKER: Not quite, but I shall accept the member for Bragg's censure and sit down. The leader.