Members

Member for Unley, Naming

The SPEAKER (14:54): Regarding the member for MacKillop's earlier point of order. I have consulted the Clerk and it seems to me that the question of whether the member's explanation upon being named be accepted can be debated, and I would so rule, but standing orders are clear that suspension from the service of the house cannot be debated—that's just a vote.

The problem we have with the interaction of the sessional orders and the standing orders is that I can remove a member under the sessional orders, and if he or she on his or her way out then engages in loud, further abuse and is named on the way out, they are normally out by the time the naming comes up, and that's the problem.

I have a naming by Speaker Lewis of the member for Unley—a different member for Unley. Speaker Lewis is here. Former Speaker Lewis, welcome to the house. On that occasion, the member for Unley hopped back in and that was open, I suppose, to the current member for Unley today.

Mr Williams: On that occasion, those sessional orders that we now suffer under weren't in vogue.

The SPEAKER: The member for MacKillop's view on the sessional orders is well known. The member for Adelaide.