Legislative Council Fifty-First Parliament, Second Session (51-2) 51 2 Parliament of South Australia Legislative Council published Matters of Interest Legislative Council LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL The Hon. R.D. LAWSON Legislative Council The Hon. R.D. LAWSON (15:47): A ruling by the President last week highlighted something of which I had not previously been aware—namely, the fact that in this chamber, in a debate on a motion for the suspension of standing orders, speakers are limited to five minutes. Standing order 458 is the only standing order in the Legislative Council of South Australia that imposes any time limit on members speaking. The long second reading speeches of the Hon. Mark Parnell and the Hon. Ann Bressington recently attracted unfavourable press coverage and abuse from some government ministers in another place, notably the Treasurer. I do not propose to join in the criticism of those members or to make any criticism of them in relation to that issue. However, I mention the incident to say that it has drawn public attention to the practices of this council. If members of the public were more often present in the galleries during question time, there would be a public outcry because they would observe the current practice of ministers responding to questions by reading verbatim long passages from material furnished by their advisers or simply reading lengthy quotes from press releases. This is especially obvious in responses to questions from government members, the so-called Dorothy Dixers. I believe that the time has come for us strongly to consider placing some limits on questions and answers to questions; other parliaments have done so. I should go back a little in history to remind members that we have not had time limits in this place for a very long time. In Blackmore's Manual of the Practice, Procedure and Usage of the Legislative Council of South Australia (second edition, published in 1915), page 285 records, as follows: So long as a member observes the orders regulating debate there is no limit of time to his speech, excepting in one contingency, viz. when moving the suspension of the standing orders, is then limited to 10 minutes, as is also a minister if he speaks to the motion. Well, that 10 minutes has subsequently altered to five minutes but, as I mentioned earlier, it is currently the only limit. In some other parliaments in Australia, especially in upper houses, there have been limits imposed. For example, in the Senate a question without notice can occupy only one minute, and the minister's answer four minutes. Supplementary questions and answers are both limited to one minute. Similar limits apply in the Legislative Council in Victoria. On page 153 of the 10^th edition of Odgers' Australian Senate Practice there is a record relating to the history of the introduction of time limits on questions and answers. It occurred in 1992.The result of the imposition of limits, after some trial periods, was the greater opportunity for senators to ask questions and an obligation on ministers to focus on pertinent responses. This once experimental process is now an established part of our Senate process. In this council we have a tradition of members being given the opportunity—and I think it is an important opportunity—to provide an explanation before asking questions. I do not believe that if we in this place are to consider imposing limits that one minute for a question would be appropriate, but I do believe that members asking questions should be subject to the same disciplines we would expect of ministers and that, after discussion, we should seriously consider adopting new sessional orders on an experimental basis to provide an appropriate opportunity for members to ask a question with an appropriate explanation, as well a limit on the time available for ministers to answer the question. I look forward to the day this is introduced.