RULING BY MR SPEAKER

Press, Volume LXXXVIII, Issue 26814, 20 August 1952, Page 10

RULING BY MR SPEAKER

PROPRIETY ARGUED MR FREER TWICE CALLED ON. TO WITHDRAW (New Zealand Press Association) WELLINGTON, August 19. The propriety of an intervention by Mr Speaker was argued in the House of Representatives this afternoon after an Opposition member had twice been ordered to withdraw remarks. In a reference to the Land Settlement Promotion Bill, Mr W. W. Freer ' Opposition, Mount Albert) said he believed that the Government had done something at the dictation of a group of other people because it had to. At the intervention of Mr Speaker he withdrew the remark, and. withdrew another observation later. Mr Speaker said that if the member persisted in trying to side-track bis ruling he would have to ask him to . resume his seat and discontinue his speech. What had been said in the : past and been allowed to pass unchallenged by other Speakers was not to say that such remarks could be allowed. The Leader of the Opposition (Mr Nash; said that what had to be watched was that the House was not losing privileges. He considered that the present Opposition was being placed in an inferior position to that , of the previous Opposition. The Minister of Internal Affairs (Mr W. A. Bodkin) said it was absurd to suggest that Mr Speaker should pass , what was an obvious irregularity because previous Speakers had permitted that irregularity to pass unnoticed. Mr Nash said he was concerned ; about the actual practice in the House. Mr Speaker was introducing the practice of intervention, which might be right for him to do, but it did mean that all the time the Opposition was in a limited position compared with the position of the previous Opposition. The Prime Minister (Mr Holland) said there were circumstances in which a remark could be let go and others in which it could not. Mr Speaker himself was the judge of whether he should interrupt a member. He could choose to put a deaf ear to a statement made by a member and still discharge his duty, and he would still be in order in drawing a member’s attention to any disorderly remark made. All the previous Speakers had adopted the course that the present Speaker was pursuing. Addressing Mr Speaker, Mr Holland said: “I feel you are not restricting the rights and privileges of any member in any way.” After further debate Mr Speaker said there was no doubt in his mind about the position. Mr Speaker was entitled to intervene when something had been said which contravened Standing Orders, on Speakers’ rulings. In a border-line case when Mr Speaker did not intervene it was still quite proper for a member to rise to a point of order. It was always the privilege and duty of Mr Speaker to intervene at any period when Standing Orders were not being observed or when an objection was made. In the matter before the House it was the duty of Mr Speaker, seeing that he had ruled on the point, to intervene when the member endeavoured to break the ruling. PARLIAMENTARY DAY (From Our Parliamentary Reporter) WELLINGTON, August 19. Another five speakers took part in the Budget debate which occupied the full time of the House of Representatives to-day. Occupying the seat of junior Opposition whip to-day was Mr R. Macdonald (Ponsonby). He will replace Mr J. Mathison (Avon) who will act as senior whip during the absence of Mr J. B. F. Cotterill (Wanganui) overseas as a member of the delegation to the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association. The seat of the junior Government whip, Mr R. G. Gerard (Ashburton), also a member of the delegation, is still vacant. Miss M. B. Howard (Opposition, Sydenham! was to-day appointed a member of the Local Bills Committee in place of Mr W. T. Anderton (Opoosition, Auckland Central), another member of the delegation. The House adjourned at 10.30 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. to-morrow when Ministerial replies to questions will be debated. The Budget debate will continue to-morrow evening.