Brownlee GerryHon GERRY BROWNLEE (National): I wonder if the member promoting the bill Rachel Boyack would be able to tell us whether or not in the process of compilation of the bill the research that was done before the bill was put into a form that would make it acceptable for the ballot if there was any consideration—research due diligence whatever term might like to be applied—to just how many documents that relate to Government would need to be altered if this bill were to pass. Further has there been consideration of who might do that scrutiny who might be the body that goes through all of the literature that would relate to legislation and its application scrutinises it and makes decisions about its rewrite? Would this in fact be a new commission that the Government might be required to put together with the appointment of people who are qualified in this regard—people obviously not too highbrow but people who understood and could express themselves well in very plain language.One of the things that immediately would come to mind would be the Standing Orders of this House. It's not inappropriate in any debate to discuss Standing Orders; it's one of the rules of the House because they are in fact the rules of the House. So I looked earlier at some Standing Orders that I think could do with quite a degree of clarification. I wonder if the member promoting the bill has had a discussion with the Clerk's Office about how that piece of work might be progressed. I would refer the member so that I can give an example—because we've had very few examples given to us in the Chamber today of actual circumstances where some plain language rewrites of various documents might make a difference to the public. So I'm asking her to look at page 15 of the Standing Orders and Standing Order 55 which talks about the early sitting or postponement of sittings during adjournment.Now think about what that means. So adjournment normally means that things have stopped—they are adjourned. But here we have a contradiction where it talks about the early sitting during an adjournment—a sitting where things are stopped or when things are postponed. So my question is: will this bill reach this far into the operation of the House? It goes on to say Whenever the House is adjourned and it appears the Prime Minister"—CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Order! Order! Order! I'm going to invite the member to come back to Part 2 of the bill and I will direct him in so doing at his leisure but if he wishes to keep going to—Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: Well Madam Chair—CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): No sorry—I hadn't finished.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: Sorry you were interrupted over here—I will just take a point of order.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Order! Order! Order!Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: I'll sit down. Now can I stand?CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Order! No. I would direct him to have regard to the fact that the "reporting agency means a Crown agent or a public service agency." So if the member wishes to continue his contribution.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: Well that is exactly my point Madam Chair—exactly my point. I started my contribution here before I was interrupted by people who clearly weren't listening to what I had to say asking the question: how's it going to work? Who is going to be the agency that makes these decisions?CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Well I'd advise the member to get on with it—Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: And there's no advice in what you've just given me to say that that's answered.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean):—not defending his position.Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: Further the Chair should not be answering for the member who's in the chair. So I ask again: how are these things going to be sorted out? And I'm asking for quite a practical example of how it might be dealt with because this is very confusing. There is nothing plain about the language used on this particular Standing Order where it talks about firstly it being adjourned then it says the Prime Minister could say "Well maybe it shouldn't now be adjourned." But then that's the Speaker who decides whether or not it is adjourned. And if it's agreed with the Prime Minister that it shouldn't be adjourned then the Speaker is the one who decides when the adjournment shall cease and the House shall sit again. This document is full of this very sort of convoluted type of language. It's there in that fashion to make it believe it or not easy for those who administer the place to do so. And that will be the case for thousands of documents that relate to legislation throughout the country. So I ask again: what will the structure be that allows this type of consideration to be done? I do hope the member answers in the context of the Standing Orders of the part we're looking at at the moment."