Franks Stephen: Business of Select Committees — Appointments 
Franks Stephen: Business of Select Committees — Appointments 
[Volume:622;Page:18020] 
STEPHEN FRANKS (ACT) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I know that the National and Labour whips have been talking about the issue—and I have also been involved in the discussion—of anticipating a closure motion on a debate that technically is not limited. When the debate is not limited it is deliberately like that in our Standing Orders. We recognise that the Government can move and carry a closure motion but on an issue like this I think it is improper not to allow a different sort of debate from the normal introduction debate which runs ritually backwards and forwards. I know that Mr Smith wants to have another call. I certainly would like to have 10 minutes. I do not think this is a debate where the Speaker should be bound by arrangements that are reached between whips. 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: There was an arrangement and Mr Franks was part of that arrangement. Now he wants to change that arrangement yet the Government on the standard tariff could have moved the closure before Mr Ryall’s speech. But if the member insists on speaking for 10 minutes we cannot stop him since this is not a speech that is being split between members of one party. I simply note that in this House when arrangements are arrived at they are stuck to for a pretty good reason which is that eventually life goes around in this place over time. 
Lindsay Tisch 
: National did seek to have a third call. That was not going to happen. I looked to negotiate with ACT to be able to split the call. I negotiated with the Government to be able to take one 10-minute call split between the two of us—National and ACT—and that was certainly my understanding. That is National’s position. 
Murray Smith 
: I understand that there may have been discussion between the whips in Labour and National. To my knowledge there has been no communication with United Future’s whip. I certainly want to take a call tonight on this matter because of its importance. I do not think it is right that the minor parties should be bound in this instance by discussions between only two parties. 
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: I assure the member that the Speaker cannot be bound by any arrangement like that. A call can only be split between members of the same party. In fact this is a 10-minute call because no closure motion has been moved to date. 
STEPHEN FRANKS 
: Speaking to the point of order Madam Speaker. I want to reassure Mr Tisch that I was not taking issue with the arrangement that Labour and National had reached nor would I have done so except that I knew the United Future member was seeking a call as well. I thought that perhaps the Labour Party whip was not aware of that when considering the closure motion. It would have been awkward to have had a 5-minute speech when there might have been a 10-minute speech if the Government is in fact not able to get the closure motion through. I wanted to draw attention to that point. 
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: The Speaker is not involved in this matter. It is Mr Stephen Frank’s call. I have called him properly and it is his call. 
Rodney Hide 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. 
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: I have ruled on that point of order. Is this a new point of order? 
Rodney Hide 
: Yes. What I do not understand is why you thought that there could be a 5-minute call because my understanding is that members can only share a call with someone of the same party. So I do not understand how the Speaker could have decided that there would be a 5-minute call. 
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: If the member had listened he would have heard me say that I was not party to that at all. Tony Ryall took his call and that was his call.