Franks Stephen: Civil Aviation Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Franks Stephen: Civil Aviation Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:610;Page:7403] 
STEPHEN FRANKS (ACT NZ) 
: 
 I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I intend to speak to a proposed motion to amend the resolution to commit the bill to select committee. Is that a matter on which I may move as of right or do I require to seek leave for that purpose? 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The member needs only to hand the amendment in at the table. 
STEPHEN FRANKS 
: Thank you; then I will speak to it. The purpose of this motion which I think I have advised each party of now is simply to ensure that the referral to select committee is on the ordinary terms for a select committee with the ordinary deadline. There has been no indication that I am aware of that this bill is of particular urgency that should truncate time or that should put the committee in the difficulty of sitting while the House is sitting with all the adjustments and problems that can cause particularly for smaller parties whose members are thereby obliged sometimes to choose between doing their duty properly at a committee and attending in the House and taking part in debate on other matters where the committee members are involved. Of course it is not only a problem for smaller parties but it is probably often more acute for them. The motion would be an amendment that would omit the words after the reference to the select committee so that the proposed suspension of Standing Order 196 would not proceed and the committee would not be given an express instruction that it should or could meet while the House is sitting or after the normal sitting hours of the House without the leave of the committee. 
As I said this is not intended to signify any particular concern about the content of this bill. We would give it the careful consideration that the ACT party gives to all bills. We regard the quality of legislation as the responsibility of all members but we take particularly good care because of our respect for the rule of law. If law is to be strictly enforced or observed then it should be as sparse and as unobtrusive as possible. But we do not wish that to extend to suspending the normal proceedings of select committees. We are prompted in this by the surprise that the motion on the previous bill should have suspended that Standing Order. We would be very pleased if any member of the Government could explain why this was appended to the motion to refer to select committee both for the previous bill and this bill. If this is a practice that the Government intends to adopt then it needs more than simple adoption; it needs explanation of some kind. 
I understand from our whip that the Business Committee has not discussed this matter. Therefore it must relate to something that the Government has decided unilaterally. If so it would be very helpful to know exactly why. Is it related to these two particular bills or is it intended by the Government that this become a standing practice? If it does that it is essentially saying that the Standing Orders are being amended by default. 
With regard to the previous bill the Government might understand that we are particularly concerned because that bill has been foreshadowed for the entire time I have been in Parliament. It follows from a bill that the Minister of Justice introduced in 1997. It is a massive bill and if this is to be a practice then I think that the experience of being on the select committee will be very much more burdensome and less satisfying and less useful to members of the House. So we ask whether the Government does or does not intend this. Is it some oversight or some procedural experiment? We ask that the Government take the time in a call to explain whether it has a particular reason whether it is related to this bill the Civil Aviation Amendment Bill or whether we just happen to be in the first stage of a change in practice by the Government. 
If the amendment that we have moved is accepted the select committee motion would revert to the normal select committee motion which means that we are not attempting to frustrate the Government or infringe the Government’s rights or expectations at all.