Talk:Speaker of the Australian House of Representatives

message: All the Speakers are shown with 'the Hon' or 'the Rt Hon'.  This is fine during their term of office, but it does not necessarily apply in perpetuity.  
My understanding is that Ministers and Parliamentary Secretaries, once sworn as Executive Councillors, remain permanently on call and are thus 'the Hon' forever.  However the Presiding Officers are not equivalent to Executive Councillors, so they do not automatically entitle the holders to 'the Hon'.   This title is a courtesy title given to Presiding Officers who have not already acquired 'the Hon' by being Ministers or Parliamentary Secretariers, or 'the Rt Hon' by being Privy Councillors.  
The courtesy title normally applies only during the Presiding Officer's term of office. However the title has also been extended to ex-Speakers Jim Cope, Leo McLeay and Bob Halverson.    JackofOz 02:16, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Honorifics

message: It's interesting (well, at least to me), and relevant. But whatever, I'm sick of having to battle reverts. Dysprosia 01:40, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revert 

message: Now that he's retired from parliament and has not (to my knowledge) retained "the Hon", should the article continue to show this against his name?  His own article gives him no such honorific.  JackofOz 04:38, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: If I'm not mistaken, didn't he gain the right to retain the title for having been Speaker for however-many years? Most people with the honourable title don't have that in their articles - indeed, putting it in has been actively resisted until lately. Ambi 04:52, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  If I remember from the Practice, past speakers get to keep "Hon" indefinitely. Dysprosia 10:21, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  No. It's not automatic.  Some ex-speakers have requested permission for the title to be granted for life, but permission is not always granted.  I'm not aware that Neil Andrew has requested, or been granted, the title.  JackofOz 04:31, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: According your post above, the Hon title is acquired after being Speaker for more than three years. Andrew was Speaker for six. Ambi 06:56, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sorry for that.  What I meant to say was that, unless the person had been Speaker for at least 3 years, any request for a permanent honorific is rejected out of hand.  But even for those with service as speaker longer than 3 years, it's still not an automatic thing and is very much dependent on the whim of the government of the day.  Even for a Speaker who'd held the chair for 20 years, there is simply no "entitlement" to the honorific after retiring from the position.  Cheers JackofOz 08:34, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Honorific for Neil Andrew

message: Adam, Bronwyn Bishop takes the chair occasionally. Should one describe this in the article, and how? Please do so if you think it necessary. Dysprosia 09:59, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  More deputies 

message: "Because party discipline in the Labor Party is tighter, Labor Speakers are generally seen as more partisan, particularly Speakers Rosevear and Leo McLeay, but recent Liberal Speakers have been seen as more partisan than those in the past."
Unless someone can come up with an actual, reputable source for this, I'm just deleting it straight out. It's not just generalised, biased and POV, it's alleging a prosecutable legal offense.
--Furpants Tom 02:32, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV ahoy! 

message: We say Labor Speakers have not worn it. This says Jim Cope was "prevented by his party" from wearing it, which suggests he personally would have preferred to.  --  Jack of Oz [your turn] 12:02, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Labor Speakers and the wig

message: This is a significant event in Australian Parliamentary History, albeit limited to the somewhat arcane parliamentary processes and procedures of that House.  Prior to 31 May 2011, the Speaker of the House of Representatives had only been once overruled after naming a member, prompting his resigntation.  The fact that this has happened only for the second time in Australia's history.  The even is even more significant as it led immediately thereafter to a motion of confidence in the Speaker moved by the Leader of the Opposition (who only minutes before had led the opposition to the Speaker's authority in opposing the suspension of the named member) is certainly of historical interest.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by ExcaliburPrime1 (talk • contribs) 05:01, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The added text for the 2011 situation is supported by only one primary reference. The significance of this event cannot be established on the basis of that one source alone; secondary sources (i.e. outside the government) are needed to support how this event is significant and notable, as described under the WP:NOR policy. Generally, four references for the whole article is insufficient, thus the "moresources" tag. Dl2000 (talk) 03:52, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: 2011 Speaker Overruled after naming member

message: Mal Colston aside, I note here that the first House speaker, former South Australian "l"iberal Premier Frederick Holder, won his seat in 1901 for the Free Trade Party, and 1903 as an independent... "Standing as an Independent, Holder was returned to parliament for Wakefield in 1903 and 1906." Does anyone know if he was still an FTPer when he took the speaker's chair in 1901? If so, his comment field needs further updating. Timeshift (talk) 22:08, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I can see nothing to suggest he cut his links with the FTP prior to the 1903 election.  --  Jack of Oz [your turn] 23:09, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Holder, the first speaker 

message: Slipper has stood aside pending the charges being dealt with, and intends to return to the job if cleared.  This is not a resignation, but a temporary (he hopes) vacating of the office.  Anna Burke will take over as acting Speaker.  There will be no election for a new Sepaker, because there's no vacancy to fill.  It's no different than if Slipper had gone on indefinite sick leave. Comments?  --  ♬ Jack of Oz ♬ [your turn] 08:35, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Now overtaken by events.  --  Jack of Oz [Talk] 19:23, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Speakership vacant?

message: Assuming dear Auntie Bronwyn gets the nod, I think she'll be the first former Senator to have descended to the lower House, only to rise again, phoenix-like, to the Speakership.  Is this worthy of a note?  --  Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 22:30, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: You are quite right, and it does sound worthy of a note. Frickeg (talk) 00:55, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

text: This should be updated now to reflect the newly elected Speaker, the Hon Tony Smith MP. Daniel Mee 05:15, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Bishop's record, of sorts

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Speaker of the Australian House of Representatives. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20111123085250/http://aph.gov.au/house/members/speaker_booklet.pdf to http://www.aph.gov.au/house/members/speaker_booklet.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:22, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. Community Tech bot (talk) 03:54, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion