❓ The Leader of the House is unable to confirm the 2006 sitting dates due to ongoing discussions, but intends to seek renewal of the sessional order, pending consultation and a majority vote in the house.
AnsweredQoN 963Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
(1) Is the Leader of the House in a position to inform the house of next year’s sitting dates? (2) Is the Leader of the House able to inform the house whether the sessional order will apply in 2006? Hon KIM CHANCE
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the Leader of the House for asking me that question. All honourable members will be keen to hear the answer. (1) As the honourable Leader of the Opposition is aware, we are still in discussion on the matter of sitting dates. There is a list of proposed sitting dates, which has been circulating. Certainly I know that the Leader of the Opposition has had the opportunity to look at that list of proposed sitting dates, the number of which I believe amounted to 22 weeks. The Leader of the Opposition has approached me with an alternative list of dates. At this stage I am unable to answer in the affirmative to the first question because I am still considering the matters that were raised. I will explain to members the logic for the government going to 22 weeks. Members will be aware that when we began the sessional order for a three-day sitting week we had been working on a four-day week, including Friday. This is the first year that we have tried to operate the sessional order, but also meet requests from some members on either side of the house - particularly country members from the south west, without being too specific - who felt that sitting on Friday was inappropriate and that they would rather not do so. I thought that at least in the first year of a new term of government we could attempt to meet both ambitions; that is, drop the Friday but continue with the sessional order. However, it appeared to me that if we were to have a sessional order for a three-day sitting week, it would be necessary for us to expand to something like 21 or 22 weeks. At this stage I still have not resolved that matter in my own mind. I have certainly had advice from the Leader of the Opposition, which I think in the main was very good advice, and I am inclined towards that view. Hon Norman Moore : Members are just keen to know what is happening next year so that they can make some arrangements, Mr Leader, that is all. Hon KIM CHANCE : I believe they will, but my answer to the first part of the question has to be no, I cannot give that answer. However, that is why I have given the Leader of the Opposition a fairly full answer in terms of where my thought process is at the moment. It lies somewhere between 21 and 22 weeks. I will be trying to aim as closely as possible to the two-on, two-off ambition that we sought to achieve in previous structures for sitting weeks. However, beyond that, I cannot be precise at this stage. (2) Yes, it is my intention to seek the renewal of a sessional order. I believe both the members of the house and the house as a group have been served well by the sessional order. However, on each occasion that we have operated under the sessional order, each side has brought issues to the table for negotiation on how the sessional order should be framed. At this stage I, as one member of this house, can say that my view is that a sessional order is desirable. Obviously there are matters we want to achieve from the sessional order, but ultimately the decision on whether the house adopts the sessional order will depend on the vote of the majority of the house. Hon Norman Moore : If you move it. The house does not have any say if you don’t move it. Hon KIM CHANCE : If I gain the opinion from consultation with every member of the house that it is likely that a sessional order will be thought of kindly, I will most certainly move for the adoption of a sessional order in 2006.
(2) Is the Leader of the House able to inform the house whether the sessional order will apply in 2006? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank the Leader of the House for asking me that question. All honourable members will be keen to hear the answer. (1) As the honourable Leader of the Opposition is aware, we are still in discussion on the matter of sitting dates. There is a list of proposed sitting dates, which has been circulating. Certainly I know that the Leader of the Opposition has had the opportunity to look at that list of proposed sitting dates, the number of which I believe amounted to 22 weeks. The Leader of the Opposition has approached me with an alternative list of dates. At this stage I am unable to answer in the affirmative to the first question because I am still considering the matters that were raised. I will explain to members the logic for the government going to 22 weeks. Members will be aware that when we began the sessional order for a three-day sitting week we had been working on a four-day week, including Friday. This is the first year that we have tried to operate the sessional order, but also meet requests from some members on either side of the house - particularly country members from the south west, without being too specific - who felt that sitting on Friday was inappropriate and that they would rather not do so. I thought that at least in the first year of a new term of government we could attempt to meet both ambitions; that is, drop the Friday but continue with the sessional order. However, it appeared to me that if we were to have a sessional order for a three-day sitting week, it would be necessary for us to expand to something like 21 or 22 weeks. At this stage I still have not resolved that matter in my own mind. I have certainly had advice from the Leader of the Opposition, which I think in the main was very good advice, and I am inclined towards that view. Hon Norman Moore : Members are just keen to know what is happening next year so that they can make some arrangements, Mr Leader, that is all. Hon KIM CHANCE : I believe they will, but my answer to the first part of the question has to be no, I cannot give that answer. However, that is why I have given the Leader of the Opposition a fairly full answer in terms of where my thought process is at the moment. It lies somewhere between 21 and 22 weeks. I will be trying to aim as closely as possible to the two-on, two-off ambition that we sought to achieve in previous structures for sitting weeks. However, beyond that, I cannot be precise at this stage. (2) Yes, it is my intention to seek the renewal of a sessional order. I believe both the members of the house and the house as a group have been served well by the sessional order. However, on each occasion that we have operated under the sessional order, each side has brought issues to the table for negotiation on how the sessional order should be framed. At this stage I, as one member of this house, can say that my view is that a sessional order is desirable. Obviously there are matters we want to achieve from the sessional order, but ultimately the decision on whether the house adopts the sessional order will depend on the vote of the majority of the house. Hon Norman Moore : If you move it. The house does not have any say if you don’t move it. Hon KIM CHANCE : If I gain the opinion from consultation with every member of the house that it is likely that a sessional order will be thought of kindly, I will most certainly move for the adoption of a sessional order in 2006.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank the Leader of the House for asking me that question. All honourable members will be keen to hear the answer. (1) As the honourable Leader of the Opposition is aware, we are still in discussion on the matter of sitting dates. There is a list of proposed sitting dates, which has been circulating. Certainly I know that the Leader of the Opposition has had the opportunity to look at that list of proposed sitting dates, the number of which I believe amounted to 22 weeks. The Leader of the Opposition has approached me with an alternative list of dates. At this stage I am unable to answer in the affirmative to the first question because I am still considering the matters that were raised. I will explain to members the logic for the government going to 22 weeks. Members will be aware that when we began the sessional order for a three-day sitting week we had been working on a four-day week, including Friday. This is the first year that we have tried to operate the sessional order, but also meet requests from some members on either side of the house - particularly country members from the south west, without being too specific - who felt that sitting on Friday was inappropriate and that they would rather not do so. I thought that at least in the first year of a new term of government we could attempt to meet both ambitions; that is, drop the Friday but continue with the sessional order. However, it appeared to me that if we were to have a sessional order for a three-day sitting week, it would be necessary for us to expand to something like 21 or 22 weeks. At this stage I still have not resolved that matter in my own mind. I have certainly had advice from the Leader of the Opposition, which I think in the main was very good advice, and I am inclined towards that view. Hon Norman Moore : Members are just keen to know what is happening next year so that they can make some arrangements, Mr Leader, that is all. Hon KIM CHANCE : I believe they will, but my answer to the first part of the question has to be no, I cannot give that answer. However, that is why I have given the Leader of the Opposition a fairly full answer in terms of where my thought process is at the moment. It lies somewhere between 21 and 22 weeks. I will be trying to aim as closely as possible to the two-on, two-off ambition that we sought to achieve in previous structures for sitting weeks. However, beyond that, I cannot be precise at this stage. (2) Yes, it is my intention to seek the renewal of a sessional order. I believe both the members of the house and the house as a group have been served well by the sessional order. However, on each occasion that we have operated under the sessional order, each side has brought issues to the table for negotiation on how the sessional order should be framed. At this stage I, as one member of this house, can say that my view is that a sessional order is desirable. Obviously there are matters we want to achieve from the sessional order, but ultimately the decision on whether the house adopts the sessional order will depend on the vote of the majority of the house. Hon Norman Moore : If you move it. The house does not have any say if you don’t move it. Hon KIM CHANCE : If I gain the opinion from consultation with every member of the house that it is likely that a sessional order will be thought of kindly, I will most certainly move for the adoption of a sessional order in 2006.
I thank the Leader of the House for asking me that question. All honourable members will be keen to hear the answer. (1) As the honourable Leader of the Opposition is aware, we are still in discussion on the matter of sitting dates. There is a list of proposed sitting dates, which has been circulating. Certainly I know that the Leader of the Opposition has had the opportunity to look at that list of proposed sitting dates, the number of which I believe amounted to 22 weeks. The Leader of the Opposition has approached me with an alternative list of dates. At this stage I am unable to answer in the affirmative to the first question because I am still considering the matters that were raised. I will explain to members the logic for the government going to 22 weeks. Members will be aware that when we began the sessional order for a three-day sitting week we had been working on a four-day week, including Friday. This is the first year that we have tried to operate the sessional order, but also meet requests from some members on either side of the house - particularly country members from the south west, without being too specific - who felt that sitting on Friday was inappropriate and that they would rather not do so. I thought that at least in the first year of a new term of government we could attempt to meet both ambitions; that is, drop the Friday but continue with the sessional order. However, it appeared to me that if we were to have a sessional order for a three-day sitting week, it would be necessary for us to expand to something like 21 or 22 weeks. At this stage I still have not resolved that matter in my own mind. I have certainly had advice from the Leader of the Opposition, which I think in the main was very good advice, and I am inclined towards that view. Hon Norman Moore : Members are just keen to know what is happening next year so that they can make some arrangements, Mr Leader, that is all. Hon KIM CHANCE : I believe they will, but my answer to the first part of the question has to be no, I cannot give that answer. However, that is why I have given the Leader of the Opposition a fairly full answer in terms of where my thought process is at the moment. It lies somewhere between 21 and 22 weeks. I will be trying to aim as closely as possible to the two-on, two-off ambition that we sought to achieve in previous structures for sitting weeks. However, beyond that, I cannot be precise at this stage. (2) Yes, it is my intention to seek the renewal of a sessional order. I believe both the members of the house and the house as a group have been served well by the sessional order. However, on each occasion that we have operated under the sessional order, each side has brought issues to the table for negotiation on how the sessional order should be framed. At this stage I, as one member of this house, can say that my view is that a sessional order is desirable. Obviously there are matters we want to achieve from the sessional order, but ultimately the decision on whether the house adopts the sessional order will depend on the vote of the majority of the house. Hon Norman Moore : If you move it. The house does not have any say if you don’t move it. Hon KIM CHANCE : If I gain the opinion from consultation with every member of the house that it is likely that a sessional order will be thought of kindly, I will most certainly move for the adoption of a sessional order in 2006.
(1) As the honourable Leader of the Opposition is aware, we are still in discussion on the matter of sitting dates. There is a list of proposed sitting dates, which has been circulating. Certainly I know that the Leader of the Opposition has had the opportunity to look at that list of proposed sitting dates, the number of which I believe amounted to 22 weeks. The Leader of the Opposition has approached me with an alternative list of dates. At this stage I am unable to answer in the affirmative to the first question because I am still considering the matters that were raised. I will explain to members the logic for the government going to 22 weeks. Members will be aware that when we began the sessional order for a three-day sitting week we had been working on a four-day week, including Friday. This is the first year that we have tried to operate the sessional order, but also meet requests from some members on either side of the house - particularly country members from the south west, without being too specific - who felt that sitting on Friday was inappropriate and that they would rather not do so. I thought that at least in the first year of a new term of government we could attempt to meet both ambitions; that is, drop the Friday but continue with the sessional order. However, it appeared to me that if we were to have a sessional order for a three-day sitting week, it would be necessary for us to expand to something like 21 or 22 weeks. At this stage I still have not resolved that matter in my own mind. I have certainly had advice from the Leader of the Opposition, which I think in the main was very good advice, and I am inclined towards that view. Hon Norman Moore : Members are just keen to know what is happening next year so that they can make some arrangements, Mr Leader, that is all. Hon KIM CHANCE : I believe they will, but my answer to the first part of the question has to be no, I cannot give that answer. However, that is why I have given the Leader of the Opposition a fairly full answer in terms of where my thought process is at the moment. It lies somewhere between 21 and 22 weeks. I will be trying to aim as closely as possible to the two-on, two-off ambition that we sought to achieve in previous structures for sitting weeks. However, beyond that, I cannot be precise at this stage. (2) Yes, it is my intention to seek the renewal of a sessional order. I believe both the members of the house and the house as a group have been served well by the sessional order. However, on each occasion that we have operated under the sessional order, each side has brought issues to the table for negotiation on how the sessional order should be framed. At this stage I, as one member of this house, can say that my view is that a sessional order is desirable. Obviously there are matters we want to achieve from the sessional order, but ultimately the decision on whether the house adopts the sessional order will depend on the vote of the majority of the house. Hon Norman Moore : If you move it. The house does not have any say if you don’t move it. Hon KIM CHANCE : If I gain the opinion from consultation with every member of the house that it is likely that a sessional order will be thought of kindly, I will most certainly move for the adoption of a sessional order in 2006.
Hon KIM CHANCE : I believe they will, but my answer to the first part of the question has to be no, I cannot give that answer. However, that is why I have given the Leader of the Opposition a fairly full answer in terms of where my thought process is at the moment. It lies somewhere between 21 and 22 weeks. I will be trying to aim as closely as possible to the two-on, two-off ambition that we sought to achieve in previous structures for sitting weeks. However, beyond that, I cannot be precise at this stage. (2) Yes, it is my intention to seek the renewal of a sessional order. I believe both the members of the house and the house as a group have been served well by the sessional order. However, on each occasion that we have operated under the sessional order, each side has brought issues to the table for negotiation on how the sessional order should be framed. At this stage I, as one member of this house, can say that my view is that a sessional order is desirable. Obviously there are matters we want to achieve from the sessional order, but ultimately the decision on whether the house adopts the sessional order will depend on the vote of the majority of the house. Hon Norman Moore : If you move it. The house does not have any say if you don’t move it. Hon KIM CHANCE : If I gain the opinion from consultation with every member of the house that it is likely that a sessional order will be thought of kindly, I will most certainly move for the adoption of a sessional order in 2006.
(2) Yes, it is my intention to seek the renewal of a sessional order. I believe both the members of the house and the house as a group have been served well by the sessional order. However, on each occasion that we have operated under the sessional order, each side has brought issues to the table for negotiation on how the sessional order should be framed. At this stage I, as one member of this house, can say that my view is that a sessional order is desirable. Obviously there are matters we want to achieve from the sessional order, but ultimately the decision on whether the house adopts the sessional order will depend on the vote of the majority of the house. Hon Norman Moore : If you move it. The house does not have any say if you don’t move it. Hon KIM CHANCE : If I gain the opinion from consultation with every member of the house that it is likely that a sessional order will be thought of kindly, I will most certainly move for the adoption of a sessional order in 2006.
Hon Norman Moore : If you move it. The house does not have any say if you don’t move it. Hon KIM CHANCE : If I gain the opinion from consultation with every member of the house that it is likely that a sessional order will be thought of kindly, I will most certainly move for the adoption of a sessional order in 2006.
Hon KIM CHANCE : If I gain the opinion from consultation with every member of the house that it is likely that a sessional order will be thought of kindly, I will most certainly move for the adoption of a sessional order in 2006.
(2) Is the Leader of the House able to inform the house whether the sessional order will apply in 2006? Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank the Leader of the House for asking me that question. All honourable members will be keen to hear the answer. (1) As the honourable Leader of the Opposition is aware, we are still in discussion on the matter of sitting dates. There is a list of proposed sitting dates, which has been circulating. Certainly I know that the Leader of the Opposition has had the opportunity to look at that list of proposed sitting dates, the number of which I believe amounted to 22 weeks. The Leader of the Opposition has approached me with an alternative list of dates. At this stage I am unable to answer in the affirmative to the first question because I am still considering the matters that were raised. I will explain to members the logic for the government going to 22 weeks. Members will be aware that when we began the sessional order for a three-day sitting week we had been working on a four-day week, including Friday. This is the first year that we have tried to operate the sessional order, but also meet requests from some members on either side of the house - particularly country members from the south west, without being too specific - who felt that sitting on Friday was inappropriate and that they would rather not do so. I thought that at least in the first year of a new term of government we could attempt to meet both ambitions; that is, drop the Friday but continue with the sessional order. However, it appeared to me that if we were to have a sessional order for a three-day sitting week, it would be necessary for us to expand to something like 21 or 22 weeks. At this stage I still have not resolved that matter in my own mind. I have certainly had advice from the Leader of the Opposition, which I think in the main was very good advice, and I am inclined towards that view. Hon Norman Moore : Members are just keen to know what is happening next year so that they can make some arrangements, Mr Leader, that is all. Hon KIM CHANCE : I believe they will, but my answer to the first part of the question has to be no, I cannot give that answer. However, that is why I have given the Leader of the Opposition a fairly full answer in terms of where my thought process is at the moment. It lies somewhere between 21 and 22 weeks. I will be trying to aim as closely as possible to the two-on, two-off ambition that we sought to achieve in previous structures for sitting weeks. However, beyond that, I cannot be precise at this stage. (2) Yes, it is my intention to seek the renewal of a sessional order. I believe both the members of the house and the house as a group have been served well by the sessional order. However, on each occasion that we have operated under the sessional order, each side has brought issues to the table for negotiation on how the sessional order should be framed. At this stage I, as one member of this house, can say that my view is that a sessional order is desirable. Obviously there are matters we want to achieve from the sessional order, but ultimately the decision on whether the house adopts the sessional order will depend on the vote of the majority of the house. Hon Norman Moore : If you move it. The house does not have any say if you don’t move it. Hon KIM CHANCE : If I gain the opinion from consultation with every member of the house that it is likely that a sessional order will be thought of kindly, I will most certainly move for the adoption of a sessional order in 2006.
Hon KIM CHANCE replied: I thank the Leader of the House for asking me that question. All honourable members will be keen to hear the answer. (1) As the honourable Leader of the Opposition is aware, we are still in discussion on the matter of sitting dates. There is a list of proposed sitting dates, which has been circulating. Certainly I know that the Leader of the Opposition has had the opportunity to look at that list of proposed sitting dates, the number of which I believe amounted to 22 weeks. The Leader of the Opposition has approached me with an alternative list of dates. At this stage I am unable to answer in the affirmative to the first question because I am still considering the matters that were raised. I will explain to members the logic for the government going to 22 weeks. Members will be aware that when we began the sessional order for a three-day sitting week we had been working on a four-day week, including Friday. This is the first year that we have tried to operate the sessional order, but also meet requests from some members on either side of the house - particularly country members from the south west, without being too specific - who felt that sitting on Friday was inappropriate and that they would rather not do so. I thought that at least in the first year of a new term of government we could attempt to meet both ambitions; that is, drop the Friday but continue with the sessional order. However, it appeared to me that if we were to have a sessional order for a three-day sitting week, it would be necessary for us to expand to something like 21 or 22 weeks. At this stage I still have not resolved that matter in my own mind. I have certainly had advice from the Leader of the Opposition, which I think in the main was very good advice, and I am inclined towards that view. Hon Norman Moore : Members are just keen to know what is happening next year so that they can make some arrangements, Mr Leader, that is all. Hon KIM CHANCE : I believe they will, but my answer to the first part of the question has to be no, I cannot give that answer. However, that is why I have given the Leader of the Opposition a fairly full answer in terms of where my thought process is at the moment. It lies somewhere between 21 and 22 weeks. I will be trying to aim as closely as possible to the two-on, two-off ambition that we sought to achieve in previous structures for sitting weeks. However, beyond that, I cannot be precise at this stage. (2) Yes, it is my intention to seek the renewal of a sessional order. I believe both the members of the house and the house as a group have been served well by the sessional order. However, on each occasion that we have operated under the sessional order, each side has brought issues to the table for negotiation on how the sessional order should be framed. At this stage I, as one member of this house, can say that my view is that a sessional order is desirable. Obviously there are matters we want to achieve from the sessional order, but ultimately the decision on whether the house adopts the sessional order will depend on the vote of the majority of the house. Hon Norman Moore : If you move it. The house does not have any say if you don’t move it. Hon KIM CHANCE : If I gain the opinion from consultation with every member of the house that it is likely that a sessional order will be thought of kindly, I will most certainly move for the adoption of a sessional order in 2006.
I thank the Leader of the House for asking me that question. All honourable members will be keen to hear the answer. (1) As the honourable Leader of the Opposition is aware, we are still in discussion on the matter of sitting dates. There is a list of proposed sitting dates, which has been circulating. Certainly I know that the Leader of the Opposition has had the opportunity to look at that list of proposed sitting dates, the number of which I believe amounted to 22 weeks. The Leader of the Opposition has approached me with an alternative list of dates. At this stage I am unable to answer in the affirmative to the first question because I am still considering the matters that were raised. I will explain to members the logic for the government going to 22 weeks. Members will be aware that when we began the sessional order for a three-day sitting week we had been working on a four-day week, including Friday. This is the first year that we have tried to operate the sessional order, but also meet requests from some members on either side of the house - particularly country members from the south west, without being too specific - who felt that sitting on Friday was inappropriate and that they would rather not do so. I thought that at least in the first year of a new term of government we could attempt to meet both ambitions; that is, drop the Friday but continue with the sessional order. However, it appeared to me that if we were to have a sessional order for a three-day sitting week, it would be necessary for us to expand to something like 21 or 22 weeks. At this stage I still have not resolved that matter in my own mind. I have certainly had advice from the Leader of the Opposition, which I think in the main was very good advice, and I am inclined towards that view. Hon Norman Moore : Members are just keen to know what is happening next year so that they can make some arrangements, Mr Leader, that is all. Hon KIM CHANCE : I believe they will, but my answer to the first part of the question has to be no, I cannot give that answer. However, that is why I have given the Leader of the Opposition a fairly full answer in terms of where my thought process is at the moment. It lies somewhere between 21 and 22 weeks. I will be trying to aim as closely as possible to the two-on, two-off ambition that we sought to achieve in previous structures for sitting weeks. However, beyond that, I cannot be precise at this stage. (2) Yes, it is my intention to seek the renewal of a sessional order. I believe both the members of the house and the house as a group have been served well by the sessional order. However, on each occasion that we have operated under the sessional order, each side has brought issues to the table for negotiation on how the sessional order should be framed. At this stage I, as one member of this house, can say that my view is that a sessional order is desirable. Obviously there are matters we want to achieve from the sessional order, but ultimately the decision on whether the house adopts the sessional order will depend on the vote of the majority of the house. Hon Norman Moore : If you move it. The house does not have any say if you don’t move it. Hon KIM CHANCE : If I gain the opinion from consultation with every member of the house that it is likely that a sessional order will be thought of kindly, I will most certainly move for the adoption of a sessional order in 2006.
(1) As the honourable Leader of the Opposition is aware, we are still in discussion on the matter of sitting dates. There is a list of proposed sitting dates, which has been circulating. Certainly I know that the Leader of the Opposition has had the opportunity to look at that list of proposed sitting dates, the number of which I believe amounted to 22 weeks. The Leader of the Opposition has approached me with an alternative list of dates. At this stage I am unable to answer in the affirmative to the first question because I am still considering the matters that were raised. I will explain to members the logic for the government going to 22 weeks. Members will be aware that when we began the sessional order for a three-day sitting week we had been working on a four-day week, including Friday. This is the first year that we have tried to operate the sessional order, but also meet requests from some members on either side of the house - particularly country members from the south west, without being too specific - who felt that sitting on Friday was inappropriate and that they would rather not do so. I thought that at least in the first year of a new term of government we could attempt to meet both ambitions; that is, drop the Friday but continue with the sessional order. However, it appeared to me that if we were to have a sessional order for a three-day sitting week, it would be necessary for us to expand to something like 21 or 22 weeks. At this stage I still have not resolved that matter in my own mind. I have certainly had advice from the Leader of the Opposition, which I think in the main was very good advice, and I am inclined towards that view. Hon Norman Moore : Members are just keen to know what is happening next year so that they can make some arrangements, Mr Leader, that is all. Hon KIM CHANCE : I believe they will, but my answer to the first part of the question has to be no, I cannot give that answer. However, that is why I have given the Leader of the Opposition a fairly full answer in terms of where my thought process is at the moment. It lies somewhere between 21 and 22 weeks. I will be trying to aim as closely as possible to the two-on, two-off ambition that we sought to achieve in previous structures for sitting weeks. However, beyond that, I cannot be precise at this stage. (2) Yes, it is my intention to seek the renewal of a sessional order. I believe both the members of the house and the house as a group have been served well by the sessional order. However, on each occasion that we have operated under the sessional order, each side has brought issues to the table for negotiation on how the sessional order should be framed. At this stage I, as one member of this house, can say that my view is that a sessional order is desirable. Obviously there are matters we want to achieve from the sessional order, but ultimately the decision on whether the house adopts the sessional order will depend on the vote of the majority of the house. Hon Norman Moore : If you move it. The house does not have any say if you don’t move it. Hon KIM CHANCE : If I gain the opinion from consultation with every member of the house that it is likely that a sessional order will be thought of kindly, I will most certainly move for the adoption of a sessional order in 2006.
Hon KIM CHANCE : I believe they will, but my answer to the first part of the question has to be no, I cannot give that answer. However, that is why I have given the Leader of the Opposition a fairly full answer in terms of where my thought process is at the moment. It lies somewhere between 21 and 22 weeks. I will be trying to aim as closely as possible to the two-on, two-off ambition that we sought to achieve in previous structures for sitting weeks. However, beyond that, I cannot be precise at this stage. (2) Yes, it is my intention to seek the renewal of a sessional order. I believe both the members of the house and the house as a group have been served well by the sessional order. However, on each occasion that we have operated under the sessional order, each side has brought issues to the table for negotiation on how the sessional order should be framed. At this stage I, as one member of this house, can say that my view is that a sessional order is desirable. Obviously there are matters we want to achieve from the sessional order, but ultimately the decision on whether the house adopts the sessional order will depend on the vote of the majority of the house. Hon Norman Moore : If you move it. The house does not have any say if you don’t move it. Hon KIM CHANCE : If I gain the opinion from consultation with every member of the house that it is likely that a sessional order will be thought of kindly, I will most certainly move for the adoption of a sessional order in 2006.
(2) Yes, it is my intention to seek the renewal of a sessional order. I believe both the members of the house and the house as a group have been served well by the sessional order. However, on each occasion that we have operated under the sessional order, each side has brought issues to the table for negotiation on how the sessional order should be framed. At this stage I, as one member of this house, can say that my view is that a sessional order is desirable. Obviously there are matters we want to achieve from the sessional order, but ultimately the decision on whether the house adopts the sessional order will depend on the vote of the majority of the house. Hon Norman Moore : If you move it. The house does not have any say if you don’t move it. Hon KIM CHANCE : If I gain the opinion from consultation with every member of the house that it is likely that a sessional order will be thought of kindly, I will most certainly move for the adoption of a sessional order in 2006.
Hon Norman Moore : If you move it. The house does not have any say if you don’t move it. Hon KIM CHANCE : If I gain the opinion from consultation with every member of the house that it is likely that a sessional order will be thought of kindly, I will most certainly move for the adoption of a sessional order in 2006.
Hon KIM CHANCE : If I gain the opinion from consultation with every member of the house that it is likely that a sessional order will be thought of kindly, I will most certainly move for the adoption of a sessional order in 2006.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.