Under 94A

As the media struggles to articulate what has been one of the worst months for a government in recent history, Speaker Bronwyn Bishop has removed all doubt about her unsuitability for the role.

This week she has set records in parliament, for the most number of ejections from Question Time under 94A by a speaker in a parliamentary session (285), the most number of ejections under 94A in a single Question Time (18), and more the likely, the most lopsided ejections in both of the other categories (98% ejections from the opposition).

Even more extraordinary, her first record – the most ejections ever for a single parliament, has been achieved in under 15 months – less than half of the term of the 44^th parliament, should it run its full three years. If she is allowed to continue at this rate, she will more than double the previous record.

In Question Time, there are ways to go about things, and it is the Speaker’s responsibility to govern behaviour and standards in the House. Her chief weapon is Standing Order 94A:

"Sanctions against disorderly conduct", allows The Speaker to take action against disorderly conduct by a Member. Item 94A, "Direction to leave the Chamber", means The Speaker can direct a disorderly Member to leave the Chamber for one hour. This direction is not open to debate or dissent, and if the Member does not leave the Chamber immediately, the Speaker can name the Member under 94B, suspending them from parliament for anywhere from one to seven days.

The definition of ‘disorderly conduct by a Member’ is left to the Speaker’s discretion, and this is where Ms Bishop is setting new standards.

Yesterday, she ‘booted’ eighteen MPs, all from the Opposition, under 94A, which would give the impression that the Opposition is a rowdy mob of bored troublemakers, which seems to be in line with the Speaker’s opinion. 

Mr BURKE (Watson—Manager of Opposition Business) (15:13): At risk of adding to the total, I should note that 18 people being ejected in one question time is an all-time record since Federation.

Mr Pyne: On the point of order, it is very apparent, and the Australian public should know, that the Labor Party have run a deliberate strategy of ejection from the House today. They have deliberately attempted to be thrown out, and if they intend to continue to behave like idiots then they will deserve to be thrown out. And trying to now make a political point out of it is so transparent and so pathetic. They are so transparent. They have so few members left because you told them all to get thrown out, and now you want to try to make the point that the Speaker has thrown your people out. We are behaving and you are not.

The SPEAKER (15:13): I would simply say to the Manager of Opposition Business that the behaviour today was an absolute disgrace. Looking at the list, I can see that quite a few of them are indeed Victorian members, who perhaps wish to go back and campaign. Others may wish to have early planes, but there was a deliberate campaign of noise and disruption, and I am fortunate in having standing order 94(a) with which to deal with it, otherwise it means naming people and taking up the time of the House. Simply to stand there and try to say that you all behaved like little angels and that you were picked on is pathetic.

It’s no coincidence that that as the government appears to lose its way, the Speaker’s attitude towards the Opposition becomes harsher. When, six months ago, Ms Bishop was favouring the government in Question Time, she is now openly running interference for the government. The government is besieged on many fronts: the questionable performance by Tony Abbott just two weeks ago at the G20, unpopular cuts to the ABC, Defence Minister David Johnston’s extreme linguistic flourish regarding submarines and canoes, the confusion about the fate of $7 GP copayments, and the continual denial by the government of lying or breaking promises. 

This week in particular, the Abbott government appears to be unhinged, leaving plenty of opportunities for the opposition to attack.

And attack they should. That’s part of their job.

The obvious partiality of the Speaker places the opposition is in a no-win situation every time the House sits. The Speaker will not allow them to be heard, and the few minor ‘stunts’ they’ve tried – orchestrating laughter, holding up newspaper front pages that are critical of the government - are basically ineffective.

There’s one thing left to try.

What would happen if the entire opposition failed to attend Question Time, or if they walked out as a block…or if the Speaker ejected every member under 94A? What would the consequences be? The Labor Opposition tested this in 2012 in the Victorian State Parliament. There were a few ripples, but no lasting impact. 

The Federal Opposition should try it. Question Time has virtually no credibility and serves no real purpose under Speaker Bishop, and a major statement like a walkout would at least force the performance of the Speaker to come under additional scrutiny.