|
TRANSCRIPT OF
PROCEEDINGS
Monday, 2 February 1998
Page 6
Mr MUIR- I
move a motion to reflect proper gender balance. I move:
That the
Convention elect a woman as a further deputy chairperson.
CHAIRMAN-
Thank you, Mr Muir. Mr Jones, do you second the motion? Are there
any speakers to that proposition?
Mr RUXTON- Mr
Chairman, what does `gender balance' mean?
CHAIRMAN- The
amendment is that the Convention elect a woman as a further
deputy chairperson. Are there any further speakers?
Councillor TULLY-
I think we need to clarify clause 24 of the standing orders,
which says that neither the chairman or deputy chairman is
entitled to vote, to make provision in relation to this motion
that the additional appointed deputy delegate, if that is carried
by this meeting, is in fact entitled to vote. The way in which
that is worded could have the unintended consequence of denying
that person the right to vote. Whilst I support that, I believe
that that should be clarified in that amending motion.
CHAIRMAN- Mr
Muir, I will give you a right of reply directly.
Ms HEWITT-
That was the point I was going to make- as to whether that
delegate would have the right to vote.
Ms RODGERS-
While I am not a proponent of affirmative action, I would suggest
that gender balance would mean two women and two men.
Mr JOHNSTON- I
wish to speak against this motion, because instantly I can see
this Convention moving away from the questions it was proposed
that it handle: that is, whether Australia becomes a republic. We
are not here to debate who is or is not chairman. I would tend to
believe that, seeing that that has already been stated by the
government, as you yourself have said, we as delegates have no
power to alter or to add to the chairman's roles.
CHAIRMAN-
Thank you, Mr Johnston. There being no further speakers, I call
on Mr Muir to exercise his right of reply.
Mr MUIR- The
appointment of chairman or chairpersons is a matter of substance.
Under the rules of debate the chairpersons have a very material
role in this Convention. If we are serious about any form of
gender balance- and I am sure Mr Ruxton now understands what that
means- we should ensure that a woman is appointed in that role.
As you can see from the rules of debate, that is clear. I
certainly accept the amendment proposed by Mr Paul Tully.
CHAIRMAN-
Thank you, Mr Muir. The question is that the Convention elect a
woman as a further deputy chairperson. I am not sure whether you
added any qualification about voting or not. I presume you accept
that she should have no vote.
Mr MUIR- I
accept what Mr Tully moved.
CHAIRMAN- I do
not think Mr Tully moved it technically. He just suggested that
it created a dilemma and it was for you to resolve it.
Mr RAMSAY- I
raise a point of order. I am sorry to interrupt again, sir, but I
see this creating quite-
CHAIRMAN- I am
afraid the speaker who moved the motion has responded; therefore,
there is no further debate-
Mr RAMSAY-
There is a point of order.
CHAIRMAN-
Right. Do it that way.
Mr RAMSAY- By
this motion we are going to provide one delegate with the right
to vote and put a requirement on the chairman under the rules of
debate to consult with that voting delegate as far as possible on
the whole management of the meeting. That seems to me to be
inappropriate and upsetting the gender balance completely.
CHAIRMAN- I
think you are now debating the issue rather than speaking to a
point of order. I put the motion moved by Mr Muir and seconded by
Mrs Jones that the Convention elect a woman as further deputy
chairperson.
Motion lost.
CHAIRMAN- The
next notice of motion with respect to rules of debate is one of
which I have received notice from Delegate Mary Kelly, to be
seconded by delegate Catherine Moore. I call on Delegate Mary
Kelly.
Ms MARY KELLY- Thank
you, Chairperson. Can I move this in a slightly amended form from
the printed version. After the words `That in the running of the
Convention the following steps be pursued', I wish to add the
words `to ensure as far as possible'. The only other change is in
the second dot point. I wish to delete the first three words
`working groups and'. Slightly further along in that same line I
wish to delete `where possible'. I move:
That in the
running of the Convention, the following steps be pursued as far
as possible:
- * the
Resolutions Committee be gender-balanced 50/50;
*
speakers be gender-balanced 50/50 but no less than 33%,
consistent with female representation at the Convention;
* the cohort of Convenors should be gender-balanced over
the duration of the Convention, as above;
* working groups to consider gender balance in their
choice of reporters.
In moving this I
acknowledge that these ideas were previously submitted to the
chairs and I received their answer last night. In that answer the
chairs said that, to the extent that it was within the power of
the chair, they would what they could to encourage gender balance
in participation by the delegates. I accept that view and believe
them, and thank them for that response. The reason for moving it
here to is to bring this issue to the attention of all delegates,
to talk about why it is important and how it might be pursued not
just by the chairs but by us all.
Women's
representation here is a huge improvement on the conventions of
100 years ago when no women attended. We have about one-third
here, and that is very pleasing. The highest share is amongst the
appointed non-parliamentarians, the next highest amongst the
elected and the lowest amongst the appointed parliament- in fact,
only seven of those 40 being women. So we have a goodly number of
women here.
But it is a
documented experience of women in public life that, unless you
pursue steps to prevent it, in speaking time and positions of
influence men will be overrepresented and this will feel normal
to most delegates. There are many reasons for this. Some of them
are about cultural socialisation, some are about habit, some are
about confidence levels. Whatever the reasons, I am sure we all
agree that such am outcome is undesirable.
So what does the
motion ask us to do? It asks to take steps, firstly, on the
Resolutions Committee- probably one of the most influential
groups here. It asks for the balance to be 50:50 in that case if
we can achieve that. That, you will understand, is more than
women's representation inside this House but about right for the
women in this country. That will require some effort, I guess, on
the part of the chairs, to perhaps solicit nominees where
necessary and so on.
The second point asks
us to look at speakers. I understand that in informal sessions
where people are speaking ex-officio such as this morning this
not possible, and every one accepts that, but in many other cases
it is possible to encourage people to step aside to do the things
that will make the outcomes reasonable for us all. The convenors
and working group reporters are really in the hands of us all.
CHAIRMAN- I am
sorry, your time has expired.
Ms MARY KELLY-
Can I have a last sentence?
CHAIRMAN-
Please.
Ms MARY KELLY-
I want to say in the last sentence that these are not binding
numbers but targets to which we should commit as a collaborative
endeavour to achieve.
Ms MOORE- I
will be brief. I would like to reiterate what Mary said. Last
week hundreds of women gathered in New Parliament House for the
Women's Convention. The overwhelming message was that we are
here, we want to be included and, if we are committed to
establishing a representative democracy, it is essential that we
are given the opportunity to properly participate in decision
making processes.
CHAIRMAN-
Thank you very much. Any other speakers?
Ms THOMPSON-
On behalf of the Australian Republican Movement, we are delighted
to support this motion. In doing so, we point out that we are the
only group here today that has more women than men amongst our
numbers. That is something which we are intensely proud of and,
in doing so, we went out of our way consciously to ensure that
that would happen. We as a group regard gender equity as an
important thing. We are delighted to support Delegate Kelly's
motion and we commend it to this Convention.
CHAIRMAN- Any
further comments?
Mr JOHNSTON- I
speak against this motion. Delegates should be permitted to
engage in working groups regarding their interests and what they
can contribute to them. They should not be seconded to working
groups on the basis of gender. They should be able to move in
whatever working groups they choose in consultation with the
chair. This Convention is about Australia's political stability,
Australia's political future; it is not about an exercise in
political correctness.
CHAIRMAN- I
should point out to Mr Johnston that there have been deletions in
respect of working groups in that second dot point.
Ms CHRISTINE
FERGUSON- I speak against this motion. The women's convention
held here in Canberra last week I do not think really speaks for
all women. I have great faith in the chair and I am sure that he
and his deputy will be very fair in their assessment of who goes
on where and who speaks. I oppose the motion.
CHAIRMAN-
There being no further speakers, I give Delegate Mary Kelly a
right of reply.
Ms MARY KELLY-
In reply, it is important to point out that the support of women
at the last week's convention is drawn to your attention simply
for what it is- 300 interested women expressing that view- and
that this motion binds us all in a collaborative endeavour to try
to reach those targets. It does not prohibit anything proceeding
if those targets are not reached. I would hope we would all do
that anyway, and it would be non-contentious. The opposition
suggests that this is not so. So in that spirit of collaborative
endeavour I urge your support.
CHAIRMAN- The
amendment that we are considering reads as follows:
That in the
running of the Convention,
the
following steps be pursued:
- * the
Resolutions Committee be gender-balanced 50/50;
*
working groups and speakers be gender-balanced 50/50
where possible, but no less than 33%, consistent with
female representation at the Convention;
* the cohort of Convenors should be gender-balanced over
the duration of the Convention, as above;
* working groups to consider gender-balance in their
choice of reporters.
Motion carried.
CHAIRMAN- The
next amendment is one from Mr Paul Tully.
Councillor TULLY- I
formally move:
That
Constitutional Convention- Rules of Debate Clause 30 be amended
to read:
- Delegates
are to comply promptly with any direction of the
chairman. A ruling by the Chairman on any matter is final
subject to a motion of dissent, with the Chair and the
mover of such a motion being the only speakers to the
motion and limited to three (3) minutes duration each.
CHAIRMAN- Is
the motion seconded?
Ms MARY KELLY-
I second the motion.
CHAIRMAN- Do
you wish to speak to it, Mr Tully?
Councillor TULLY-
Yes, please. I will be brief. I believe it is fundamental to the
right of any group of delegates in any organisation to have the
right of dissent. I would trust that that power will not need to
be exercised by delegates over the next 10 days. However,
situations could arise that, under the current provisions of rule
30, there would be no procedure or provision for any dissent or
for delegates to take any action other than to accept the rulings
of the chair. I believe it is a simple proposition. It is a
provision which occurs in constitutions and rules of debate of
just about every organisation in Australia. I would ask delegates
to endorse this simple but fundamental amendment.
CHAIRMAN-
Delegate Kelly, first of all, do you wish to speak to second the
motion?
Ms MARY KELLY-
Yes, briefly. This does not signal an intention to wantonly
dissent from the chair at every opportunity. It simply signals
and anticipates the almost certainty that, at some point, someone
will want to dissent. We may as well, dare I say, codify a brief
and efficient way of dealing with that which I hope will be as
infrequent as the chairs do.
CHAIRMAN- I
call on Delegate Bernard Wilcox.
Mr WILCOX- Mr
Chairman and delegates, I oppose this motion for the reason that
I think the appointment of this Convention, particularly the
appointment of the Chairman and the Deputy Chairman, was very
well done. Both are experienced people. Both, I think, are
retiring from public life at the end of the term of this
parliament. I think they are very good choices.
Mr Chairman, you will
recall possibly that I wrote to you and said in my letter in
relation to the rules of procedure that I thought you had taken
the whole of the authority unto yourself- and you have, to an
extent- but I also said, with no disrespect to my fellow
delegates, that it is a hotchpotch of representation here and I
do not see how we could have any chance at all of getting through
the legitimate business of this Convention unless we did have the
ruling that a ruling by the chairman on any matter is final. I,
therefore, oppose the motion.
Ms O'SHANE- I
wish to speak in support of the motion. The motion does not imply
in any way any disrespect to the chairpersons, Mr Sinclair and Mr
Jones. Indeed, we have just been through the process of
endorsing, I suppose, that they be the chairpersons. There was no
expression of dissent in that, and nor is there in this
particular motion. There is absolutely no disrespect intended.
One of the words that
I have heard quite a bit in the presentation of addresses this
morning is democracy. There has been a great emphasis on the
necessity for us to abide by democratic principles and to
continue to build a democratic society here in Australia, and I
doubt that there is any person within this gathering or beyond it
who would cavil with those propositions. This motion is really
about broadening the practice of democracy within this
Convention. It is for that reason that I support the motion.
Mr TURNBULL-
The Australian Republican Movement will support the motion. We do
so in the belief that there will not be any need for the majority
to dissent from the chair. In that respect, the power of the
majority to so dissent could be regarded as a reserve power, and
this a small example of codification.
CHAIRMAN- Does
the mover wish to respond?
Councillor TULLY-
Very briefly, I think it is fundamental, as I said before, that
this motion be adopted. Without it, 152 delegates would have less
power than the chairperson or the deputy chairperson. I would
simply ask delegates to endorse something which is both fair and
reasonable.
CHAIRMAN- The
question is that words be added to the rules of debate, clause
30, relating to a motion of dissent.
Motion carried.
Previous Page
Next Page
·===============  ===============·
Last updated: 21 October 2000
| 
