PETITION OF MR SIVADAS S/O SANKARAN

Mr Jeyaretnam: Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise on a point of order.

Mr Speaker: What do you mean by "point of order"?

Mr Jeyaretnam: The point of order concerns the petition that was presented to this House.

Mr Speaker: Do you mean a point of clarification?

Mr Jeyaretnam: It is also a point of order, and it concerns the petition that was presented - whether the Standing Orders have been followed in dealing with this petition that was presented to the House. It is a point of order. It concerns Standing Orders.

Mr Speaker: Why do you say that it was not carried out? It was carried out.

Mr Jeyaretnam: That is the question I am asking, Mr Speaker, Sir.

Mr Speaker: It is a point of clarification then.

Mr Jeyaretnam: The question is simply this, Mr Speaker, Sir. There was presented to this House, not just to the Committee but to this House, Parliament, a petition from a member of the public to the peoples' representatives gathered here. I understand from the member of the public concerned that he has had no reply to the petition that was presented to this House. My first question then is: should there not have been a reply to the man? ---

The Leader of the House (Mr S. Dhanabalan): Mr Speaker, Sir, on a point of order. I do not see how this is a point of order. A point of order arises during the course of a debate. The Member cannot just stand up and raise a point of order.

Mr Speaker: I think it is a point of clarification.

Mr Dhanabalan: Where does the clarification arise?

Mr Jeyaretnam: It is on the Standing Orders that I am asking.

Mr Dhanabalan: Please quote the Standing Order.

Mr Jeyaretnam: I say it is a point of order, Mr Speaker, Sir, because it concerns Standing Orders of this House.

Mr Speaker: I do not agree with you, Mr Jeyaretnam. If you want to raise a point of clarification, I will let you carry on.

Mr Jeyaretnam: Thank you, Sir. That is sufficient for me. All right, on a point of clarification then, Mr Speaker, Sir.

As I said, there was a petition presented. Should not the man have had a reply from this House to the petition that was presented? Maybe this is the first petition that has been received by this House. But that does not afford an excuse for not giving a reply to the man.

Mr Speaker: Was a copy not sent to you, Mr Jeyaretnam?

Mr Jeyaretnam: No. There was a Report to this Parliament from the Committee. I am talking about a reply to the man who presented the petition.

Mr Speaker: Is that so? Under which Standing Order must I send a reply?

Mr Jeyaretnam: Mr Speaker, Sir, there is no specific provision in the Standing Orders. [Interruption].

May I carry on, Mr Speaker, Sir?

Mr Speaker: You are making certain allegations that I have not sent any reply. But a copy of the Report was sent to you.

Mr Jeyaretnam: I was only sent this Report from the Public Petitions Committee of this House. But that is not the reply from Parliament. This is the point that I am making, Mr Speaker, Sir.

Mr Speaker: Surely that is a reply.

Mr Jeyaretnam: It is not. With the deepest respect, Mr Speaker, Sir, to you, this is not a reply of Parliament. As I understand Standing Orders, once a Select Committee of this House ---

Mr Speaker: Can you point out to me which Standing Order states that?

Mr Jeyaretnam: It is Standing Order 100. It says:

'(1) Every Select Committee shall make a report to Parliament upon the matters referred to them ---' .

Mr Speaker: Yes, that is what I have done.

Mr Jeyaretnam: ' --- before the end of the session in which the Committee was appointed, and if a Committee finds itself unable to conclude its investigations before the end of the session, it shall so report to Parliament.' [Interruption].

Mr Speaker, Sir, may I carry on in spite of all these interruptions?

Mr Speaker: I am not sure which part of the Standing Orders you are referring to.

Mr Dhanabalan: Mr Speaker, Sir, on a point of order. The Member has quoted a Standing Order which has absolutely no relevance to the point that he is making. If he wants to debate this matter, Sir, I think he should file a substantive motion.

Mr Speaker: If I may say so, Mr Jeyaretnam, you were referring to Standing Order 100. Can you look at Standing Order 100, paragraph (5), which states:

'Any Member may, after not less than seven clear days' notice, move in Parliament that the report of a Select Committee, other than a report of a Select Committee on a Bill, be adopted.' You have not done so. You have been given well over seven clear days to do so.

Mr Jeyaretnam: Mr Speaker, Sir, will you hear me on my complaint about the way in which ---

Mr Speaker: There is no ground for a complaint. Everything has been carried out according to Standing Orders.

Mr Jeyaretnam: It is my contention, Mr Speaker, Sir, that it has not.

Mr Speaker: It has.

Mr Jeyaretnam: Because there is a Report ---

Mr Speaker: It was sent to you.

Mr Jeyaretnam: --- from this Public Petitions Committee to Parliament and Parliament must consider that Report. Parliament has not considered that Report yet.

Mr Speaker: Under which part of the Standing Orders must Parliament consider this particular Report?

Mr Jeyaretnam: When it comes to a question on the Committee of Privileges, there is a requirement for the Leader of the House to give notice of a motion expressing the opinion of Parliament in regard to the Report. That is a question concerning privilege and this petition was a question of the privileges of Parliament.

Mr Speaker: No. This petition is a matter for the Public Petitions Committee and not the Committee of Privileges.

Mr Jeyaretnam: I am aware of that, Mr Speaker, Sir, but the petition concerns the privilege of this House.

Mr Speaker: I do not know how you interpret that, Mr Jeyaretnam.

Mr Jeyaretnam: It does say so, Mr Speaker, Sir. If you look at the Report of the Public Petitions Committee ---

Mr Speaker: But it is not the Privileges Committee.

Mr Jeyaretnam: It concerns the privilege of this House that the petitioner prays that the legal proceedings instituted against him for defamation arising from his representation submitted by him to the Select Committee on the Companies (Amendment) Bill be declared a breach of the privileges of Parliament. It concerns the privilege of this House.

Mr Speaker: But this is a question of the Report from the Public Petitions Committee.

Mr Jeyaretnam: That is so, Mr Speaker, Sir. But I am saying to the Leader of the House and to the Members here that this is a matter on which the House should consider the Report. I rang up the Clerk and I was told that there would be no consideration, ie, there would be no motion from the Minister on this.

Mr Speaker: That is so.

Mr Jeyaretnam: Is that right, Mr Speaker, Sir?

Mr Speaker: I think so.

Mr Jeyaretnam: Is it? Here is a member of the public who writes to Parliament. Should not Parliament consider his petition and give him a reply? Is he not entitled to that courtesy at least?

Mr Dhanabalan: Mr Speaker, Sir, if the Member feels so strongly, he can give proper notice and debate this at the next meeting.

Mr Speaker: That is what I have indicated to him just now.

Mr Dhanabalan: There is provision and he can do so.

Mr Jeyaretnam: I am not going to move a motion to adopt that Report.

Mr Speaker: Then you can debate on it. I think there is no point carrying on.

Mr Dhanabalan: It is wasting the time of the House!