NOTICES OF SITTINGS

Mr J.B. Jeyaretnam (Anson): Mr Speaker, Sir, may I, with your permission, rise on a point of order?

Mr Speaker: Your point of order being?

Mr Jeyaretnam: It relates to sittings of Parliament, and notices in relation to the sittings.

Mr Speaker: Let us hear what you have to say.

Mr Jeyaretnam: I have already expressed to you, Mr Speaker, Sir, my own views about this. But I ask leave from you to raise this publicly now, and that is, to make a plea that Members should be given longer notices of the sittings of Parliament. It was made very poignant as regards this sitting because we had notice of the sitting on the 23rd April. Under Standing Orders, all questions and motions for debate in Parliament had to be sent in on the 24th April. So Members had barely 24 hours within which to prepare their questions and to table their motions.

As I have told you, I missed out because I sent in my questions and motions on the 25th April, having clean forgotten that 1st May was a public holiday. I understood from you, Mr Speaker, Sir ---

The Leader of the House (Mr S. Dhanabalan): Point of order, Mr Speaker, Sir.

Mr Speaker: What is your point of order?

Mr Dhanabalan: The Member for Anson is not raising a point of order. There is nothing wrong with the way that notice was given. Sufficient notice was given as required under Standing Orders. He could have filed whatever motions or questions he wanted any time. He need not have waited for me to give notice of a sitting. So the point raised is not a point of order.

Mr Jeyaretnam: Mr Speaker, Sir, I still maintain it is a point of order because it relates to notices of sittings.

I am well aware that Standing Order requires that the Clerk should only give at least five days' notice. But that is the minimum period. I am making a plea to the Leader because I understood from you that it is the Leader who decides when Parliament is to -

Mr Dhanabalan: It is not a point of order.

Mr Jeyaretnam: It is. Mr Speaker, I await your ruling because it concerns the interpretation and application of Standing Orders so as to give ample opportunity to Members of this House to bring up matters for debate. So I submit it is a point of order. I am aware that, under the Standing Orders, only five days is required.

Mr Dhanabalan: So what is your point of order?

Mr Jeyaretnam: I am making a plea. May we know from the Leader why is it not possible to give Members sufficient notice of sittings of Parliament because Parliament is not a club or an association. Parliament is concerned with national matters and it is important that Members should be given ample time to bring up their matters before Parliament. It is not a game of trying to catch out Members from giving notices of motions.

Mr Dhanabalan: Mr Speaker, Sir, on a point of order. I think the Member really is stretching his point too much. There is no point of order. I have made the subject clear. It is provided for in the Standing Orders that a certain number of days of notice is required. Any Member can file his Question for Oral Answer or any motion without waiting for Parliament to be called for a sitting. If any Member is so exercised that he wants to file a motion, he could have done so any time. There is no need for him to wait until a meeting is called. So no right has been denied, no opportunity has been deprived from the Member for Anson. He should have filed when he felt exercised and not waited for me to file the notice for a meeting.

Mr Speaker: This is exactly what I told the Member for Anson in private the other day. He has been given ample time to file his motion and I am afraid there is no point of order for me to rule on.

Mr Chiam See Tong (Potong Pasir): Mr Speaker, Sir, may I just make a point of what the Leader of the House has said?

Mr Speaker: What is your point of order? I have already said that the matter is closed.

Mr Chiam See Tong: As regards the point of order of the Member for Anson.

Mr Speaker: I have closed the case, Mr Chiam.

Mr Chiam See Tong: There are certain matters which have to be urgently dealt with, otherwise it just lapses. Therefore, I think what he said is not justified. Let this point be recorded.