Hon Member, I thought you were going to read article 110(1) to assist all of us? Please, for the avoidance of doubt, I will read article 110(1), which is cardinal to the discussion and the suggestion being made. It reads:
“Subject to the provisions of the Constitution, Parliament may, by standing orders, regulate its own procedure.”
So, everything Parliament does regarding the regulation of its procedure is subject to the Constitution. What the Supreme Court said was that the particular Standing Order is against the
The Question of Quorum
1992 Constitution. It has not taken away the right to regulate it, and that misinformation is going out unfairly. I heard one of the Leaders this morning - and I said, “Gee”, we should not be misinforming the public when it comes to matters like this. Leaders should speak sparingly.
Please, whatever we do here to
regulate our business is subject to the
Constitution. If for any reason anybody
says a clause or otherwise is against the
Constitution, it is the
Supreme Court that will determine
whether it is against the Constitution or
we would say no, the Constitution does
not give us the power to do a, b, or c.
Once that determination has been done, if
the Hon Member wishes to ask for a
review or appeal against that, it is open to
us. But let us stop misinforming the
public that the Supreme Court has taken
the power of Parliament to regulate itself.
No; we still have the power to regulate
our proceedings, except that we must
work within and not outside the
Hon Members, I think there is no more
to be said. I asked for us to be counted and
the results have been brought to me. The
total of Hon Members at the time the
count was done was 41. I am still looking
round, but I do not see any more Hon
Members joining the House.
Hon Members, I would proceed to
accordingly adjourn the House.
