Get Involved - Parliament

Residential Tenancies Legislation

Published on: November 2025

Record: HANSARD-1323879322-159974

Residential Tenancies Legislation

Ms MARYANNE STUART (Heathcote) (20:56:00):

By leave: I move:

Hansard

That the family name and names of individual family members contained in my contribution to the second reading debate on the Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill 2024, made on 23 October 2024, be expunged from the record and minor amendments be made to refer to the family in general terms and remove identifying particulars.

It is my understanding that all parties have agreed to the motion being moved ahead of time.

Ms ELENI PETINOS (Miranda) (20:56:52):

With respect, I acknowledge the request of the member for Heathcote.

Mr David Mehan:

What a waste of time.

Ms ELENI PETINOS:

I acknowledge the interjection of the member for The Entrance while I am asking for simple clarity. As all members would appreciate, it is a highly unusual request. Given that it has been over 12 months since the member for Heathcote made her contribution, on what basis is she seeking this Chamber's permission to expunge the names from the record? All I am asking for is a brief explanation. It can be a simple sentence. Given that it is now nine o'clock on an evening when members are permitted to go home and there are to be no divisions, I am asking for a simple explanation on the record as to why the member is asking this place to agree to an extraordinary motion to permit the change to be made.

Ms MARYANNE STUART (Heathcote) (20:57:51):Hansard

I thank the member for Miranda for the opportunity to speak further. First of all, I did not want to take up any further time. I know that members are exhausted. That is why the issue was put forward to all parties concerned and agreed upon many hours ago. I mentioned names, and the family has asked for the removal of their names from , hence my request.

Ms FELICITY WILSON (North Shore) (20:58:35):

I speak in debate on the motion before the House. I am deeply concerned that this Government moved a suspension of standing orders to essentially remove most members of this place after 6.30 p.m. and to not have divisions on debate. We are usually discussing our communities in community recognition statements and private members' statements. Government members are now trying to change the record of things said in this place a year ago without this House having the ability to oversight those decisions, because most members have left for the night. It is concerning that the motion is being rushed through at nine o'clock at night. I do not know the substance of it. If we need to protect an individual's records and information, then we should do that in every circumstance. We do that in committees and in the House when necessary. Why has it taken a year to move this motion? Why is it being done at nine o'clock at night? Why is it being done when this Government has moved a suspension of standing orders to, essentially, push most members out of the Chamber in the evening?

I put on record that I am deeply concerned that this sets a precedent for the Government to use this time of the evening, when it has pushed members out of the Chamber, to push through different types of procedural motions of substance that we are concerned about. I do not know the details of the proposal by the member for Heathcote, but I am concerned about the precedent it sets. The standing orders have been suspended to push most members out of the Chamber in the evening. The Government has reserved this time for members to speak about our communities, not debate motions like this.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Ms Sonia Hornery):

Before I call the member for Heathcote, I point out that leaders on both sides of the House have discussed the matter. They are aware of it.

Ms MARYANNE STUART (Heathcote) (21:00:36):

In reply: I thank the member for North Shore for her ongoing monologue. As I have explained, all parties agreed to this many hours ago. I would have thought that, if any member needed it, clarification would have been sought in the course of the day.

Interruption

[]

Members opposite are speaking while I am speaking. Do they want to know the reason I have moved the motion or are they going to be rude and disrespectful and not listen?

Mr Adam Crouch:

Point of order: Given the commentary going on in the Chamber, we withdraw leave at this time.

Ms ANNA WATSON:

Leave was already given. I move:

That the question be now put.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Ms Sonia Hornery):

The member for Heathcote will resume her seat. I have received good advice from the Clerk that there are precedents for requests for leave in these circumstances. Leave has been granted and members have a right to vote on the matter, which will be debated tomorrow morning if necessary. I will put the question.

Ms Felicity Wilson:

Point of order: Leave was withdrawn before the motion to put the question was moved. The member for Terrigal requested that leave be withdrawn before the member for Shellharbour moved that the question be now put. The question before the House has to be that leave be withdrawn. That occurred before the member for Shellharbour moved the motion that the question be now put. It remains the question before the House.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Ms Sonia Hornery):

My understanding is that leave was granted. I will put the question. We will have a chance to vote on it now and then debate it tomorrow.

Mr Adam Crouch:

Point of order: With respect, I understand that leave was originally granted for the member for Heathcote to make a contribution. Given the level of disruption I saw when I walked into the Chamber, I sought for leave to be withdrawn.

Mr David Mehan:

You can't control your troops.

Mr Adam Crouch:

Are you done? I requested that leave be withdrawn prior to the member for Shellharbour moving that the question be now put. Madam Deputy Speaker, I ask that you check with the Clerk because leave was withdrawn by the Opposition prior to the decision by the member for Shellharbour to move that the question be now put.

Ms Anna Watson:

To the point of order: Leave was granted and then leave was withdrawn. I moved that the question be now put, and that is the question before the House after receiving advice from the Clerk. I ask that the question be now put so that we can deal with this matter tomorrow.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Ms Sonia Hornery):

I have sought advice and we will defer consideration of this matter until tomorrow. We will now proceed to private members' statements. I call the member for Oxley.