Senate standing orders panel holds over Standing Order 82 sign-off pending further review

The Senate Standing Orders Committee met on June 26, 2026 to continue its review of proposed changes to Standing Order 82, which governs private members' bills, with most of the redraft already approved and one clause still under scrutiny.

The session opened with the adoption of minutes from earlier sittings held on June 5 and June 15, 2026. Those records showed the committee had been working through amendments prepared by the legal team, including a redraft of Standing Order 82(15). At the June 15 meeting, Senator Sinclair had taken the chair while members sought clarity on the revised wording.

The main focus on June 26 was Standing Order 82(15)(C), which states that if a special select committee finds the facts and allegations in a bill have not been proved, it must report that finding to the Senate and no further proceedings on the bill may continue unless the Senate makes a special order to the contrary. Senator Golding Campbell had previously questioned how that provision aligns with Standing Order 58(1), which allows the Senate to proceed with a bill after it is reported from a select committee.

Legal counsel told the committee the aim of 82(15)(C) is to stop a bill whose facts have not been proved from moving automatically to the committee of the whole Senate. An adverse committee report would normally end the bill's progress unless the full Senate, by majority vote, decides through a special order that further scrutiny is warranted. Counsel said the clause does not remove the Senate's authority to continue deliberations if the chamber chooses, and noted that similar language already exists in the current standing orders.

Senator Gail welcomed the drafting work but asked what would trigger a special order to the contrary. Senator Bernard also sought clarity and suggested the matter might need further discussion when Senator Golding Campbell, who had raised extensive concerns at an earlier sitting, is present. Senator Gail said the phrase left too much discretion, though she accepted the chair's explanation that an order to the contrary would simply mean allowing proceedings to continue after an adverse report.

With the hour ending, the committee agreed that members present were satisfied with the legal explanation for now, but that Senator Golding Campbell should review the minutes before the panel signs off on Standing Order 82 at its next meeting. Senator Scott Miley, who had hoped to join remotely, was unable to connect because of technical difficulties on her end despite efforts by the parliamentary team.