First of all, I enormously resent the way this has been sprung on the House. It is an extremely important matter and it is put before us at the very last minute, without notice. It is not on the original Order Paper. I had very little idea about it. It has just been sprung on me. It is a very, very important matter for the House and it has been brought in at 8 p.m. I do not know at what stage the committee knew they were going to be looking for an extension. I do not know if they knew this three weeks ago. I certainly oppose, in principle and in fact, that this committee should be given one more hour to sit. From memory, and because I had no time to prepare this matter, this is the third extension which this committee have looked for.
I remember the Leader of this House, Senator Dooge, saying in July 1984, when the first extension was looked for, that he would oppose a second extension. A second extension was granted by this House in December 1984 for three months with the assurances that they had had a lot of work to do but that they would report on 19 February. The committee have the nerve to come back to us again to ask us for another extension. We hear that there is one chapter still to write and that chapter is on divorce, on the dissolution of marriage.
Let there be no doubt in this House why this committee was set up. This committee was set up specifically to deal with the dissolution of marriage. All other matters could be dealt with by the Government and that is what the Government are for. The committee come back to us at this time saying they have not even considered this matter properly. They have the audacity to ask us for another three weeks. No, Sir, I do not believe for a moment they should. Issues like this are for Government to consider. I said, and I was the only person in this House who said it the day this committee was set up, when every single member of the political parties were congratulating themselves on the setting up of this committee, that it was a bogus committee, that Members would not agree and that they would be looking for an extension. I was assured nearly two years ago that this was not true. Yet, they came back in June 1984, December 1984 and they come back to us in February 1985 and ask for another extension. There is no point in going through this bogus procedure. I will be very interested to see what conclusions they come to on the vital issue of the dissolution of marriage, which they have not even considered at this stage, two years after the Government have taken power. I shall oppose this and I shall be looking for a division on it.
