|
representatives vote 2017-12-04#4
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2023-10-06 11:36:42
|
Title
Resolutions of the Senate — Asylum Seekers; Consideration of Senate Message- Resolutions of the Senate - Asylum Seekers; Consideration of Senate Message - Do the vote again
Description
<p class="speaker">Tony Smith</p><p>Before we recommit the vote, I do want to address the matter of the Manager of Opposition Business's point of order, which I did dismiss. The difficulty that I have as Speaker, of course, is that the standing order provides for missing a vote through 'misadventure', which in my interpretation is pretty much everything other than deliberately not voting. That's why that word is there. The other difficulty I have is that, with members not being here, to require an explanation from them means that we couldn't proceed to the final vote. We would have just been suspended, not doing anything.</p><p>But I do think that the Manager of Opposition Business raises a reasonable point. The Senate certainly have a different approach. We can learn from them—not on everything, I hasten to say! But I do think the approach I took was reasonable, inasmuch as the Leader of the House speaks for government members; the Manager of Opposition Business speaks for members of the official opposition. But I have reflected on his point, and I do think that, now that members who missed the vote are here, they should explain to the House that they missed the vote through one of the reasons in the standing orders, notably misadventure. Unless anyone crossed sides, there are two.</p> <p class="speaker">Honourable Member</p><p>An honourable member interjecting—</p> <p class="speaker">Tony Smith</p><p>A member's misadventure can get you out of the chamber as well.</p> <p class="speaker">Steven Ciobo</p><p>Mr Speaker, I want to apologise to the House for the delay that I caused in its having to recommit the vote, and I apologise for missing the vote.</p> <p class="speaker">Honourable Members</p><p>Honourable members interjecting—</p> <p class="speaker">Steven Ciobo</p><p>I was unfortunately detained, so I wasn't able to get here in time. I apologise.</p> <p class="speaker">Warren Entsch</p><p>Mr Speaker, I'd like to apologise to the House—again, it was misadventure in missing the vote, and I certainly apologise for that.</p> <p class="speaker">Tony Smith</p><p>I thank both members.</p><p>Honourable members interjecting—</p><p>Members on both sides will cease interjecting. I thank both—</p><p class="italic">Mr Snowdon interjecting—</p><p>I'm going to remind the member for Lingiari, in particular, that 94(a) applies beyond question time. Both members have confirmed that they did not deliberately miss the vote. Good to see the member for Kennedy here. The question now is, again, that the amendment be agreed to.</p><p>An honourable member interjecting—</p><p>We're back to the amendment. You're entitled to be a bit confused. That's fair enough. We're now back to the member for Melbourne's amendment. Everyone clear with that? The immediate question is that the member for Melbourne's amendment be agreed to.</p><p class="italic"> <i>A division having been called and the bells being/having been rung—</i></p><p>Can I have people's attention. We're just going to stop the division. The Leader of the House had moved that the motion be put. That was carried. We do need to go back to the amendment, deal with that, and then deal with any final proposition, whether the bill is amended or not. But first, on this unusual procedure, we do need to actually put the question that the House do now divide again. So I'll put that question—that is, that the House divide again.</p> -
- The majority voted in favour of a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2017-12-04.107.1):
- > *That the House divide again under standing order 132.*
- Due to a 'misadventure', which meant some members weren't present for the [first time](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/divisions/representatives/2017-12-04/2) this vote was taken.
-
-
|