17th Oct 2018, 5:55 PM – Representatives Motions - Minister for the Environment - Let a vote happen

The same number of representatives voted for and against the motion. As the Speaker explained:

As members would be aware, in these circumstances I issue a casting vote. Normally that vote, according to the principles, would be that the motion doesn't have a majority and the status quo remains, but I think, in line with earlier precedents, I won't exercise a casting vote because the motion is to suspend standing orders and it fails because it doesn't have an absolute majority. So we'll just declare it lost.

In other words, the motion did not succeed as it couldn't reach majority

Motion text

That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Watson from moving the following motion immediately—That the House:

(1) notes:

(a) in the House today, the Environment Minister categorically denied reports that last night she said to the former President of Kiribati "I know why you're here. It is for the cash. For the Pacific it's always about the cash. I have my cheque book here. How much do you want?";

(b) however, multiple sources have confirmed to journalists that the Minister did in fact say those words;

(c) the Minister also told the House today during Question Time that only "a small amount of money" could be spent on administration under the Government's almost half a billion dollar Great Barrier Reef grant and that administration costs were capped at five per cent;

(d) however, under the Government's grant agreement up to 10 per cent of the entire grant can be spent on administration by the Foundation itself and a further 10 per cent of any grant money provided to subcontractors can be spent on administration as well, which means that more than $80 million can be spent on administration; and

(e) immediately before providing this incorrect information, the Minister was handed a note by the Prime Minister which she appeared to rely on during her answer when she falsely claimed that administration costs were capped at five per cent—an amount $60 million lower than what is the case; and

(2) therefore, calls on the Environment Minister to:

(a) attend the House to correct her answers as she is required to do under the Prime Minister's Ministerial Standards; and

(b) advise the House whether any of the incorrect information she provided was as a result of the note handed to her by the Prime Minister.