|
senate vote 2018-12-06#2
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2023-05-26 13:01:07
|
Title
Committees — Selection of Bills Committee; Report- Committees - Selection of Bills Committee; Report - Change report date
Description
<p class="speaker">Scott Ryan</p><p><i>(In division)</i> Senators, I'm not going to call this division until we resolve the matter that was being voted on. I'll call Senator Cormann, and I think we should all heed Senator Bernardi's entreaties of a few minutes ago that these things need to be circulated in writing.</p>-
- The majority voted in favour of an [amendment](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2018-12-06.47.4) introduced by Tasmanian Senator [Anne Urquhart](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/tasmania/anne_urquhart). This means that the [original government amendment](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2018-12-06.31.1) will be changed to match the wording below.
- ### Amendment text
- > *Omit '11 February 2019' in paragraph (b) and substitute '18 March 2019'. In paragraph (c), omit '11 February 2019' and substitute '18 March 2019'.*
- ### Original government amendment
- > *At the end of the motion, add "and, in respect of:*
- >
- > *(a) the Sex Discrimination Amendment (Removing Discrimination Against Students) Bill 2018, the bill and all circulated amendments to the bill be referred to the Education and Employment Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 11 February 2019;*
- >
- > *(b) the Treasury Laws Amendment (Consumer Data Right) Bill 2018, the bill be referred to the Economics Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 11 February 2019; and*
- >
- > *(c) the Treasury Laws Amendment (Prohibiting Energy Market Misconduct) Bill 2018, the bill be referred to the Economics Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 11 February 2019".*
<p class="speaker">Mathias Cormann</p><p><i>(In division)</i>I seek leave to make a short statement.</p> <p class="speaker">Scott Ryan</p><p>Leave is granted.</p><p class="italic">Senator Wong interjecting—</p><p>Can I outline the situation from the chair. There was a circulated amendment that had the words 'references committee' in it. As Senator Bernardi pointed out, that amendment was inconsistent. We had to deal with the amendment verbally and have it rewritten. When it was read out, the word 'references' was not used.</p> <p class="speaker">Mathias Cormann</p><p>If I could speak: essentially, the reason I think we need to pause for a moment is that the chair of the Senate Legal and Constitutional References Committee, Senator Pratt, was interjecting during the division to our side of the chamber that the intention was to refer this bill to the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee. I think there are several of our senators on this side who very clearly heard Senator Pratt, who is the chair of the references committee, point out to the chamber that it was not going to her committee but was going, as it should appropriately, to the legislation committee. If it was the intention of the opposition to initiate a referral to the references committee then I find that very, very disappointing, indeed, because instead of resolving legislation in the usual way this is essentially further politicising something that should be managed in a consensus fashion, which is what the government is prepared to do. This is legislation. It should appropriately go to a legislation committee, and that is of course what Senator Pratt, the chair of the references committee seemed to think. I understood, based on previous discussions among parties, that the question was whether it should go to the education legislation committee or to the legal and constitutional legislation committee, but I think there was some Labor Party initiated confusion in relation to this.</p> <p class="speaker">Penny Wong</p><p><i>(In division)</i>I'm happy to provide some indication. The reference is to the Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee.</p><p class="italic">Senator Cormann interjecting—</p><p>Senator Cormann, if you want to use interjections as the basis of asserting a party's position, I'm very happy to do so. Can I make the point so that the chamber, and I thank those who've supported it—</p><p class="italic">Senator Ian Macdonald interjecting—</p><p>No; we need to proceed.</p><p class="italic">Senator Ian Macdonald interjecting—</p><p>Can I just be clear: this is the committee to which these issues were previously referred. They have already done the work ahead of the Sex Discrimination Act discussion that we had this week. We have put forward an amendment and, if the Senate supports it, we'd be grateful.</p><p class="italic">Senator Ian Macdonald interjecting—</p> <p class="speaker">Scott Ryan</p><p>I will come to you, Senator Macdonald. In my recollection, when this amendment was moved verbally, the word 'references' was not used. That has probably caused the confusion. Senator Bernardi rightly pointed out that this may happen.</p><p class="italic">Senator Bernardi interjecting—</p><p>You say, 'I told you so', quite rightly. That is the point of the confusion. Senator Macdonald, I will call you and then I will come to you, Senator Pratt. Are you seeking leave to make a statement, Senator Macdonald?</p> <p class="speaker">Ian Macdonald</p><p><i>(In division)</i> Yes, I'm seeking leave the same way the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate sought leave.</p> <p class="speaker">Scott Ryan</p><p>Leave is granted.</p> <p class="speaker">Ian Macdonald</p><p>I am the chairman of the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee. We're very happy to deal with that, as we deal with all other bills referred by this chamber. Senator Wong used the argument that the references committee had already dealt with the matter. Of course, clearly they didn't. The references committee dealt with a referral by, as it turned out, the majority of the Senate to the references committee of not this bill but of a similar issue.</p><p>Mr President, if this Senate is to have any credibility whatsoever, we have to follow the rule since time immemorial—well, since the two committees were created—that all bills are referred to the legislation committees, which were set up specifically to look at legislation. The references committees were set up to look at anything vaguely in the area of legal and constitutional affairs that the parliament might decide the references committee should refer to.</p><p>This is an outrageous breach not only of the by-laws of the Senate but also of the principles and spirit of the Senate dealing with the executive's actions. The executive put forward these bills and private senators put forward these bills, and they're always been referred to the legislation committee, not to the references committee.</p> <p class="speaker">Scott Ryan</p><p>Senator Wong, on a point of order? Leave was granted for him to make a statement, Senator Wong.</p> <p class="speaker">Penny Wong</p><p>For how long?</p> <p class="speaker">Scott Ryan</p><p>He sought leave to make a statement and he was granted leave.</p> <p class="speaker">Penny Wong</p><p>I ask that you move on, Mr President.</p><p>Government senators interjecting—</p><p>The motion has been voted on and we need to move to discovery. Senator Bernardi and others have motions.</p> <p class="speaker">Scott Ryan</p><p>Senator Wong, if someone seeks leave to make a statement and that leave is granted, I have no choice; that is a choice of the Senate. Senator Macdonald.</p> <p class="speaker">Ian Macdonald</p><p>Thank you, Mr President. I had almost finished my contribution when Senator Wong interrupted. She didn't raise a point of order; as is her wont, she just gets up and talks and thinks that different rules apply to her. When she spoke, I remind you, Mr President, she didn't even seek leave to make a statement; she just made a statement. It's an ongoing approach of the leader of the Labor Party in the Senate to simply believe that the rules of the Senate apply to everybody except her. What you've just seen there is typical of the CFMMEU bullying you get from the current Leader of the Opposition in the Senate.</p> <p class="speaker">Scott Ryan</p><p>Senator Bernardi, on a point of order?</p> <p class="speaker">Cory Bernardi</p><p>No, I was going to seek leave to speak. I thought Senator Macdonald was winding up.</p> <p class="speaker">Scott Ryan</p><p>Senator Macdonald, have you concluded?</p> <p class="speaker">Ian Macdonald</p><p>I think I've made the point, Mr President. My speech was sought by leave, and it wasn't time limited. Senator Wong just got up and started talking, as she does—because the rules don't apply to her; there are special rules for CFMMEU people who understand how the CFMMEU operate! What you just saw and what this motion represents is a complete disregard for the rules and for the law. No wonder the CFMMEU that Senator Wong used to belong to is out there now saying publicly, 'The laws of the land do not apply to us'—because their representative in this chamber has the same view on the Senate rules.</p> <p class="speaker">Scott Ryan</p><p>I am going to call Senator Cormann. He has precedence.</p> <p class="speaker">Mathias Cormann</p><p><i>(In division)</i> Just to assist the chamber, I do believe that there was a level of confusion because—</p> <p class="speaker">Opposition Senators</p><p>Opposition senators interjecting—</p> <p class="speaker">Scott Ryan</p><p>Order! Senator Cormann is seeking leave to make a statement. Is leave granted?</p><p>An opposition senator: For one minute.</p><p>One minute, Senator Cormann.</p> <p class="speaker">Mathias Cormann</p><p>I am just going to ask a question—it is not going to be a long statement—to assist the chamber. There was a level of confusion, including because of a contribution by Senator Pratt during the division, as to whether it was going to the legislation or references committee. There is only one matter that is relevant to me now. If that had been very clearly understood, would any senator in this chamber have voted differently? If the answer is yes then I believe the vote would have to be put again. If the answer is no then the Senate can move on.</p> <p class="speaker">Cory Bernardi</p><p><i>(In division)</i> I seek leave to make a short statement.</p> <p class="speaker">Scott Ryan</p><p>Leave is granted for one minute.</p> <p class="speaker">Cory Bernardi</p><p>I note that in the notice of motion, Senator Patrick refers this bill to the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee. Senator Patrick needs to understand that the Selection of Bills Committee reference will take precedence over his motion. It's only prudent for this chamber to recommit the vote.</p> <p class="speaker">Scott Ryan</p><p>For the good order of the chamber, I ask the question put by Senator Cormann: if there was any confusion that would result in what people know now changing their vote on the motion to refer those bills to the legal and constitutional affairs references committee, not the legislation committee, does any senator wish to indicate they would like the vote to be re-put, because their vote would change?</p> <p class="speaker">David Leyonhjelm</p><p>Are you referring to all three bills or just the sex discrimination bill?</p> <p class="speaker">Scott Ryan</p><p>The sex discrimination bill and associated amendments.</p> <p class="speaker">David Leyonhjelm</p><p>You did say 'these bills'.</p> <p class="speaker">Scott Ryan</p><p>I meant 'the amendments'—my apologies. I will call the division.</p><p>Question agreed to.</p> <p class="speaker">Anne Urquhart</p><p>I move to amend an amendment to the government amendment.</p> <p class="speaker">Scott Ryan</p><p>Which?</p> <p class="speaker">Anne Urquhart</p><p>In paragraph (b). It's just an omission of a date. I move:</p><p class="italic">Omit '11 February 2019' in paragraph (b) and substitute '18 March 2019'. In paragraph (c), omit '11 February 2019' and substitute '18 March 2019'.</p><p>I ask for the question to be divided on.</p> <p class="speaker">Scott Ryan</p><p>The question is that Senator Urquhart's amendment to paragraph (b) of the government's amendment be agreed to.</p> -
-
|