|
senate vote 2023-08-10#13
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2024-01-05 13:04:33
|
Title
Business — Rearrangement- Business - Rearrangement - Call on the Senate notice of motion No. 1
Description
<p class="speaker">Katy Gallagher</p><p>The Senate has voted six times this morning to deal with business of the Senate notice No. 1 to make medicines cheaper for six million Australians. I move:</p>-
- The majority voted in favour of a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2023-08-10.66.45):
- > *that business of the Senate notice of motion No. 1 be called on immediately and determined without amendment or debate.*
<p class="italic">That business of the Senate notice of motion No. 1 be called on immediately and determined without amendment or debate.</p><p>Opposition senato rs interjecting—</p> <p class="speaker">Sue Lines</p><p>Order! I am not giving you the call, Senator Birmingham, until there's order in the chamber.</p> <p class="speaker">Simon Birmingham</p><p>I note that she has called for this to be moved without debate. Indeed, I want to rise, President, to condemn the government for the tactics that they are deploying here, to condemn the government for the tactics they are deploying in seeking to stare down fair debate in this chamber, in turning down the generous offer from the opposition to actually say, 'We won't bring this disallowance on.'</p> <p class="speaker">Sue Lines</p><p>Senator Birmingham, please resume your seat. Senator Gallagher?</p> <p class="speaker">Katy Gallagher</p><p>Point of order. I have moved this be determined without amendment or debate. We won that motion earlier, in a series of debates. The motion should be moved.</p> <p class="speaker">Sue Lines</p><p>Senator Birmingham?</p> <p class="speaker">Simon Birmingham</p><p>This is the chaotic approach the government is applying. We don't have the motion circulated around the chamber, as would be the usual courtesy, so it's been a little hard to follow precisely which rushed tactics the government is deploying to try to avoid letting the coalition even speak to our motion. What we are seeing from this government is a chaotic approach. In terms of the proposal from Senator Gallagher, what I heard her move—</p> <p class="speaker">Sue Lines</p><p>Senator Birmingham, I'm giving you quite a bit of licence here.</p> <p class="speaker">Simon Birmingham</p><p>was a motion that the disallowance be called on without debate. I'm seeking to speak to the motion she's just moved—and I didn't hear a closure at the end of that motion.</p> <p class="speaker">Sue Lines</p><p>Thank you, Senator Birmingham. I am advised by the Clerk the minister has put the question, and the question ought be put. That's what I'm going to do. Senator Birmingham?</p> <p class="speaker">Simon Birmingham</p><p>President, can I ask you to step us through the motions that have been passed by this chamber to date. There was certainly nothing at the end of what Senator Gallagher said before that said the words 'and I move that the question be now put'. That was not what Senator Gallagher said in the motion she just put before. She moved a motion. The motion itself entailed no debate if that motion was successful, but there was nothing in the content of that motion that sought to close debate on that specific motion put forward.</p><p>Opposition senators interjecting—</p> <p class="speaker">Sue Lines</p><p>Order! Senator Reynolds and Senator Hughes! The minister has put the question. It is my intention to call for the vote. The question is that the motion as moved by the minister be agreed to.</p> <p class="speaker">Simon Birmingham</p><p>Point of order: I did ask—</p> <p class="speaker">Sue Lines</p><p>Senator Birmingham, I have not given you the call.</p> <p class="speaker">Simon Birmingham</p><p>I'm seeking the call.</p> <p class="speaker">Sue Lines</p><p>I will give you the call. I was waiting for silence. You had two people on their feet. Senator Birmingham?</p> <p class="speaker">Simon Birmingham</p><p>President, I asked you before, out of respect for this chamber, in courtesy, in terms of understanding the precise rushed procedure of the government, to step us through the question before the chair but also the motions that have been passed through, for clarity about whether or not, indeed, the rush to put this question without any debate is an accurate reflection of the will of the chamber. Can you please repeat, for the benefit of the Senate, the question before the chair and what is leading to your rule of the guillotine applying?</p> <p class="speaker">Sue Lines</p><p>I will certainly do that, and I will do it with silence across the chamber. The minister sought leave; that was put. The motion was then put. The minister then moved the motion be put on calling on motion No. 1; that was put. That motion was then moved. The minister then moved the substantive motion, which is: 'Pursuant to contingent notice, I move that so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent me moving a motion to provide for the consideration of a matter, namely a motion to provide that a motion relating to the consideration of Business of the Senate notice of motion No. 1 may be moved immediately and determined without amendment or debate, and I move that the question now be put.' You then jumped to your feet and began to debate.</p><p>Honourable senators interjecting—</p><p>Order! Order across the chamber.</p><p>Senator McGrath! I was asked to step through where we are up to. It's not for you to debate with me. I'm simply following the request that Senator Birmingham made of me. I've done that. It is now my intention to put the motion.</p> <p class="speaker">Simon Birmingham</p><p>On a point of order, President, I thank you for stepping through that. I appreciate, President, that you have a copy of the usual dit that's circulated in the chamber in front of you, as does Senator Gallagher. That dit has in it the words, 'And I move that the question be now put,' which sit separately. However, President, I did not hear those words said by the minister. So, President, I would encourage you to defer consideration of this matter to review precisely what occurred because my understanding is that the minister concluded—indeed, I've now got a copy of the same document you've got—before the red text. She read the black text, which was the motion that you went through, and stopped before saying the words, 'And I move that the question be now put.' In that case, the motion is eligible for debate, as moved by the minister. I would ask you to allow that motion to be debated, given the minister did not move that it be put.</p> <p class="speaker">Sue Lines</p><p>Senator Birmingham, I listened very carefully to the motion as outlined by the minister, and I heard the minister say, 'And I move that the question now be put.' If I agreed with you, I would not have then called the motion because I would not have heard those words. Those words were spoken. I think this could be resolved by me inviting the minister to put the question again, if that resolves it for you.</p><p>Opposition senators: No!</p><p>I believe that we are at the point of putting the question, and that's what I intend to do. The question is that the motion as moved by the minister be agreed to. Those of that opinion say aye.</p><p>Government senators: Aye!</p><p>Those against—</p><p>Opposition senators interjecting—</p><p>The one that the minister has moved—the one that you asked me to read out; the last motion that was moved by the minister. The question is that the motion as moved by the minister be agreed to. Those of that opinion say aye.</p><p>Government senators: Aye!</p><p>Those against.</p><p>Opposition senators: No!</p><p>Division required. Ring the bells for one minute.</p><p>Opposition senators: Four minutes!</p><p>Four minutes.</p><p class="italic"> <i>A division having been called and the bells being rung—</i></p><p>Opposition senators interjecting—</p> <p class="speaker">Sarah Henderson</p><p>This is a disgrace—20,000 jobs.</p> <p class="speaker">Sue Lines</p><p>Order! Senator Henderson!</p> <p class="speaker">Sarah Henderson</p><p>No. I'm so angry, President.</p> <p class="speaker">Sue Lines</p><p>Senator Henderson, I am ordering you to be silent. You are not debating with me.</p><p>Opposition senators interjecting—</p><p>I'm waiting. I have Senator Birmingham on his feet.</p> <p class="speaker">Simon Birmingham</p><p>President, on a point of order, I believe the motion that you have said we are up to, and that this division had been called on, is an earlier motion in this process which has already been determined by the Senate—</p> <p class="speaker">Sue Lines</p><p>Yes, that's correct, I called the wrong—</p> <p class="speaker">Simon Birmingham</p><p>and that a review of the <i>Hansard</i> will show that what the minister moved was instead that business of the Senate notice of motion No. 1 be called on immediately and determined without amendment or debate. That is all that the minister said. She did not say at the conclusion of that, 'And that the question be now put.' It was on that basis that I was seeking the call at that time, but right now we are in the midst of the bells ringing for a division on a motion you have called that I believe has already been determined by the Senate.</p> <p class="speaker">Sue Lines</p><p>Senator Birmingham, she didn't need to, because we had moved the procedural motion. So the next one was that the motion, as moved by the minister, be agreed to. It's the procedural point that went before that. It was established that way.</p><p>Yes. I didn't read the final one.</p> <p class="speaker">Penny Wong</p><p>In order to ensure the Senate is clear, as I understand it the motion that is being called on is the minister's motion that business of the Senate notice of motion No. 1 be called on immediately and determined without amendment or debate. Is that right?</p> <p class="speaker">Sue Lines</p><p>Yes. My apologies, Senator Birmingham, because I should have read that one.</p> <p class="speaker">Penny Wong</p><p>I would suggest to the Senate that, if there is a party that would vote differently on that motion to the one that was read out, they can raise that, but, if no party would vote differently, then the will of the Senate is not affected.</p> <p class="speaker">Sue Lines</p><p>After the question that Senator Wong has asked, is the chamber happy to proceed with the division?</p> <p class="speaker">Bridget McKenzie</p><p>Just on a point of clarity: are there two questions right now before the Senate?</p> <p class="speaker">Sue Lines</p><p>No, there are not.</p> <p class="speaker">James McGrath</p><p>What are we voting on, President?</p> <p class="speaker">Sue Lines</p><p>The question is that the motion relating to the consideration of business of the Senate notice of motion No. 1 may be moved immediately and determined without amendment or debate. That was moved by Senator Gallagher.</p><p>Opposition senators interjecting—</p><p>I beg your pardon. Sorry. The question is that business of the Senate notice of motion No. 1 be called on immediately and determined without amendment or debate.</p><p></p><p></p> -
-
|