How Peter Garrett voted compared to someone who believes that Members of Parliament (MPs) and Senators should vote to suspend standing and sessional orders (that is, the procedural rules of Parliament) so that their colleagues can introduce motions for Parliament to vote on even when the the procedural rules would prevent them from doing so

Division Peter Garrett Supporters vote Division outcome

26th Jun 2013, 3:24 PM – Representatives Motions - Labor Party Leadership - End Labor's internal arguments

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by the Leader of the Opposition Tony Abbott. This means that it was unsuccessful.

The motion was:

That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Leader of the Opposition from moving the following motion:

That this House calls on the Government to end its internal arguments and actually govern the country and if it can’t, to restore the selection of the Prime Minister to the people in an election, where it should be.

Background to the motion

The Labor Party leadership has been tumultuous since 2010, when there was a leadership spill that led to Prime Minister Kevin Rudd resigning and being replaced by Julia Gillard. This spill was followed by further spills in 2012 and March 2013, which Ms Gillard managed to win and so remain Prime Minister.

The day this motion was moved, another leadership spill is brewing. At 7pm it is called and Mr Rudd wins to become Prime Minister once more and Ms Gillard resigns.

No Yes (strong) Not passed by a small majority

5th Jun 2013, 4:19 PM – Representatives Motions - National Security - Suspend standing and sessional orders

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of a motion introduced by Liberal MP Christopher Pyne. However, since an absolute majority is required to suspend standing and sessional orders (as the motion attempted to do), it was unsuccessful.

The motion was:

That in accordance with standing order 132, standing and sessional orders be suspended to enable the House to divide again on the question: That the suspension of standing and sessional orders be agreed to.(Read Mr Pyne's explanation of the motion and the related debate here, after 3:58 pm. )

Mr Pyne was seeking to vote on the question again because, when the division originally took place, one of the opposition members just missed out on the chance to take part in it. It was Mr Pyne's hope that, if the division is retaken, it will be successful.(See that previous division here.)

References

No Yes (strong) Passed by a small majority

5th Jun 2013, 3:53 PM – Representatives Motions - National Security - Suspend standing and sessional orders

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of a motion introduced by Independent MP Andrew Wilkie. However, since an absolute majority is required to suspend standing and sessional orders (as the motion attempted to do), it was unsuccessful.

The motion was:

That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Denison moving the following motion forthwith:

That the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security be directed by the Minister to report by 20 June 2013 on the following:

(1) to establish all facts in relation to allegations that a convicted Egyptian jihadist terrorist was in a detention centre in full knowledge of the Department of Immigration and Citizenship, without passing this information to the Minister; and

(2) whether processes and/or resources need to change to address any issues raised, and if so, in detail, to recommend where.(Read Mr Wilkie's explanation of the motion and the related debate here. Read more about this incident on ABC News here.)

References

No Yes (strong) Passed by a small majority

5th Jun 2013, 3:38 PM – Representatives Motions - National Security - Suspend standing and sessional orders

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Liberal MP Michael Keenan.

The motion was:

That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Stirling moving the following motion forthwith:

That the Prime Minister immediately commission a cross government review into the Government’s incompetent handling of the circumstances surrounding the placing of a convicted Egyptian jihadist terrorist in a low security family detention facility in the Adelaide Hills including:(Read Mr Keenan's explanation of the motion and the related debate here. Read more about this incident on ABC News here.)

(1) when was the Prime Minister, the Attorney-General, the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship and the Home Affairs Minister first made aware of the presence of the Egyptian terrorist in the detention network and when did each responsible department or agency brief their Minister and the Prime Minister;

(2) the adequacy of communication arrangements and intelligence sharing between the relevant departments and agencies on matters of national security;

(3) the effects of the Governments budget cuts on our national security agencies ability to detect such cases particularly the $6.9 million cut to ASIO’s budget for security screening of asylum seekers; and

(4) a review of any similar cases including those of a Sri Lankan man accused of murder who was released into the community on a bridging visa and an accused Iranian drug smuggler.

References

No Yes (strong) Not passed by a small majority

3rd Jun 2013, 3:37 PM – Representatives Motions - National Security - Suspend standing and sessional orders

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of a motion introduced by Liberal MP Scott Morrison. However, since an absolute majority is required to suspend standing and sessional orders (as the motion attempted to do), it was unsuccessful.

The motion was:(Read Mr Morrison's whole explanation of his motion and the related debate here. )

That so much of standing and sessional orders be suspended as to allow the member for Cook to move the following motion:

That given the Government’s refusal to answer questions in this House and their refusal to establish an independent inquiry into the Government’s ‘light touch’ handling of national security issues regarding the detention and processing of a convicted terrorist who arrived illegally by boat in and around May 2012 that:(Read more about this incident on ABC News here.)

(1) a Select Committee on the ‘National security issues relating to the processing and detention of a convicted terrorist who arrived by boat in and around May 2012 and other related matters involving the Government’s handling of national security issues for irregular maritime arrivals’ be appointed to inquire into and report on, having regard to the following circumstances,:

(a) in or around May 2012, an Egyptian adult male accompanied by his family arrived illegally by boat at Christmas Island claiming asylum. After initial processing the man and family were transferred to the Inverbrackie Alternative Place of Detention, a detention facility for low risk asylum seeker families in the Adelaide Hills;

(b) by end August 2012 it was established by ASIO that this man was convicted of multiple terrorist offences, a member of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad which merged with Al Qaeda in June 2001. He was the subject of an Interpol Red Notice; and

(c) the man and family remained in low security detention at Inverbrackie until April 2013 when they were transferred to higher security detention facilities at Villawood in Sydney;

(2) the Select Committee should:

(a) establish the facts surrounding the case in relation to:

(i) the full chronology of the events relating to the man and his family’s arrival and detention in Australia and associated security and criminal investigations;

(ii) how and when relevant agencies and Ministers became aware of the man’s terrorist conviction and what action was taken in response to that knowledge;

(iii) the adequacy of interagency co-operation, and in particular co-operation between DIAC, ASIO and the AFP, in identifying, sharing information, and taking steps to appropriately deal with the individual concerned;

(iv) why the individual was left so long at the Inverbrackie low security facility before being transferred to Villawood;

(v) the current location and security arrangements for the man and family;

(vi) the current status of immigration processing of his asylum or any other claim; and

(vii) action being taken in relation to his extradition to Egypt and the point of responsibility for ongoing management of this national security case;

(b) review the facts and make an assessment of any failings in the Government’s handling of this case and who will be responsible;

(c) identify and establish the facts relating to the Government’s handling of other cases, involving national security issues including, but not restricted to:

(i) a Sri Lankan national suspected of murder who was released into the community before being taken to Villawood detention centre;

(ii) a suspected Iranian drug smuggler who arrived via boat and is now in a mental health facility;

(iii) asylum seeker claims involving membership of the group the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam; and

(iv) any other asylum seeker claim that has received a negative ASIO security assessment; and

(d) make recommendations to address issues identified in the review;

(3) the committee consist of seven members, three members to be nominated by the Government Whip or Whips, three members to be nominated by the Opposition Whip or Whips, and one non-aligned member;

(4) the committee may supplement its membership by up to four members, with a maximum of two extra government and two extra opposition or non-aligned members. Supplementary members shall have the same participatory rights as other members, but may not vote;

(5) every nomination of a member of the committee be notified in writing to the Speaker of the House of Representatives;

(6) the members of the committee hold office as a select committee until presentation of the committee's report or the House of Representatives is dissolved or expires by effluxion of time, whichever is the earlier;

(7) the committee elect a government or a non-government member as chair at its first meeting;

(8) the committee elect a member as its deputy chair who shall act as chair of the committee at any time when the chair is not present at a meeting of the committee, and at any time when the chair and deputy chair are not present at a meeting of the committee the members present shall elect another member to act as chair at that meeting;

(9) in the event of an equally divided vote, the chair, or the deputy chair when acting as chair, have a casting vote;

(10) three members of the committee constitute a quorum of the committee provided that in a deliberative meeting the quorum shall include one government member and one non-government member;

(11) the committee have power to appoint sub-committees consisting of three or more of its members and to refer to any sub-committee any matter which the committee is empowered to examine;

(12) the committee appoint the chair of each sub-committee who shall have a casting vote only and at any time when the chair of a sub-committee is not present at a meeting of the sub-committee the members of the sub-committee present shall elect another member of that sub-committee to act as chair at that meeting;

(13) two members of a sub-committee constitute the quorum of that sub-committee;

(14) members of the committee who are not members of a sub-committee may participate in the proceedings of that sub-committee but shall not vote, move any motion or be counted for the purpose of a quorum;

(15) the committee or any sub-committee have power to call for witnesses to attend and for documents to be produced;

(16) the committee or any sub-committee may conduct proceedings at any place it sees fit;

(17) the committee or any sub-committee have power to adjourn from time to time and to sit during any adjournment of the House of Representative;

(18) the committee may report from time to time but that it present its final report no later than 30 June 2013; and

(19) the provisions of this resolution, so far as they are inconsistent with the standing orders, have effect notwithstanding anything contained in the standing orders.

References

No Yes (strong) Passed by a small majority

15th May 2013, 5:34 PM – Representatives Superannuation Legislation Amendment (Service Providers and Other Governance Measures) Bill 2012 - Consideration in Detail - Recommital on Opposition amendments

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of a motion introduced by Labor MP Anthony Albanese. The motion was: "That in accordance with standing order 132, standing and sessional orders be suspended to enable the House to divide again on the question viz.: That the Opposition amendments be agreed to."

That earlier division took place when some members were not in the House.(The earlier division on Opposition amendments is available here. ) This meant that the Opposition was able to form a majority to pass their amendments. Mr Albanese brought this motion to take advantage of parliamentary reform that occurred as a result of the 2010 election, when neither major party formed a clear majority. This reform introduced standing order 132, which allows a recommittal if a member inadvertently misses a division.(Read more about these reforms here. )

Because an absolute majority agreed with this motion, a second division on whether to agree with the Opposition amendments will be made.(See the second division on Opposition amendments here. )

One member, Liberal MP Luke Simpkins, rebelled and crossed the floor to vote 'aye' with the Government.(Read more about what it means to cross the floor in our FAQ Section. )

Background to the Bill

The Bill is the fourth and final legislative bundle implementing the Stronger Super reforms announced by the Labor Government in 2010.(More information about this Bill and the context surrounding it can be found here.) It introduces a number of corporate governance measures that arose out of the Review into the Governance, Efficiency, Structure and Operation of Australia’s Superannuation System (known as the Cooper Review) and the Government’s own consultations with industry, employer and consumer groups.

References

Yes Yes (strong) Passed by a small majority

28th Jun 2012, 4:04 AM – Representatives Motions - Asylum Seekers - Suspend standing orders

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of a motion by Independent MP Andrew Wilkie to suspend the rules so that he could move another motion on the Migration Legislation Amendment (Offshore Processing, Protection and Other Measures) Bill 2012.

Motion text

That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Denison from moving the following motion forthwith—That the House, in consideration of the urgent need to find a way through the irregular immigration impasse, continue to sit until private Members' notice No. 1 given for Thursday, 28 June 2102, by the member for Cook, Migration Legislation Amendment (Offshore Processing, Protection and Other Measures) Bill 2012, is called on immediately.

No Yes (strong) Passed by a small majority

11th Oct 2011 – Representatives Motions - Carbon Pricing - Suspension of Standing and Sessional Orders

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Liberal MP Tony Abbott, the Leader of the Opposition. This means that the motion is rejection.

The motion was:

That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Warringah moving immediately:

That this House calls on the Prime Minister to explain to the Australian people the following:

(1) why this is the right time to introduce the world’s largest carbon tax despite growing economic uncertainty; and(By "carbon tax", Mr Abbott is referring to the carbon pricing mechanism, which will begin on 1 July 2012. )

(2) why it is right for the Prime Minister to break her solemn pledge that “there will be no carbon tax under a government I lead” by bringing in this tax without the consent of the people.(Read more about this promise, made by Prime Minister Julia Gillard, on ABC's The Drum.)

References

No Yes (strong) Not passed by a small majority

11th Oct 2011 – Representatives Motions - Carbon Pricing - Suspension of Standing and Sessional Orders

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Leader of the Opposition Tony Abbott.

The motion was:

"That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Warringah moving immediately:

That this House calls on the Prime Minister to explain to the Australian people the following:

(1) why this is the right time to introduce the world’s largest carbon tax despite growing economic uncertainty; and

(2) why it is right for the Prime Minister to break her solemn pledge that “there will be no carbon tax under a government I lead” by bringing in this tax without the consent of the people."(The Prime Minister responded to questions about this statement on ABC's AM Program here. )

National Party Senator Tony Crook rebelled against his party by crossing the floor to vote 'no' with the Opposition in this division.(Read more about what it means to be a rebel in our FAQ Section.)

References

No Yes (strong) Not passed by a small majority

7th Jul 2011 – Representatives Motions - Gillard Government; Censure - Suspension of Standing and Sessional Orders

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Leader of the Opposition Tony Abbott. This means that the motion was unsuccessful.

The motion was:

That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Warringah moving immediately-That this House censures the Government for deceiving the Australian people by bringing in a carbon tax that is nothing more than a bad tax built on a lie.(By "carbon tax", Mr Abbott is referring to the carbon pricing mechanism, which will begin on 1 July 2012. By "lie", he is referring to an election promise made by Prime Minister Julia Gillard, which you can read more about on ABC's The Drum.)

References

No Yes (strong) Not passed by a small majority

5th Jul 2011 – Representatives Motions - Carbon Pricing - Suspension of Standing and Sessional Orders

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion moved by Leader of the Opposition Tony Abbott. This means that it was unsuccessful.

The motion was:

That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Warringah moving immediately:

That the Prime Minister immediately explain why she is so determined to deceive the Australian people about the details of her carbon tax(By "carbon tax", Mr Abbott is referring to the carbon pricing mechanism, which will begin on 1 July 2012. ) by refusing to release the details for the full scrutiny of the Parliament this week. In particular:

(1) why should anyone trust:

(a) the Prime Minister to tell them the truth on the carbon tax now, when, six days before the election, she said that "there will be no carbon tax under the government I lead";(Read more about this promise, made by Prime Minister Julia Gillard, on ABC's The Drum.)

(b) the Prime Minister to tell them the truth now, when, one day before the election, she said "I rule out a carbon tax";

(c) the Prime Minister to tell them the truth now, when she said only yesterday that "when I'm in a position to give people the details about a carbon tax I will" yet is refusing to release the details to this Parliament and is hiding from scrutiny;

(d) this Prime Minister when she is trying to sneak through a carbon tax without a mandate when the only real mandate of this Parliament is a mandate NOT to introduce a carbon tax; and

(e) this Prime Minister who rules out giving people a vote on the carbon tax by refusing to call an election and now refusing to allow a plebiscite; and

(2) that the House calls on the Prime Minister to recall Parliament next week to debate her carbon tax and give the answers that the forgotten families of Australia are demanding today.

References

No Yes (strong) Not passed by a small majority

21st Jun 2011 – Representatives Motions - Carbon Pricing - Suspension of Standing and Sessional Orders

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Liberal MP Tony Abbott. This means that it was rejected. The motion was:

That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Warringah moving immediately-

That this House calls on the Prime Minister to explain to the Australian people why she arrogantly refuses to give them a vote on whether Australia should introduce a carbon tax,(By "carbon tax", Mr Abbott is referring to the carbon pricing mechanism, which will begin on 1 July 2012. ) a vote that she denied them at the last election when she said "there will be no carbon tax under a Government I lead",(Read more about this promise, made by Prime Minister Julia Gillard, on ABC's The Drum.) and now rules out a plebiscite. If the Prime Minister thinks the Australian people want a carbon tax, why is she so scared to give the people their say?

References

No Yes (strong) Not passed by a small majority

20th Jun 2011 – Representatives Motions - Live Animal Exports - Ensure resumption of trade

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of a motion introduced by Independent MP Bob Katter. However, because an absolute majority was not achieved (as required for motions to suspend standing and sessional orders), it was not successful. The motion was:

That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Kennedy from moving the following motion-That this House:

(1) note the impact of the live animal export suspension on Northern Australia, the whole cattle industry and all those associated with it and directs the Government within two weeks to:(Read more about the suspension to live animal exports on ABC News here and on Wikipedia here. The Four Corners report that precipitated the suspension is available here.)

(a) deploy 10 Australian officials to Indonesia;

(b) direct these officials, along with Indonesia Government appointees, to immediately implement an upgrading of Indonesian abattoirs to meet humane standards currently met in Australia; and

(c) instruct Indonesian meatworkers on how to process to humane standards currently met in Australia;

(2) directs the Government to ship to Indonesia 60 stun guns with knocking boxes and video cameras within seven days, and to provide appropriate training;

(3) directs the Government as a matter of urgency to:

(a) immediately accredit Indonesia abattoirs that already meet Australian standards;

(b) begin accrediting Indonesian abattoirs that have been newly upgraded to meet humane standards currently met in Australia;

(c) implement supply chain traceability and auditing systems; and

(d) implement independent monitoring of conditions in Indonesian abattoirs;

(4) once the conditions in clause 3 are satisfied, calls on the Government to immediately ensure the resumption of trade with accredited Indonesian abattoirs that meet humane standards currently met in Australia; and

(5) directs the Federal Government to immediately commence an inquiry into the circumstances leading up to the Minister for Agriculture’s decision to suspend the live cattle export trade to Indonesia and that this inquiry include Meat and Livestock Australia and all other related instrumentalities and departmental division.

References and further information

No Yes (strong) Passed by a small majority

16th Jun 2011 – Representatives Motions - Live Animal Exports - Inquiry into decision to ban live cattle trade to Indonesia

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of a motion introduced by Independent MP Bob Katter to suspend standing orders so that a motion could be put forward to “to establish an immediate inquiry into the circumstances leading up to the Minister for Agriculture's decision to suspend the live cattle trade to Indonesia”. However, because an absolute majority was not achieved (as required for motions to suspend standing and sessional orders), the motion was not successful.

The motion was:

That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Kennedy moving immediately-

That this House urgently agrees to bring on the motion standing in the name of the Member for Kennedy to establish an immediate inquiry into the circumstances leading up to the Minister for Agriculture's decision to suspend the live cattle trade to Indonesia.

See Bob Katter's full explanation of his motion and the related debate on openaustralia.org.

Read more about this decision to ban live cattle trade to Indonesia on Lateline.

No Yes (strong) Passed by a small majority

14th Jun 2011 – Representatives Motions - Asylum Seekers - Suspend standing orders

Show detail

The majority voted against suspending standing and sessional orders so that Liberal MP Tony Abbott could introduced his motion.

Motion text

That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Warringah moving immediately—That this House calls on the Prime Minister to explain why she continues to pursue a people swap policy with Malaysia when it is now abundantly clear that Nauru provides an immediate solution to deal with illegal arrivals that is cost effective, humane and proven. In particular:

(1) why would the Prime Minister send illegal arrivals to Malaysia:

(a) which hasn't signed the UN Convention Against Torture, rather than Nauru which has;

(b) which won't sign the UN Declaration on Refugees, when the Nauru Government announced yesterday that they will;

(c) where they would be detained and tagged, rather than Nauru where they would have the run of the island under an open processing centre regime;

(d) when she can't guarantee the standard and accessibility of medical care, when I have personally seen the hospital in Nauru and I can make this guarantee; and

(e) when she can't guarantee the access to school for the children, when I have personally seen the schools in Nauru and I can make this guarantee; and

(2) above all, why should the Australian taxpayer be forced to pay over $300 million for a new processing facility in Malaysia when they have already funded one in Nauru that could be rapidly re-opened for a fraction of the cost and has been proven to work.

No Yes (strong) Not passed by a small majority

2nd Jun 2011 – Representatives Motions - Carbon Pricing - Suspension of Standing and Sessional Orders

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Leader of the Opposition Tony Abbott. This means that it was unsuccessful.

The motion was:

That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Warringah moving immediately-

That this House calls on the Prime Minister to explain to the Australian people why her Government has abandoned the manufacturing industry in this country by preparing to introduce a carbon tax.(By "carbon tax", Mr Abbott is referring to the carbon pricing mechanism, which will begin on 1 July 2012.) In particular, why the:

(1) Members for Corio and Corangamite aren’t standing up for the 1,300 workers at Ford in Geelong;

(2) Member for Gellibrand isn’t standing up for the 3,300 workers at Toyota in Altona;

(3) Member for Capricornia isn’t standing up for the 2,000 workers a the Newlands, German Creek and Moranbah coal mines;

(4) Members for Throsby and Cunningham aren’t standing up for the 7,000 workers at Bluescope Steel and Illawarra Coal;

(5) Member for Brand isn’t standing up for the 1,300 workers at Alcoa in Kwinana;

(6) Member for Calwell isn’t standing up for the 1,900 workers at Ford in Broadmeadows;

(7) Member for Hunter isn’t standing up for the 2,700 jobs at the Wambo, Mount Thorley, Mount Owen and Hunter Valley mines;

(8) Member for Lingiari isn’t standing up for the 850 workers at Rio Tinto/Alcoa Gove;

(9) Member for Wakefield isn’t standing up for the 2,700 workers at Holden in Elizabeth;

(10) Member for Bass isn’t standing up for the 560 workers at Alcan in Bell Bay; and

(11) Prime Minister won’t even stand up for the 466 workers in her own seat of Lalor who work at One Steel in Laverton.

References

No Yes (strong) Not passed by a small majority

10th May 2011 – Representatives Motions - Asylum Seekers - Let a vote happen

Show detail

The majority voted against letting a vote happen. In parliamentary jargon, they voted against suspending the standing orders.

Motion text

That so much of standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Warringah moving immediately—That this House suspend proceedings forthwith so that the Prime Minister can stand before the Parliament and explain why:

(1) the Prime Minister refuses to consider an offshore detention centre in Nauru because, as she said in an interview on 8 July 2010, “I would rule out anywhere that is not a signatory to the Refugee Convention” yet now plans to send asylum seekers to Malaysia who hasn’t signed it either;

(2) the Prime Minister decried the use of Manus Island and the Howard Government’s so called “Pacific Solution” as “costly, unsustainable and wrong as a matter of principle” in 2003 yet is now desperately negotiating with the PNG Government to re-open Manus Island;

(3) the Prime Minister has damaged our national interest by agreeing to a deal with Malaysia that will see us accept five of their refugees for every one of the asylum seekers we send to them - with Australian taxpayers footing the complete bill;

(4) the Government allowed three people, identified by the NT Coroner as responsible for the fire aboard the people smuggling boat, SIEV36 which killed five people and injured 40, to be granted permanent residency in Australia;

(5) it took only three hours for the NSW police to remove protestors from the roof of the Immigration Minister’s office yet no action was taken against protestors on the roof of Villawood for 11 days;

(6) rioters at Christmas Island faced no penalty for burning down buildings and risking the lives of people at the facility;

(7) the Prime Minister promised an East Timor solution before the election knowing very well that it was opposed by the Government of East Timor and was nothing more than a dishonest election smokescreen; and

(8) the Prime Minister doesn’t just come clean and reinstate the Howard Government policies that worked rather than try to maintain this elaborate fiction that Labor has a plan to stop the boats.

No Yes (strong) Not passed by a small majority

24th Feb 2011, 3:00 PM – Representatives Motions - Prime Minister - Suspension of Standing and Sessional Orders

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Liberal MP Tony Abbott. This means that it was rejected. The motion was:

That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Warringah moving immediately-That this House censures the Prime Minister for her announcement today that confirms that she will introduce a carbon tax(By "carbon tax", Mr Abbott is referring to the carbon pricing mechanism, which will begin on 1 July 2012. ) this year breaking her solemn promise to the Australian people that “there will be no carbon tax under the Government I lead”(Read more about this promise, made by Prime Minister Julia Gillard, on ABC's The Drum. ) and in particular:

(1) that the Prime Minister stand condemned for:

(a) inflicting another new Labor tax on families already battling to make ends meet because of the rising cost of living;

(b) hitting pensioners and carers with another new Labor tax at a time when they are already struggling with soaring power bills and increased grocery prices;

(c) burdening small business with another new Labor tax at a time when many of them are barely surviving;

(d) adding an extra $300 to the average household power bill with her new carbon tax; and

(e) adding an extra 6.5 cents per litre to the cost of petrol with her new carbon tax; and

(2) at a time when there is no global agreement on reducing emissions and, under this new Labor tax, Australia will bear an unacceptable economic cost that won't be shared by our international competitors.

One member, Nationals MP Tony Crook, rebelled against his party and crossed the floor to vote 'no' with the Government.(Read more about what it means to cross the floor in our FAQ Section.)

References

No Yes (strong) Not passed by a small majority

22nd Feb 2011, 4:09 PM – Representatives Banking — Suspension of Standing and Sessional Orders

Show detail

That the motion ( Mr Hockey ’s) be agreed to.

The requirements of standing order 47(c)(ii) for an absolute majority having not been satisfied, the motion was not carried.

No Yes (strong) Not passed

27th Oct 2010, 9:31 AM – Representatives Private Members’ Business - Asylum Seekers - Suspend standing and sessional orders

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Liberal MP Scott Morrison. The motion was:

That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Cook [Scott Morrison] from moving that standing orders be suspended to enable the Member for Mayo to move the motion standing in his name, viz.—That this House:

(1) notes:

(a) the announcement on 18 October 2010 by the Prime Minister and the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship about the commissioning of a detention facility at Inverbrackie in South Australia costing $9.7 million to accommodate 400 people, consisting of family groups who are undergoing refugee status assessment; (b) that the Prime Minister and the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship failed to consult with the State Government of SA, the Adelaide Hills Council and the local Woodside community on the commissioning of this facility; and (c) that the Prime Minister visited the Adelaide Hills on Sunday 17 October 2010 immediately prior to the announcement and made no mention of the plan to commission the detention facility at Inverbrackie;

(2) provides a reference to the Joint Standing Committee on Migration to undertake the following inquiry:

(a) that the Joint Standing Committee on Migration inquire into the commissioning of a detention facility for 400 people comprising family groups at Inverbrackie, including:

(i) the suitability of the site for locating a detention facility for the purpose of accommodating family groups in comparison with alternative options available to the Department of Immigration and Citizenship; (ii) the impact of the operation of the facility on the local community, including on health, education, recreation, transport, police and other community services; (iii) the impact on defence operations, personnel and family groups based at the Inverbrackie facility; (iv) the impact of the facility on the local economy and small business; (v) the level of community support for the commissioning of the facility; (vi) the level of cost and extent of services and facilities provided to clients at the detention facility; and (vii) potential risks that need to be managed for the successful operation of the facility;

(b) that the Joint Standing Committee on Migration undertake public hearings in Woodside, SA and Canberra, ACT to facilitate the participation of community members, local service providers, council officers and state and federal departmental officials to assist the Committee with its inquiry; and (c) that the Joint Standing Committee on Migration report back no later than the first sitting week of Parliament in 2011; and

(3) calls on the Government to postpone commissioning the detention facility for 400 people including family groups at Inverbrackie, until such time as the Committee has reported and the Government has provided a response to that report to the Parliament.

Since the majority voted against this division, it was unsuccessful.

Nationals MP Tony Crook rebelled against his party and crossed the floor to vote 'no' with the Government.(Read more about what it means to cross the floor in our FAQ section.)

References

No Yes (strong) Not passed by a small majority

3rd Jun 2010, 2:33 PM – Representatives Motions - Australian Mining Industry — Suspension of Standing Orders (re: Impact on jobs)

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of a motion introduced by Independent MP Bob Katter, which means that it was rejected. The motion was:

That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Kennedy [Mr Katter] moving immediately the following motion: That the House immediately debate a matter of national importance, namely the continuing deterioration of the Australian mining industry demonstrated by the announcement by Xstrata that they will not be proceeding with Ernest Henry copper mine at Cloncurry nor the Wandoan Coal Project,(Read more about this announcement here.) costing Queensland 3,200 jobs in construction and over 1,000 permanent jobs thereafter.

Because this motion was unsuccessful, Mr Katter was not able to subsequently move his proposed motion.

No Yes (strong) Not passed by a small majority

23rd Sep 2008, 3:24 PM – Representatives Motions - Urgent Relief for Single Age Pensioners Legislation - Suspension of Standing and Sessional Orders

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Leader of the Opposition Malcolm Turnbull, which means that it was unsuccessful. The motion was:

That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Leader of the Opposition from moving immediately - That the House of Representatives: (1) recognises that the Prime Minister and his Government: (a) have acknowledged that it is virtually impossible for single age pensioners to meet essential expenses on the current pension rate, yet have refused to act and instead expect struggling pensioners to wait until yet another review is completed; and (b) have a responsibility to act immediately to ensure that the entire pension payment system appropriately addresses these pressures; (2) affirms the urgency of the Coalition’s pension bill in proposing to: (a) increase the single age pension, single age service pension and the Widow B pension by $30 per week; (b) provide immediate relief to single age pensioners, single age service pensioners and Widow B pensioners struggling with the rising cost of living pressures; and (c) provide the first step in ensuring that the Government acts immediately and accepts its responsibilities to take the urgent action required to assist all pensioners; (3) demands that the Government: (a) allow the Opposition proposal to be debated immediately and in doing so, reflect the will of the Senate in passing the Urgent Relief for Single Age Pensioners Bill 2008 last night; and (b) recognise the urgency of the Coalition’s bill and support its enactment without further delay; and (4) should it refuse to deal with the Coalition’s bill, demands that the Acting Prime Minister immediately introduce the Urgent Relief for Single Age Pensioners Bill 2008 in the House of Representatives with full knowledge that it will pass through this place and through the Senate.

No Yes (strong) Not passed by a small majority

19th Mar 2008, 9:19 AM – Representatives Motions - Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Laws Bill 2008 - Suspend standing orders

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Liberal MP Petro Georgiou. The motion was:

That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent order of the day No. 6, private Members’ business, relating to the Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Laws Bill 2008, being called on and proceeded with immediately, in light of the following reasons:

(1) the Australian Parliament has enacted more than 30 laws dealing with terrorism since 2001;(The year 2001 is significant due to the events of 11 September in New York City and Washington, which you can read more about here.)

(2) offences and procedures have been established which depart significantly from traditional criminal law principles and practices, and restrict fundamental civil liberties;

(3) it is critical that Parliament and the executive are well informed about the effectiveness and impact of the laws;

(4) however, the machinery of vigilance in Australia is deficient—reviews to date have been sporadic and fragmented and with limited mandates. Important issues have not been addressed;

(5) a credible new mechanism of review is essential;

(6) the Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security has twice recommended the establishment of the position of Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Laws, to provide a more integrated and ongoing approach to monitoring the laws;

(7) the committee considered that creation of the position would contribute positively to community confidence as well as provide the Parliament with regular factual reports;

(8) the committee’s recommendation was made unanimously on a bipartisan basis;

(9) the appointment of an Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Laws has been supported by other authoritative commentators, including the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security and the President of the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission; and

(10) Parliament should have an immediate opportunity to consider this bill to establish a safeguard for the protection of our security and our rights, one which has been strongly endorsed across the political spectrum and within civil society.

Because this motion to suspend standing orders was rejected, Mr Georgiou cannot move the above motion in respect to an Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Laws.

References

No Yes (strong) Not passed by a small majority

8th Aug 2007, 9:15 AM – Representatives Australian Citizenship Amendment (Citizenship Testing) Legislation - Let a vote happen

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of a motion to let a vote happen. In parliamentary jargon, the majority voted in favour of suspending standing orders.

Motion text

That:

(1) so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended in relation to proceedings on the Australian Citizenship Amendment (Citizenship Testing) Bill 2007 such that, at the conclusion of the second reading debate, not including a Minister speaking in reply, or at 1 p.m. on Wednesday 8 August 2007, whichever is the earlier, a Minister be called to sum up the second reading debate and thereafter, without delay, the immediate question before the House be put, then any question or questions necessary to complete the remaining stages of the Bill be put without amendment or debate; and

(2) any variation to this arrangement be made only by a motion moved by a Minister.

absent Yes (strong) Passed by a small majority

How "voted strongly against" is worked out

The MP's votes count towards a weighted average where the most important votes get 50 points, less important votes get 10 points, and less important votes for which the MP was absent get 2 points. In important votes the MP gets awarded the full 50 points for voting the same as the policy, 0 points for voting against the policy, and 25 points for not voting. In less important votes, the MP gets 10 points for voting with the policy, 0 points for voting against, and 1 (out of 2) if absent.

Then, the number gets converted to a simple english language phrase based on the range of values it's within.

No of votes Points Out of
Most important votes (50 points)      
MP voted with policy 1 50 50
MP voted against policy 22 0 1100
MP absent 1 25 50
Less important votes (10 points)      
MP voted with policy 0 0 0
MP voted against policy 0 0 0
Less important absentees (2 points)      
MP absent* 0 0 0
Total: 75 1200

*Pressure of other work means MPs or Senators are not always available to vote – it does not always indicate they have abstained. Therefore, being absent on a less important vote makes a disproportionatly small difference.

Agreement score = MP's points / total points = 75 / 1200 = 6.3%.

And then