|
representatives vote 2018-12-05#13
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2019-01-04 14:27:56
|
Title
Bills — Treasury Laws Amendment (Prohibiting Energy Market Misconduct) Bill 2018; Second Reading- Treasury Laws Amendment (Prohibiting Energy Market Misconduct) Bill 2018 - Second Reading - Adjourn debate
Description
<p class="speaker">Tony Burke</p><p>I move:</p><p class="italic">That the debate be adjourned.</p>- The majority voted against a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debates/?id=2018-12-05.151.2):
- > *That the debate be adjourned.*
- This means the debate will continue.
<p class="speaker">Tony Smith</p><p>I can't accept that. We've had a contingency motion determined by the House.</p> <p class="speaker">Tony Burke</p><p>Mr Speaker, before you rule, if I may raise a point of order—</p> <p class="speaker">Tony Smith</p><p>I'm not going to rule; I'm just going to try to explain something. There has been a contingent motion moved and passed and the standing orders have been suspended to allow this to occur. We're now on the second reading. That's exactly what the House has been deciding.</p> <p class="speaker">Tony Burke</p><p>The contingent notice of motion suspended standing orders to allow a motion to be moved that the second reading would be made an order of the day for a later hour. That suspension allowed the Leader of the House to then move the motion that it be made an order of the day for a later hour. That then happened, and the House has resolved that it be made an order of the day for a later hour. The Clerk has then, in terms of order of government business, said that this is, in fact, not at a later hour but immediately the next item of business. Now that it's the next item of business—</p> <p class="speaker">Tony Smith</p><p>The Clerk hasn't said that. That's just what has happened.</p> <p class="speaker">Tony Burke</p><p>Well, you called the Clerk; it has happened, following the normal process.</p> <p class="speaker">Tony Smith</p><p>Yes, that's right.</p> <p class="speaker">Tony Burke</p><p>I'm not claiming the Clerk has done anything inappropriate. This is the first moment that the debate has been resumed. The suspension had nothing to do with whether or not the debate would be called on immediately. It was simply whether or not that was going to be allowed to be done at a later hour, rather than having to wait for tomorrow. Now that we've commenced, I will move that the debate be adjourned.</p> <p class="speaker">Tony Smith</p><p>The Leader of the House on the point of order.</p> <p class="speaker">Christopher Pyne</p><p>The purpose of the contingency motions and suspensions of standing orders is to allow the House to take an action. The correct motion to effect that action is the motion that the second reading be made an order of the day for a later hour. That is not anticipated to be a later hour during the day or the next day. It's to be the next item of business. So, if the Manager of Opposition Business were correct, then there would be no point in moving the contingency motions. There'd never be able to be a suspension of standing orders to allow an immediate debate because somebody in the House could keep consistently moving the debate be adjourned. So it would actually negate the whole purpose of a suspension of standing orders, and that wasn't the intention, of course, of the standing orders—</p><p>Honourable members interjecting—</p> <p class="speaker">Tony Smith</p><p>Could members cease interjecting?</p> <p class="speaker">Christopher Pyne</p><p>or of any other Speaker in the House for the last 117 years.</p> <p class="speaker">Tony Smith</p><p>I've got to say that I'm persuaded by that. I'll hear from the Manager of Opposition Business.</p> <p class="speaker">Tony Burke</p><p>The Leader of the House is referring to a motion that he did not move. He did not move that the next item of business would be the second reading motion. He did not move that. He simply moved that the resumption on the motion that the bill be read a second time would be made an order of the day for a later hour, and that was carried. That gave the government the flexibility to decide whether this would be the next bill or whether it would be a later bill or whenever it would happen. Whenever they bring on any bill, at that moment we are allowed to move that the House be adjourned, and I am moving that.</p> <p class="speaker">Tony Smith</p><p>I'll address the matter in this way. Certainly, it hasn't been the practice for this to occur with other contingent motions, and I think the Manager of Opposition Business would need to concede that. I understand the point he's making about 'a later hour'. He's conceded that it has now been called on and we're now into the debate, and what he's seeking to do is adjourn the debate straightaway now that we're into it. Clearly, it would be unworkable, and I certainly would not allow this motion to be moved continuously, otherwise no work would be done. So I'll allow this motion to be moved, but it'll be decided and decided once.</p> <p class="speaker">Tony Burke</p><p>I move:</p><p class="italic">That the debate be adjourned.</p> <p class="speaker">Tony Smith</p><p>The question is that the debate be adjourned.</p>
|