All changes made to the description and title of this
division.
View division
|
Edit description
| Change |
Division |
|
representatives vote 2021-05-26#1
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2022-07-01 08:04:55
|
Title
Motions — Member for Bowman- Motions - Member for Bowman - Stop MP for Dunkley from speaking
Description
<p class="speaker">Peta Murphy</p><p>I move:</p><p class="italic">That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Dunkley from moving the following motion immediately—That this House:</p><p class="italic">(1) notes:</p><p class="italic">(a) the Member for Bowman has reneged on his commitment to resign from all parliamentary positions, and the Prime Minister has failed to force him to do so; and</p><p class="italic">(b) by refusing to act, the Prime Minister is tacitly endorsing the Member for Bowman's behaviour; and</p><p class="italic">(2) therefore, calls on the Prime Minister to explain to the House why he has not discharged the Member for Bowman from the Standing Committee on Employment, Education and Training.</p><p>This government will be judged on its actions, not its words, because its words mean nothing. No-one on that side of the chamber has acted on their—</p> <p class="speaker">Rob Mitchell</p><p>The minister, on a point of order?</p> <p class="speaker">Trevor Evans</p><p>In light of the Speaker's ruling less than half an hour ago, I'd ask you to consider whether this motion had been considered already by this House. I would contend that, while this motion uses different words, it's still substantially the same issue as that which has been already determined by this House on a number of occasions.</p> <p class="speaker">Rob Mitchell</p><p>I don't think so. The Manager of Opposition Business, on a point of order?</p> <p class="speaker">Tony Burke</p><p>To the point of order: I'd invite those opposite to name a single occasion when the House has considered whether or not the Prime Minister should make a statement to the House on this issue, which is what this motion calls for. If you can name what day the House has resolved that then by all means do so.</p> <p class="speaker">Rob Mitchell</p><p>The Manager of Opposition Business is correct. It is substantially different to what was released earlier in the last one, so I'll allow the member for Dunkley to continue.</p> <p class="speaker">Peta Murphy</p><p>From backbencher to backbencher and minister to minister, you decried the member for Bowman's actions. But you won't put actions behind your words, because you can't be trusted.</p> <p class="speaker">Rob Mitchell</p><p>The member for Dunkley will resume her seat.</p> <p class="speaker">Trevor Evans</p><p>Deputy Speaker, given your determination, I move:</p><p class="italic">That the member be no longer heard.</p> <p class="speaker">Tony Smith</p><p>The question is that the member for Dunkley be no further heard.</p><p>Is the motion seconded?</p> -
- The majority voted in favour of a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2021-05-26.10.1):
- > *That the member [Dunkley MP [Peta Murphy](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/dunkley/peta_murphy) (Labor)] be no longer heard.*
- This is known as a gagging motion and means that Ms Murphy won't be able to contribute anymore to this debate.
-
-
|