Division
Stephen Parry The Committee is considering clause 4, amendment (1) on sheet 7384. Senator Rhiannon, you were seeking the call earlier. Do you wish to seek the call again? Lee Rhiannon Yes, Mr Chairman. Could you please explain what just happened? I have never seen that process. The CHAIRMAN: Certainly. The government has just moved for an extension of time to consider this bill, I presume in the anticipation of completing the bill before we rise this evening. To do that we had to move out of committee stage, and now we have moved back into committee. That is how I get my exercise for the day! So we are back to where we were? The CHAIRMAN: Exactly, we are back to where we were but we had to go through that formality, otherwise the debate would have expired at 6.50pm. Thank you for the explanation, Mr Chairman. I was interested in the comments made earlier, particularly by Senator Ryan. I am not doubting his passion and his interest in the constitution, but what we have here tonight is a whole number of excuses being used. There are heavy spoiler tactics going on around this important legislation. We have heard many comments being made—concerns about the constitution, the need for good process, the need for a commitment to ensure the machinery really works. But when you listen closely to what has been said, and when you remember how it played out today—initially there was only one speaker from the coalition and one from the Labor government, because this was supposed to be noncontroversial legislation—there was clearly an agenda going on. Yes, anybody can come in here and speak. It is one of the wonderful things about our parliaments in Australia. As Senator Ryan said, all of his party members—like all of us—are entitled to their opinion. But what we saw today in so many of the comments from the coalition was very worrying for a party that states that there is bipartisan support for this bill. We are starting to see various guerrilla tactics going on here—throwing bom
Senate, 2013-05-15. affirmative: ayes 35, noes 28.
Question
Stephen Parry The Committee is considering clause 4, amendment (1) on sheet 7384. Senator Rhiannon, you were seeking the call earlier. Do you wish to seek the call again? Lee Rhiannon Yes, Mr Chairman. Could you please explain what just happened? I have never seen that process. The CHAIRMAN: Certainly. The government has just moved for an extension of time to consider this bill, I presume in the anticipation of completing the bill before we rise this evening. To do that we had to move out of committee stage, and now we have moved back into committee. That is how I get my exercise for the day! So we are back to where we were? The CHAIRMAN: Exactly, we are back to where we were but we had to go through that formality, otherwise the debate would have expired at 6.50pm. Thank you for the explanation, Mr Chairman. I was interested in the comments made earlier, particularly by Senator Ryan. I am not doubting his passion and his interest in the constitution, but what we have here tonight is a whole number of excuses being used. There are heavy spoiler tactics going on around this important legislation. We have heard many comments being made—concerns about the constitution, the need for good process, the need for a commitment to ensure the machinery really works. But when you listen closely to what has been said, and when you remember how it played out today—initially there was only one speaker from the coalition and one from the Labor government, because this was supposed to be noncontroversial legislation—there was clearly an agenda going on. Yes, anybody can come in here and speak. It is one of the wonderful things about our parliaments in Australia. As Senator Ryan said, all of his party members—like all of us—are entitled to their opinion. But what we saw today in so many of the comments from the coalition was very worrying for a party that states that there is bipartisan support for this bill. We are starting to see various guerrilla tactics going on here—throwing bom
How each member voted
Per-member votes are not present in this static export. Consult the original division record.
Related bills
Only formal divisions leave a per-member record. A procedural vote is not necessarily a vote for or against a bill.