Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Hansard source

I ask leave of the House to amend the notice relating to the proposed amendments to standing orders by replacing standing order 133(d) with the following:

(d) Standing orders 80 and 81 shall not apply during a period of deferred divisions.

Leave not granted.

I move:

That standing orders 34, 55, 85 and 133 be amended as follows:

34 Order of business

The order of business to be followed by the House is shown in figure 2.

Figure 2. House order of business

55 Lack of quorum

(a) When the attention of the Speaker is drawn to the state of the House and the Speaker observes that a quorum is not present, the Speaker shall count the Members present in accordance with standing order 56.

(b) On Mondays, if any Member draws the attention of the Speaker to the state of the House between 10 am and 12 noon, the Speaker shall announce that he or she will count the House at 12 noon, if the Member then so desires.

(c) On Tuesdays, if any Member draws the attention of the Speaker to the state of the House prior to 2 pm, the Speaker shall announce that he or she will count the House after the discussion of the matter of public importance, if the Member then so desires.

(d) On Mondays, Tuesdays and Wednesdays, if any Member draws the attention of the Speaker to the state of the House from 6.30 pm until the adjournment of the House, the Speaker shall announce that he or she will count the House at the first opportunity the next sitting day, if the Member then so desires.

(e) If a quorum is in fact present when a Member draws attention to the state of the House, the Speaker may name the Member in accordance with standing order 94(b) (sanctions against disorderly conduct).

85 Proceedings on urgent bills

(a) If one or more bills have been declared urgent, the provisions of standing order 31 will not apply and a single second reading debate on the bill[s] may continue from 7.30 pm until 10 pm that sitting, or earlier if no further Members rise to speak, at which time the Speaker shall interrupt the debate and immediately adjourn the House until the time of its next meeting.

(b) After prayers on the next sitting, each bill will be considered in turn. The question on any second reading amendment and the question on the second reading shall be put without further amendment or debate.

(c) If the second reading of a bill is agreed to and any message from the Governor-General announced, the bill then to be taken as a whole during consideration in detail, if required, with any detail amendments to be moved together and the mover to speak for a maximum of five minutes, without further debate, and any government amendments to the bill which have been circulated to be treated as if they had been moved together, any opposition amendments which have been circulated to be treated as if they had been moved together, and any amendments by crossbench Members which have been circulated to be treated as if they had been moved as one set per Member, with:

(i) one question to be put on all the government amendments;

(ii) one question then to be put on all opposition amendments;

(iii) separate questions then to be put on any sets of amendments circulated by crossbench Members; and

(iv) any further questions necessary to complete the remaining stages of the bill to be put without delay.

(d) Standing order 81, providing for the closure of a question, shall not apply to any proceedings to which this standing order applies.

(e) Any division called for during the second reading debate from 7.30 pm until 10 pm that sitting shall be deferred until the first opportunity the next sitting day, except for a division called on a motion to suspend any standing or other order of the House moved by a Minister during this period, and, if any Member draws the attention of the Speaker to the state of the House, the Speaker shall announce that he or she will count the House at the first opportunity the next sitting day if the Member then desires.

133 Deferred division s on Mondays, Tuesdays and Wednesdays

(a) On Mondays, any division called for between the hours of 10 am and 12 noon shall be deferred until 12 noon, except for a division called on a motion to suspend any standing or other order of the House moved by a Minister during this period.

(b) On Tuesdays, any division called for prior to 2 pm shall be deferred until after the discussion of the matter of public importance, except for a division called on a motion to suspend any standing or other order of the House moved by a Minister during this period.

(c) On Mondays, Tuesdays and Wednesdays, any division called for from 6.30 pm until the adjournment of the House shall be deferred until the first opportunity the next sitting day, except for a division called on a motion to suspend any standing or other order of the House moved by a Minister during this period.

(d) Notwithstanding the provisions of standing orders 80 and 81, only a Minister may move during a period of deferred divisions—

That the Member be no longer heard; or

That the question be now put.

(e) The Speaker shall put all questions on which a division has been deferred, successively and without amendment or further debate.

[and see standing order 85 in relation to urgent bills]

For the motion in front of us on the Notice Paper there is a challenge at the moment that I am wanting us to fix. Two particular problems have arisen since the standing orders were changed shortly after the election. In response to the Jenkins report we made a decision which I think most members or possibly all will say has worked pretty well—that is, after 6.30 pm, if you're giving a speech, then you stay, but otherwise there are no further divisions or quorums. I won't say we have landed at a truly family-friendly workplace, but I think we're getting better and the 6.30 rule has been part of that.

The challenge is the way the standing order had been drafted just said, 'No divisions or quorum calls between 6.30 and 7.30,' and that means on those days, which don't happen often but we'll get one when we return on budget night, where we sit beyond 7.30 pm, divisions and quorums could all happen again, even though we've told a whole lot of members they can leave. The impact of that, simply, is we run the risk of completely undoing the intention of what we did and creating a situation where the whips—we have one of them here—end up feeling obliged to tell members, 'You have to stay. You might be able to duck out for an hour, but there could be divisions later in the night.' That would effectively defeat what we're trying to do. The first half of what's in front of the House is to say the 6.30 rule would no longer be between 6.30 and 7.30; it'd just be from 6.30 on. That should deal with the challenges we would otherwise have with members feeling an obligation to stay here and back to the late nights of everybody being here and the cultural problems that had been associated with that, which were referred to by Kate Jenkins in her report.

The second challenge, though, is one that has not yet arisen but conceivably could, and it's this: during a period of no divisions, if someone moves that the member be no further heard, the House can't divide on it; the House can't deal with it. What happens is that member is immediately sat down, whether they would have won the vote of the House or not, and we move to the next speaker. So there is a capacity at the moment for somebody, even if they don't have and know they wouldn't have a majority of the House, to effectively unilaterally terminate people's speeches by moving that the member be no further heard, and the House has no way of resolving it, because if we can't divide. It gets deferred, but the nature of the deferral is that it never happens. We have a similar problem in the Federation Chamber, but I'm not proposing to deal with that at the moment. But that challenge after 6.30 pm is real.

The amendment on the Notice Paper seeks to pull that back by saying that at the moment a minister can move anything after 6.30 pm. I'm proposing we pull that back so that a minister would only be able to force a division if it were a suspension of standing orders. Of course, in a situation where you need an absolute majority of the House, that would only be possible if people knew to stay. It would also be the circumstance, realistically, given that there are always some pairing arrangements going on, that the standing order that involves the cooperation of the Manager of Opposition Business would need to apply to that standing order for it to take effect.

I want to pull back further on what ministers are able to move. In what was circulated, I had left that a minister could move that the question be put or that a member be no further heard. I felt that we had the runs on the board in terms of not moving that and, in terms of allowing people debate, that would have been a reasonable compromise, given that we already can, and I was preventing us from moving a whole lot of other things. On consulting with both the opposition and the crossbench, I find there has been a clear view that there is concern about that. There are effectively two ways you could then go. Either you could go down a path that says that you could only move those motions if the opposition and the government agree, at which point there is a disadvantage to the crossbench, or you could have a situation where we just say, 'After 6.30 pm, those motions are not on, and that's the rule.'

What I sought leave to do would have created an absolute prohibition on there being any closure or gag motions moved after 6.30 pm so that we would have had a situation where, when they were moved, they were resolved by a majority of the House. I am hopeful that someone else will move the amendment that I was denied leave to include in the motion in the first instance. The motion in its current form says a minister can. I'm encouraging another minister to move the amendment in the terms I have described. But, out of this, we end up with two things being fixed. First, the 6.30 pm rule will become real again, and it means that, from 6.30 pm onwards, if people aren't speaking they're effectively free to go. The second thing we will fix is a situation where any person from anywhere in the chamber can just stand up and move that someone be no further heard, and it just happens without the vote of a House, which is the impact that there would otherwise be during a period where there are no divisions.

I commend the standing order change to the House. I hope that provides adequate explanation. I am braced for the prepare, when the Manager of Opposition Business uses his 'reasonable voice' speech. But, nonetheless, I actually think this is a reasonable way for the House to operate.

See this speech in context