John Hogg (President) Share this | Hansard source

Senator Birmingham, I have shown great patience on this occasion. I draw your attention and the attention of honourable senators to the Procedure Committee second report of 2011, dated 22 June. I will quote from that:

Procedures for dealing with formal motions

The committee has considered the operation of standing order 66 on numerous occasions. Standing order 66(3) provides that a formal motion shall be put and determined without amendment or debate.

It goes on to say:

Current difficulties are largely attributable to senators seeking leave to depart from these rules and the Senate granting leave, almost as a matter of course. In particular, the number of statements being made by leave in relation to complex motions leads to a de facto debate on those motions, contrary to standing order 66. This is because senators, instead of making statements, assert views in the nature of debate by mounting arguments and responding to positions expressed by others.

It goes on to say, and I quote inter alia:

... it urges senators to pay more heed to the existing restrictions. For example, if a senator wishes to amend a notice of motion, then generally, as a courtesy to the Senate, that notice should be postponed till the next day of sitting to enable the senator to use the procedures under standing order 77 to amend the notice in writing and for the notice to appear in its amended form in the next day's Notice Paper. Secondly, the committee encourages parties to use internal means to limit the number of senators seeking leave to make statements on motions to one from each group (Government, Opposition, Australian Greens).

I have read the whole thing for completion. I would ask honourable senators to please note that from the Procedure Committee.

Question put:

That the motion (Senator Birmingham's) be agreed to.

The Senate divided. [12:09]

(The President—Senator Hogg)

Question negatived.