Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Hansard source

President, on a point of order, I would just ask you to reconsider the ruling you made before in relation to Senator Pratt's ability to vote against the motion that she herself moved.I have had time since to find the 1991 precedent that was referred to in Odgers', which states:

A senator is not obliged, however, to vote for a motion which the senator has moved, the rationale being that even the mover may be persuaded against a motion by the debate; or the motion may have been amended in a way unacceptable to the mover.

President, there was no debate on this motion because the government gagged and guillotined any and all debate on the motion. There were no amendments to the motion. Therefore, the rationale given in Odgers' as to the grounds upon which a senator could come to move a motion and then vote against their own motion does not stand. The rationale given in Odgers' does not stand for why it is that Senator Pratt, a Labor senator, should have been entitled to move to disallow a Labor government policy but then vote against her own disallowance motion. I suggest, President, that the application of this ruling on this occasion was an incorrect application and that the vote should be recommitted, with Senator Pratt expected to not vote against her own motion.