Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the amendment circulated by Senator Xenophon be agreed to.

Senator Xenophon's circulated amendment

At the end of the motion add:

b ut the Se nate calls on the Government to initiate a review of:

  (a)   current issues regarding airport security and policing, building on the report by the Rt Hon Sir John Wheeler, DL, An Independent Review of Airport Security and Policing for the Government of Australia in 2005; and

  (b)   progress on the implementation of the recommendations made in the 2005 report.

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern and Remote Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy President, I raise a point of order. I have no idea what Senator Xenophon's amendment is because I have not heard him argue it. Is there a provision to allow the chamber to actually listen to and understand what the amendment might be before we are required to vote on it?

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is no point of order. The Senate resolved yesterday that this would be the course of action today.

Question put:

That the amendment (Senator Xenophon's) be agreed to.

A division having been called and the bells being rung—

John Faulkner (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy President, I rarely take points of order in divisions, but can I ask you to address the standing order on a senator who calls for a division and votes one way on the voices and now—and I have to name Senator Macdonald—is voting another way as the Senate divides. You might care to address that in the standing orders.

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Faulkner. You are correct about the standing order provision. Senator Macdonald, if that is in fact correct you will need to vote the way you called. Senator Joyce, are you raising a point of order?

Barnaby Joyce (Queensland, National Party, Leader of The Nationals in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy President, in light of the circumstance that this is all being guillotined and we are trying at this point in time to deal with truncated amendments, it is quite obvious that at this juncture there is not the capacity for us to be fully across the question. It is the Labor Party which truncated all this and it is that which is turning this into a complete and utter farce.

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On the point of order, Mr Deputy President: to facilitate the smooth running of the Senate, I suggest that you call the vote again so that senators are clear what they are voting on.

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On the point of order, Mr Deputy President: it should be said that the reason for this confusion is that nobody in this chamber knows what the amendment is. The guillotine procedure imposed on this chamber by the Labor Party and the Greens makes it impossible for senators—government, opposition or crossbench—to be aware of what the amendment is upon which we are voting.

John Williams (NSW, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On the point of order, Mr Deputy President: Senator Xenophon and Senator Madigan were the two voices clearly heard back here.

Government senators interjecting—

Yes, they were. Ask them yourself.

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I may be able to assist the chamber, if the chamber would allow me to. Prior to Senator Faulkner raising a point of order, I was actually going to put the question again because there was a lot of noise and confusion and the chamber was exceptionally disorderly. At the expiry of the one minute, there were over 14 senators standing in the centre of the chamber. On that basis, I am going to put the question again and call for the voices prior to calling for the division. Senator Macdonald, if you think you are going to assist the chamber, I will hear you.

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern and Remote Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy President, I am speaking on the point of order raised by Senator—

A government senator: You should be speaking from your seat.

I am sorry; I have been told by a Labor Party person I should be speaking from my seat. Mr Deputy President, I am speaking on the point of order raised by Senator Brandis. Senator Brandis is absolutely correct—how can we know what we are voting on in this chamber when we do not have any discussion, any argument in favour or against the amendment or any argument in favour or against the bill? How can we possibly do this in a situation where the Labor Party and the Greens have gagged every piece of debate, every piece of argument on four or five bills we are required to vote on tonight?

Bob Brown (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On the point of order, Mr Deputy President: the standing orders are quite clear about this. There will be a series of votes, as we are seeing here, without debating the matter.

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern and Remote Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Why don't you guillotine it? You were paid for this, were you—$1.6 million?

Bob Brown (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That is the guillotine; you are right, Senator Macdonald. There were 116 such occurrences during the years in which the Howard government was in office and this contention was—

Opposition senators interjecting—

Just like this. And we understood the rules.

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What is your point of order, Senator Brown?

Bob Brown (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The point of order is that Senator Macdonald did call one way and is now trying to vote another. I agree with your ruling that the vote should be put again so that he can get himself out of the mess that he is in.

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I call Senator Joyce, but I will not take any further points of order after you, Senator Joyce. Then I will put the question again.

Barnaby Joyce (Queensland, National Party, Leader of The Nationals in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On the point of order, Mr Deputy President: I have passage of this from the other place and quite obviously it is completely and utterly impossible. To try and deal with this in this manner is the height of difficulty because we really have no idea. Senator Evans has graciously said, as I suggested, that we should have the vote again and I think that is what should be done.

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am going to put the question again. Senator Fifield, will this really assist?

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think it may, Mr Deputy President. It is not a point of order, but just a suggestion.

Government senators interjecting—

Okay, I will call it a point of order, then, if that satisfies Labor members. It may—

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Fifield, it would assist the chamber if I put the question again and I will do so unless you have new material that I have not been made aware of.

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Xenophon could perhaps seek leave to briefly explain what his amendment is.

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Xenophon, I gather you are going to seek leave to make a statement?

Nick Xenophon (SA, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy President, I seek leave to make a short explanation.

Leave not granted.

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I propose now to put an end to this matter. I am going to put the question again and I will call for the voices and see whether we need to divide. In respect of the Aviation Transport Security Amendment (Air Cargo) Bill 2011, the question is that the amendment circulated by Senator Xenophon on revised sheet 7155 be agreed to.

A division having been called and the bells being rung

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern and Remote Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On a point of order, Mr Deputy President: am I allowed to move that so much of standing orders be set aside as would prevent Senator Xenophon from explaining for two minutes what his amendment is about?

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Not during a division. You cannot do that whilst we are waiting for a division to be determined.

The Senate divided. [22:22]

The Deputy President—Senator Parry

Question negatived.

Could I just ask senators to listen carefully to the next few resolutions so that we have less confusion. Please listen to the resolutions.

Cory Bernardi (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary Assisting the Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy President, I do not want to be obstructive to the Senate, given the lateness of the hour, but I was not alone in hearing Senator Feeney call in favour of the ayes, and that means there were three for the ayes and he refused to vote with the ayes—that is how he called it. When you questioned Senator Feeney with respect to this, he did not provide an answer. He grinned, he may have blushed and looked embarrassed, but he did not deny the fact. I ask you to call upon Senator Feeney to explain why he made a call for the ayes and then voted with the noes.

David Feeney (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Can I just have it noted, Mr Deputy President, that I did not call for a division.

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Can we now proceed to the business before the chair.

Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you. I table a supplementary explanatory memorandum relating to the government amendment to be moved to the Aviation Transport Security Amendment (Air Cargo) Bill 2011 and I table a supplementary explanatory memorandum relating to the government amendment to be moved to this bill, which is the Family Law Legislation Amendment (Family Violence and Other Measures) Bill 2011.

Senator Ian Macdonald interjecting—

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Macdonald—Senator Bob Brown, on a point of order.

Bob Brown (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy President, the point of order I think Senator Macdonald might be taking is that it was not possible to hear what Senator Ludwig was saying.

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Macdonald, on the same issue—Senator Ludwig, would you read that again please, and I ask senators to be quiet. Senator Macdonald, on a point of order?

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern and Remote Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On a point of order: that was not my point of order, Mr Deputy President. Under the motion moved yesterday, how can this possibly be done at this stage, when, as I understand it, the Labor Party and the Greens have clearly set out a process to proceed—

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is no point of order, Senator Macdonald. This was a resolution of the Senate yesterday, and we are following the resolution of the Senate.

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern and Remote Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy President, he is now introducing some new material that nobody has seen.

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, it is within the ambit of the resolution passed by the Senate yesterday. Senator Ludwig, would you read your tabling—

Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I table a supplementary explanatory memorandum relating to the government amendment to be moved to the Aviation Transport Security Amendment (Air Cargo) Bill 2011 and, in relation to the Family Law Legislation Amendment (Family Violence and Other Measures) Bill 2011, I table a supplementary explanatory memorandum relating to the government amendments to be moved to this bill.

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A point of order by Senator Macdonald?

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern and Remote Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy President, we have already voted on and passed the Family Law Legislation Amendment (Family Violence and Other Measures) Bill 2011, and Senator Ludwig, the former Attorney-General, is now trying to introduce an explanatory memorandum to a bill that we have already voted upon. How can that possibly be relevant?

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Macdonald, there is no point of order. It is within the ambit of the resolution that the Senate passed yesterday.

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy President, I am rising to speak in support of Senator Macdonald's point of order. It is not, with respect, within the ambit of the order passed yesterday because that particular bill is now through the Senate. The debate has come to a completion. We have moved on to and have in fact voted on a subsequent bill on the Notice Paper. So, regardless of the terms of the limitation of debate, once that bill is disposed of, as it was when you declared that it had been passed for a third time, it was no longer a question before the chair, and Senator Ludwig is now not at liberty to introduce or to revert to that debate without the leave of the Senate.

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Brandis, there is no point of order. Senator Ludwig is entitled to table an explanatory memorandum at any stage after a bill has been passed. It has happened in the past and he is entitled to do so. Senator Macdonald, do you have a point of order?

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern and Remote Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, Mr Deputy President. If you are going to call a vote on any bills you might have a look at the clock and understand that the motion you moved yesterday provided that votes be taken between 9 pm and 9.30 pm. It is now after 9.30 pm and therefore I submit that, in relation to the order moved by the Senate yesterday, we should not be voting on this or anything else.

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Macdonald, but under that order yesterday and the resolution of the Senate, once voting is commenced we complete a process. We are now going through that process until we complete it. There is no point of order. I ask senators to concentrate on the questions. The question now is, in respect of the Aviation Transport Security Amendment (Air Cargo) Bill 2011, that the amendment on sheet BR287, as circulated by the government, be agreed to.

Government 's circulated amendment

(1)      Clause 2, page 1 (lines 7 to 9), omit the clause, substitute:

2 Commencement

  (1)   Each provision of this Act specified in column 1 of the table commences, or is taken to have commenced, in accordance with column 2 of the table. Any other statement in column 2 has effect according to its terms.

Note: This table relates only to the provisions of this Act as originally enacted. It will not be amended to deal with any later amendments of this Act.

  (2)   Any information in column 3 of the table is not part of this Act. Information may be inserted in this column, or information in it may be edited, in any published version of this Act.

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern and Remote Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Under standing order 195 I ask that the question be read by the Clerk.

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Clerk, could you read the question please.

The question having been read by the C lerk—

Question agreed to.

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy President, in the confusion in the chamber because of the guillotine it appears that we have just voted on a government amendment that the Clerk read out, and that was carried. Are we now putting the bill as amended? I am not sure that has occurred.

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, we have now disposed of the amendment and the bill. We are now moving onto the Veterans’ Affairs Legislation Amendment (Participants in British Nuclear Tests) Bill 2011.

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If it is all good, it is all good.

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is all within the remit of the resolution the Senate passed yesterday.