House debates

Thursday, 25 May 2006

Dissent from Ruling

1:08 pm

Photo of Anthony AlbaneseAnthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Hansard source

I move:

That the member be no longer heard.

A division having been called and the bells being rung—

I raise a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. Given that this is during a dissent motion, I just wonder who had a vote on this motion that the minister at the table has just moved. There has been no vote and no division called. The point of order is there has been no vote.

I thank the member for Grayndler. The member for Grayndler will resume his seat. The question is that the member be no longer heard.

Why are the bells ringing?

You didn’t put the question.

Okay. Thank you.

Mr Albanese interjecting

I thank you for your advice, and the member for Grayndler will resume his seat. The Clerk’s advice is that you are correct: we did not technically call a division. However, it was implicit.

Mr Deputy Speaker, I—

The member for Grayndler will resume his seat. Member for Grayndler, let me rule on your point of order. Just calm down! The chair will rule on the member for Grayndler’s point of order. I accept the member for Grayndler’s point of order. I will restate the question and we will re-ring the bells for one minute.

Mr Albanese interjecting

After I put the question. The question is that the member be no longer heard. All those of that opinion say aye; against no. I think the ayes have it. Is a division required? Ring the bells for one minute.

A division having been called and the bells being rung—

Mr Speaker, I raise a point of order. There is a real problem here, Mr Speaker. This is the middle of a dissent motion against Mr Deputy Speaker’s ruling. I would respectfully suggest to you that you do not take the chair until the motion is disposed of; otherwise, it puts us in a ludicrous position because he is now no longer in the chair.

I thank the Leader of the Opposition. This is an unusual situation, I admit, but I have just taken advice too. The ruling is against the chair, not against the individual; therefore, it is perfectly in order for me to be sitting here. And it is time to lock the doors. The question is that the member be no longer heard.

Comments

No comments