I move:

That a motion to vary the hours of meeting and routine of business may be moved immediately and have precedence over all other business today until determined.

I also move:

That the question be now put.

The question is that the question be now put.

So we cannot move an amendment?

Opposition senators interjecting—

It is a procedural motion. The question is—

On a point of order, just so it is completely clear—

Senator Brown, you may resume your seat because I am listening to Senator Abetz, but I cannot listen to Senator Abetz—

Honourable senators interjecting—

Senator Abetz is entitled to be heard in silence—on both sides.

Honourable senators interjecting—

This does not help the process that is going on in this chamber this morning. I call Senator Abetz.

I will not pursue the point of order.

I ask that the clerk read the motion.

The question is that the motion be given precedence and that the question be now put. That is the issue that is before the chair at this moment.

The question now is in respect of the giving of precedence.

I move:

That:

(1)

On Thursday, 25 November 2010, t he hours of meeting shall be 9.30 am to 7 pm and 7.30 pm to 10 pm.

(2)

The Senate meet on Friday, 26 November 2010, and that the hours of meeting shall be 9 am to 3.30 pm.

(3)

The Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Competition and Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2010 be called on immediately and have precedence over all other business until determined, except at 2 pm on Thursday, 25 November 2010, questions without notice shall be asked for one hour.

(4)

The Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Competition and Consumer Safeguards) Bill 2010 shall be considered under a limitation of debate.

(5)

The time allocated for the remaining stages of the bill shall be as follows:

(a)

committee of the whole––till 11.45 am, on Friday, 26 November 2010;

(b)

all remaining stages––till 12 noon, on Friday, 26 November 2010; and

(c)

this order operate as an allocation of time under standing order 142.

(6)

At the conclusion of the consideration of the business listed in paragraph (3), the order of business be:

(a)

tabling of a report of the Selection of Bills Committee;

(b)

consideration of the following government business notices of motion:No. 1 – Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills, Jobs and Workplace Relations (Senator Evans) – Introduction of the National Vocational Education and Training Regulator Bill 2010No. 2 – Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills, Jobs and Workplace Relations (Senator Evans) – Introduction of the National Vocational Education and Training Regulator (Transitional Provisions) Bill 2010No. 3 – Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research (Senator Carr) – Exemption of bills from the provisions of standing order 111 (5) to (8) concerning the consideration of legislation (Corporations Amendment (Sons of Gwalia) Bill 2010; and Financial Framework Legislation Amendment Bill 2010) No. 5 – Parliamentary Secretary for Sustainability and Urban Water (Senator Farrell) – Approval of works within the Parliamentary Zone (external expansion to the Abacus childcare centre at the Treasury building); and

(c)

consideration of the following government business orders of the day:No. 4–Airports Amendment Bill 2010 – Resumption of second reading debateNo. 5–Tax Laws Amendment (Confidentiality of Taxpayer Information) Bill 2010 – Resumption of second reading debateNo. 6–Radiocommunications Amendment Bill 2010 – Resumption of second reading debateNo. 7–Family Law Amendment (Validation of Certain Parenting Orders and Other Measures) Bill 2010 – Resumption of second reading debateCorporations Amendment (Sons of Gwalia) Bill 2010No. 8–Health Insurance Amendment (Pathology Requests) Bill 2010 – Resumption of second reading debateFinancial Framework Legislation Amendment Bill 2010No. 9–Therapeutic Goods Amendment (2010 Measures No. 1) Bill 2010 – Resumption of second reading debateNo. 10–Territories Law Reform Bill 2010 – Resumption of second reading debate.

(7)

Notices of motion may be lodged in writing on Friday, 26 November 2010.

Should government business notice of motion No. 1 read ‘regulator bill’ or ‘regulatory bill’?

You can read.

Mr President, on a point of order: the minister is purportedly reading to the Senate a motion which has been circulated, and there is now a discrepancy between that which he read and that which is printed. I would seek clarification as to what the wording ought to be.

I have no idea of what the correct title is. I will get the minister to clarify that.

No. 2 reads:

Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills, Jobs and Workplace Relations (Senator Evans)—Introduction of the National Vocational—

Mr President, on a point of order: I sought clarification in relation to government business notice of motion No. 1.

No, you said No. 2, and I raised a point of order in relation to No. 1. So, if we could have clarification of No. 1, that would be helpful.

I am sure that the minister will clarify that.

Mr President, I rise on a point of order. The motion that the minister is reading out is at variance with the motion that I have got in front of me. I am totally confused as to what the government is actually proposing to do this morning. Can he please be asked to provide some clarification?

It is correct within the standing orders for the motion to be read. If there is a difference between what has been circulated and what the minister is reading then I can only take it that what the minister is reading is the true and proper version. I think that is the correct way.

Mr President, I rise on a point of order. We just voted previously on two motions to immediately put a motion. The motion that was circulated to us as what would be put is not the one he was reading out, but the one that is on our desks. The previous two motions that have been voted upon related to the document that was on our tables when he moved that motion. So those two motions do not take account—

Mr President, let me finish. Let me develop my point of order. The two previous motions related to a document on our tables and so we voted accordingly. Perhaps if we had known it was different we might have voted a different way. And so, I think those previous two motions are invalid, and do not apply to the motion before the chair.

It is quite clear, and it has always been the fact, that a motion read is the motion that we are dealing with. A motion circulated may be at variance to that, but I would ask you, Mr President—

Order! Senator Brown, this is not a time for debate. If you have finished your point of order—

Thank you. If the attendants might circulate a pencil each to the opposition so that they can get it right as the motion is read out—

Senator Brown, that is not a point of order.

Order! When everyone is ready we will proceed.

Mr President, on Senator Macdonald’s point of order: the motion for which the Senate just voted was a motion that the motion be put. Not that ‘a motion be put’ in relation to precedence but that ‘the motion be put’. The only motion before the Senate at the time that motion was put and determined was not the motion which Minister Ludwig is now reading. The motion that Minister Ludwig is now reading is not the motion that the Senate gave leave to put. He is out of order and you should sit him down.

Senator Brandis, that is a completely wrong construction on that. The motion was simply a motion seeking precedence; it did not stipulate the motion. It was a matter of precedence and that the motion be put that would allow precedence to take place. That is what the motion was and that was quite within order.

Mr President, I rise on a point of order. Can the clerk read the motion that was just put and deliberated upon by the Senate, because I think you will find it was a motion that the motion be put.

We know exactly what your game plan is! Waste as much time as possible.

You are showing all the temperament of North Korea!

How is uncle Otto going?

Order! Just wait a minute.

Mr President, I rise on a point of order about the conduct of Minister Carr, impugning improper motives. I ask that you ask him to apologise and withdraw.

Senator Macdonald, there is so much shouting going across this chamber that I am not able to hear. There is no point of order on what you have raised.

I seek leave to move:

That the Senate take note of the ruling of the President.

Leave not granted.