Wednesday, 25 March 2015
Days and Hours of Meeting
(1) On Wednesday, 25 March 2015:
(a) the hours of meeting shall be from 9.30 am to 7 pm and 7.30 pm to 11.10 pm;
(b) the routine of business from not later than 7.30 pm until 10.30 pm shall be government business only; and
(c) the question for the adjournment shall be proposed at 10.30 pm.
(2) On Thursday, 26 March 2015:
(a) the hours of meeting shall be from 9.30 am to adjournment;
(b) consideration of general business orders of the day relating to private senators’ bills under temporary order shall not be proceeded with, and that government business shall have precedence for 2 hours and 20 minutes;
(c) from not later than 12.45 pm, the following orders of the day shall be considered:
(i) Public Governance and Resources Legislation Amendment Bill (No.1) 2015, and
(ii) Parliamentary Service Amendment Bill 2014;
(d) government business shall be called on after consideration of the bills listed in paragraph (c) and considered till not later than 2 pm;
(e) consideration of the business before the Senate shall be interrupted at approximately 4 pm, but not so as to interrupt a senator speaking, to enable valedictory statements to be made relating to Senator Mason;
(f) divisions may take place after 4.30 pm;
(g) the routine of business from not later than 8 pm shall be consideration of government business only, and that the following government business orders of the day shall have precedence over all other government business:
(i) Migration Amendment (Protection and Other Measures) Bill 2014,
(ii) Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Deregulation) Bill 2014 and the Telecommunications (Industry Levy) Amendment Bill 2014, and
(iii) Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Amendment (Data Retention) Bill 2014; and
(h) the Senate shall adjourn without debate on the motion of a minister.
Question agreed to.
I ask that government business notice of motion No. 5 relating to an additional sitting day on Monday, 11 May 2015, be taken as a formal motion.
The PRESIDENT: Is there any objection to this motion being taken as formal?