Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That standing order 131(a) be amended to read as follows:

131 Successive divisions

(a) If a division is called no more than three minutes following a division, the Speaker shall appoint tellers immediately and the bells shall be rung for one minute.

Members will note that there is a lack of clarity existing surrounding successive divisions where the bells are rung for only one minute. This motion is my favourite of the day, Madam Speaker. Generally all members are in the chamber anyway and the ringing of the bells for four minutes unnecessarily delays all members. Currently the standing orders specify that the bells may be rung for one minute unless there is 'intervening debate'. This term is not defined and it is not often clear if a four-minute or a one-minute division is required.

This amendment places a time limit on successive divisions. If another division is called three minutes after a division or less, the bells will be rung for only one minute. I chose three minutes as a compromise to ensure that proceedings would move rapidly whilst preventing members who have left the chamber from getting too far away. Hopefully, this will speed up successive divisions and enable us to get back to the business of debating legislation.

To sum up: not much will change in terms of the period when oppositions are calling many divisions, so people probably will not leave the chamber. This will simply take out the 'intervening debate' provision that requires the bells to be rung for four minutes every time there is intervening debate. In effect, most people will still be in the chamber and will not have returned to their offices. I think it will work much better and still allow the opposition to make their point, which they should, about government policy or the government's agenda that they do not support while not delaying us in the House for four minutes while the bells are being rung when we are already all here.

I think this is a very practical change. It is probably one that should have been made a very long time ago. Happily, we are making it today. I thank the opposition, who have supported all of these measures, in a very cooperative and sensible way. I think they recognise that it does not reduce their capacity to hold the government to account but at the same time it is a common-sense approach to these proceedings.

Question agreed to.