Appropriation (2011/12 Financial Review) Bill

I move, That the Appropriation (2011/12 Financial Review) Bill be now read a first time.

The question is that the motion be agreed to. Those of that opinion will say Aye, to the contrary, No. The Ayes have it. This bill is set down for second reading next sitting day.

💬 Gareth Hughes: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker.

Order! I did not hear the member call. This is purely procedural. I do not think it is the end of the world.

With the closing of question time, there was all the kerfuffle in the Chamber and you could not hear. I yelled it out pretty loudly. So I urge that the Green Party vote can be recorded on this matter.

Well, the House can go back. The Speaker has already announced the result of the first reading. Does the House wish me to go back? It is purely procedural. The vote is put without debate, and it is something that is standard. I think the House really can proceed. There will be plenty of opportunity to debate these issues.

I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. The member called No, as the member, I am assured, did, because he was heard by members this far away, if not your distance away. I am not sure whether he called for a party vote. But, given the hubbub, I think it would be reasonable for a vote to be held.

I must make the point that just because a member votes No does not mean a party vote will be held. A member must call for a party vote.

I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Just in support of the musterer for the Greens, I did see his lips moving very clearly calling for a party vote through the noise. So there is no doubt in my mind that that was his intention.

I am prepared, under the circumstances, to go back, but I stress to the House that this is purely a procedural matter. Members have hours to debate the financial reviews. This is purely a vote to get the House in a position to be able to debate the financial reviews. If members want a party vote on that, so be it. Let me go back then and put the question again.