Speaker’s Rulings — Broadcasting (Repeal of Advertising Restrictions) Amendment Bill, Third Reading—Interruption of Vote

Members, yesterday, Glen Bennett raised a point of order asking for clarification of how the vote had been interrupted for the previous sitting day. I undertook to consider the matter and come back to the House.

On Thursday, 9 October, the question was put on the third reading of the Broadcasting (Repeal of Advertising Restrictions) Amendment Bill. After a vote was declared on the voices, a personal vote was called for and held. The Assistant Speaker declared the result. However, before the bill was read a third time, a personal vote was ruled as having had no effect under Standing Order 154. This is because fewer than 20 members attended the House for the vote. The Assistant Speaker asked for the personal vote sheets to be inspected to ascertain how many members had voted in person. There were 15, and so the vote was of no effect. I should point out here that members would have been in the precinct, but given that the vote was in process, the doors would have been locked.

It was 6.23 p.m., well after the time that the House was scheduled to adjourn. The Assistant Speaker set the bill down for resumption on the next sitting day, and I endorse that decision.

Standing Order 53(2)(a) says that when a vote is in progress, the interruption of business is deferred until the question is determined. When the Assistant Speaker found that the vote was of no effect, then the vote was no longer in process, and the decision was the correct one. When the order of the day for the third reading of the bill was resumed yesterday, the only way for the business to be completed was for the question to be put again. At that point, a new vote took place, and the bill was subsequently read a third time.