Senator SHERRY (4:38 PM) —Madam Chair, I could not be more serious. I ask that amendments 375 to 384 inclusive be put separately as I wish to vote differently on these matters.

Senator Hill —Madam Chair, I raise a point of order. As I understand it from what was said this morning, this is a practice that has been designed by the chair to facilitate a genuine situation where an individual senator wishes to take a different perspective. It is difficult for me to recall one occasion in the last 18 years in this place on which an individual Labor Party senator decided to take a different position to his or her colleagues. All of a sudden today the Australian Labor Party comes in here and has suddenly adopted a new liberalism.

Senator Faulkner —Madam Chair, I raise a point of order.

Senator Hill —I am speaking to a point of order.

Senator Faulkner —Well, you are not making a point of order.

Senator Cook —What's the point of order?

Senator Faulkner —Make a point of order.

Senator Hill —When I finish, you can have a go.

Senator Faulkner —Well, you haven't started.

Senator Hill —It is a point of order.

The CHAIRMAN —Minister, what is your point of order?

Senator Hill —Madam Chair, it is that this is a stunt. It is spurious. There is no genuine difference, and you should not let the processes of the Senate be abused in this way. In other words, guidance that has been given to help genuine differences of view should be used for such circumstances, not to facilitate stunts.

Senator Faulkner —Madam Chair, I raise a point of order on the non-point of order. Of course, that was not a point of order from Senator Hill; it was just an attempt for him to use the guise of the standing orders of taking a point of order to make a speech, which he knows that he cannot do. Another political point: he does not refer to the Senate standing orders or rulings that have been made. I believe, Madam Chair, in this circumstance he ought to have been sat down after the first couple of sentences.

The CHAIRMAN —What is your point of order?

Senator Faulkner —My point of order, Madam Chair, is that it is a deliberate abuse of the standing orders for Senator Hill to stand up and make that sort of contribution under the guise of a point of order, and he should be sat down immediately.

The CHAIRMAN —There is no point of order. I did not realise that my colleagues had so much choice.