

- Title
FORMAL MOTIONS
- Database
Senate Hansard
- Date
30-10-2003
- Source
Senate
- Parl No.
40
- Electorate
Tasmania
- Interjector
- Page
17225
- Party
AG
- Presenter
- Status
Final
- Question No.
- Questioner
- Responder
- Speaker
Brown, Sen Bob
- Stage
- Type
- Context
Miscellaneous
- System Id
chamber/hansards/2003-10-30/0041
Previous Fragment Next Fragment
-
Hansard
- Start of Business
- PETITIONS
- NOTICES
- BUSINESS
- KYOTO PROTOCOL RATIFICATION BILL 2003 [NO. 2]
- COMMITTEES
- FOREIGN AFFAIRS: UKRAINIAN FAMINE
- COMMITTEES
- CHRISTMAS ISLAND: MINING PROPOSALS
- SENATE: COMMERCIAL CONFIDENTIALITY
- COMMITTEES
- CONSTITUTIONAL REFORM
- CONSTITUTIONAL REFORM
- CONSTITUTIONAL REFORM
- FORMAL MOTIONS
- COMMITTEES
- TELSTRA (TRANSITION TO FULL PRIVATE OWNERSHIP) BILL 2003
-
PETROLEUM (SUBMERGED LANDS) AMENDMENT BILL 2003
OFFSHORE PETROLEUM (SAFETY LEVIES) BILL 2003 - BUSINESS
- FARM HOUSEHOLD SUPPORT AMENDMENT BILL 2003
- FINANCIAL SECTOR LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL (NO. 2) 2002
- TELECOMMUNICATIONS INTERCEPTION AND OTHER LEGISLATION AMENDMENT BILL 2003
-
QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE
-
Defence: Defence Capability Plan
(Evans, Sen Chris, Hill, Sen Robert) -
Economy
(Colbeck, Sen Richard, Minchin, Sen Nick) -
Foreign Affairs: Dr Mahathir Mohamad
(Ray, Sen Robert, Hill, Sen Robert) -
Law Enforcement: Gun Control
(Macdonald, Sen Sandy, Ellison, Sen Chris) -
National Security
(Faulkner, Sen John, Ellison, Sen Chris) -
Defence: Budget
(Bartlett, Sen Andrew, Hill, Sen Robert) -
Arts: Playing Australia
(Lundy, Sen Kate, Kemp, Sen Rod) -
Environment: Tasmania
(Murphy, Sen Shayne, Macdonald, Sen Ian) - Family Services: Child Care
-
Insurance: Public Liability
(Watson, Sen John, Kemp, Sen Rod) -
Iraq
(Faulkner, Sen John, Hill, Sen Robert) -
Indigenous Affairs: Children
(Harris, Sen Len, Vanstone, Sen Amanda) -
Customs: Illicit Drugs
(Bishop, Sen Mark, Ellison, Sen Chris) -
Employment: People with Disabilities
(Ferris, Sen Jeannie, Patterson, Sen Kay)
-
Defence: Defence Capability Plan
- QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE: ADDITIONAL ANSWERS
- MINISTERIAL ARRANGEMENTS
- QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE: TAKE NOTE OF ANSWERS
- COMMITTEES
- DOCUMENTS
-
WORKPLACE RELATIONS AMENDMENT (COMPLIANCE WITH COURT AND TRIBUNAL ORDERS) BILL 2003
WORKPLACE RELATIONS AMENDMENT (CODIFYING CONTEMPT OFFENCES) BILL 2003
WORKPLACE RELATIONS AMENDMENT (IMPROVED REMEDIES FOR UNPROTECTED ACTION) BILL 2002 - COMMITTEES
- DELEGATION REPORTS
- LAOS: SEPON MINE
- AUSTRALIA-UNITED STATES FREE TRADE AGREEMENTREGULATION OF GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS
- SYDNEY OPERA HOUSE
- EDUCATION, SCIENCE AND TRAINING: ROAM CONSULTING
- NOTICES
- COMMITTEES
- KYOTO PROTOCOL RATIFICATION BILL 2003 [NO. 2]
- DOCUMENTS
- COMMITTEES
- DOCUMENTS
- ADJOURNMENT
-
QUESTIONS ON NOTICE
-
France: Australian War Graves
(Bishop, Sen Mark, Hill, Sen Robert) -
Defence: Security Clearances
(Evans, Sen Chris, Hill, Sen Robert) -
Attorney-General's: Military Compensation
(Brown, Sen Bob, Vanstone, Sen Amanda) -
Environment: Basslink
(Allison, Sen Lyn, Hill, Sen Robert) -
Immigration: Parent Visa Applications
(Hutchins, Sen Steve, Vanstone, Sen Amanda) -
Science: Chief Scientist
(Brown, Sen Bob, Vanstone, Sen Amanda) -
Defence: HMAS Kanimbla
(Evans, Sen Chris, Hill, Sen Robert) -
National Radioactive Waste Repository
(Allison, Sen Lyn, Vanstone, Sen Amanda) -
Romania: Australian Mining Companies
(Brown, Sen Bob, Hill, Sen Robert) -
Environment: Ningaloo Reef
(Brown, Sen Bob, Hill, Sen Robert)
-
France: Australian War Graves
Page: 17225
Senator BROWN (10:06 AM)
—by leave—I agree with the sentiments that are being expressed here. We live in an increasingly complex world, and the Senate has to deal with that complexity. It is not just changes in the Senate we are looking at; it is the complexity of the international framework within which the parliament works these days. When it comes to debate on the Constitution, and the Senate being asked to express an opinion, the Senate cannot make a determination in the matter—that would have to go to the people through a referendum. But I agree that there needs to be debate on important matters like this, and I wish the Procedure Committee well.
It may be that we have to set aside—and this would be my suggestion—an afternoon or a morning in Senate sitting weeks in which debate on those matters can be progressed with new debating rules. It may be that we have a five-minute limit on the contributions made by members. On most of those matters that is far better than nothing at all. I do not think we need the 20 minutes that is allowed in general debate. But it would allow people to contribute and there may be some allocation of debating time within the framework of new rules.
With the plurality of the membership of the Senate as it is evolving, and I do not think that is ever going to change now, it is important that there be opportunity to debate those matters. The Procedure Committee might look at, first, the allocation of time for debating motions. It may mean we sit an extra week or two during the year, but I think that is healthy. Secondly, the committee should look at what rules should apply to debate of those motions and how you prioritise motions according to their importance and complexity. On the complexity issue, it may mean that there has to be a substantive point which is incorporated in the motion and which is voted upon rather than multiple points being introduced through a motion on which we find ourselves divided as to what we support and what we do not and end up having to vote against the ones we support in order to make sure the ones we do not do not get up. I will certainly be looking forward to reading the Clerk's paper, as Senator Faulkner indicated, and to hearing what the Procedure Committee comes up with.