Page 425 - Week 02 - Wednesday, 24 February 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Moore: On a point of order, Madam Speaker: Standing order 165 provides that in case of error the Assembly shall vote again. I believe that there is some confusion over my intention. That confusion over my intention will be recorded in Hansard as it is now, and I want to correct that. The way to correct that is to call on you, under standing order 165, to call the vote again so that there can be no confusion, as recorded in Hansard or in the minds of people, about the way I voted. I want to make it very clear that my intention is to vote against this Bill. At this stage, as far as I am concerned, there is confusion about that. I seek your support in providing for this vote to be called again in order to rectify that confusion.
MADAM SPEAKER: Yes, it is correct. I am unable to do that.
Mr Humphries: Are you upholding the point of order or considering it, Madam Speaker? I wanted to address you on the point of order.
MADAM SPEAKER: I will further consider it if you want to address me, yes.
Mr Humphries: If you are inclined still to consider the matter, I submit to you that it really is not open to members to argue that individually they were personally confused and therefore entitled to have the vote cast again. Clearly, standing order 165 is talking about confusion or error on the part of those who take the vote, in my opinion. That is clearly what is intended, otherwise anybody who wanted to see a vote taken again could claim to have been confused or to have made an error. I respectfully suggest that that could become a device which parties could indulge in to delay Bills, saying, "I made a mistake. I want my vote cast again. I was confused. I was thinking about dinner and I got confused". Clearly that is not open to the Assembly, Madam Speaker. Mr Moore clearly and distinctly said yes on the first vote. There was no confusion about that. He clearly said it, and I submit that therefore the record should stand.
MADAM SPEAKER: Mr Humphries, I have considered what you are saying, but it is a privilege that is open to members of the Assembly to claim confusion. I do think we can call for the vote again.
Mr Stevenson: Madam Speaker, there is perhaps another complexion that could be put on standing order 165. It states:
In case of confusion or error concerning the numbers reported ...
It does not say "concerning a member's vote" or other matters. I maintain that there was absolutely no confusion whatsoever concerning the numbers reported. I thought the Clerk did it perfectly.
MADAM SPEAKER: Order! We will take the vote again. I have upheld that point of order before when a request has been made for a vote to be redone. I will uphold that point of order again for Mr Moore. In the past, when a member has asked for a vote to be taken again, I have done so. We will now proceed to take that vote again.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .