Senator LUDWIG (Queensland—Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Manager of Government Business in the Senate and Minister Assisting the Attorney-General on Queensland Floods Recovery) (22:27): Thank you. I table a supplementary explanatory memorandum relating to the government amendment to be moved to the Aviation Transport Security Amendment (Air Cargo) Bill 2011 and I table a supplementary explanatory memorandum relating to the government amendment to be moved to this bill, which is the Family Law Legislation Amendment (Family Violence and Other Measures) Bill 2011. Senator Ian Macdonald interjecting— The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Senator Macdonald—Senator Bob Brown, on a point of order. Senator Bob Brown: Mr Deputy President, the point of order I think Senator Macdonald might be taking is that it was not possible to hear what Senator Ludwig was saying. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Senator Macdonald, on the same issue—Senator Ludwig, would you read that again please, and I ask senators to be quiet. Senator Macdonald, on a point of order? Senator Ian Macdonald: On a point of order: that was not my point of order, Mr Deputy President. Under the motion moved yesterday, how can this possibly be done at this stage, when, as I understand it, the Labor Party and the Greens have clearly set out a process to proceed— The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: There is no point of order, Senator Macdonald. This was a resolution of the Senate yesterday, and we are following the resolution of the Senate. Senator Ian Macdonald: Mr Deputy President, he is now introducing some new material that nobody has seen. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: No, it is within the ambit of the resolution passed by the Senate yesterday. Senator Ludwig, would you read your tabling— Senator LUDWIG: I table a supplementary explanatory memorandum relating to the government amendment to be moved to the Aviation Transport Security Amendment (Air Cargo) Bill 2011 and, in relation to the Family Law Legislation Amendment (Family Violence and Other Measures) Bill 2011, I table a supplementary explanatory memorandum relating to the government amendments to be moved to this bill. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: A point of order by Senator Macdonald? Senator Ian Macdonald: Mr Deputy President, we have already voted on and passed the Family Law Legislation Amendment (Family Violence and Other Measures) Bill 2011, and Senator Ludwig, the former Attorney-General, is now trying to introduce an explanatory memorandum to a bill that we have already voted upon. How can that possibly be relevant? The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Senator Macdonald, there is no point of order. It is within the ambit of the resolution that the Senate passed yesterday. Senator Brandis: Mr Deputy President, I am rising to speak in support of Senator Macdonald's point of order. It is not, with respect, within the ambit of the order passed yesterday because that particular bill is now through the Senate. The debate has come to a completion. We have moved on to and have in fact voted on a subsequent bill on the Notice Paper. So, regardless of the terms of the limitation of debate, once that bill is disposed of, as it was when you declared that it had been passed for a third time, it was no longer a question before the chair, and Senator Ludwig is now not at liberty to introduce or to revert to that debate without the leave of the Senate. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Senator Brandis, there is no point of order. Senator Ludwig is entitled to table an explanatory memorandum at any stage after a bill has been passed. It has happened in the past and he is entitled to do so. Senator Macdonald, do you have a point of order? Senator Ian Macdonald: Yes, Mr Deputy President. If you are going to call a vote on any bills you might have a look at the clock and understand that the motion you moved yesterday provided that votes be taken between 9 pm and 9.30 pm. It is now after 9.30 pm and therefore I submit that, in relation to the order moved by the Senate yesterday, we should not be voting on this or anything else. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you, Senator Macdonald, but under that order yesterday and the resolution of the Senate, once voting is commenced we complete a process. We are now going through that process until we complete it. There is no point of order. I ask senators to concentrate on the questions. The question now is, in respect of the Aviation Transport Security Amendment (Air Cargo) Bill 2011, that the amendment on sheet BR287, as circulated by the government, be agreed to. Government 's circulated amendment — (1) Clause 2, page 1 (lines 7 to 9), omit the clause, substitute: 2 Commencement (1) Each provision of this Act specified in column 1 of the table commences, or is taken to have commenced, in accordance with column 2 of the table. Any other statement in column 2 has effect according to its terms. Commencement information Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Provision(s) Commencement Date/Details 1. Sections 1 to 3 and anything in this Act not elsewhere covered by this table The day this Act receives the Royal Assent. 2. Schedule 1, Part 1 A single day to be fixed by Proclamation. However, if the provision(s) do not commence within the period of 6 months beginning on the day this Act receives the Royal Assent, they commence on the day after the end of that period. 3. Schedule 1, Part 2 The day this Act receives the Royal Assent. 4. Schedule 1, Parts 3 to 5 At the same time as the provision(s) covered by table item 2. Note: This table relates only to the provisions of this Act as originally enacted. It will not be amended to deal with any later amendments of this Act. (2) Any information in column 3 of the table is not part of this Act. Information may be inserted in this column, or information in it may be edited, in any published version of this Act. Senator Ian Macdonald: Under standing order 195 I ask that the question be read by the Clerk. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Clerk, could you read the question please. The question having been read by the C lerk— Question agreed to. Senator Abetz: Mr Deputy President, in the confusion in the chamber because of the guillotine it appears that we have just voted on a government amendment that the Clerk read out, and that was carried. Are we now putting the bill as amended? I am not sure that has occurred. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: No, we have now disposed of the amendment and the bill. We are now moving on to the Veterans’ Affairs Legislation Amendment (Participants in British Nuclear Tests) Bill 2011. Senator Abetz: If it is all good, it is all good. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: It is all within the remit of the resolution the Senate passed yesterday. In respect of the Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Participants in British Nuclear Tests) Bill 2011, the question is that the amendment on sheet 7183, as circulated by Senators Xenophon and Ludlam, be agreed to. Senator Xenophon and Senator Ludlam's circulated amendment — At the end of the motion, add "but the Senate calls on the Government to undertake an examination of the cost of expanding the class of persons eligible for the Repatriation Health Card - For All Conditions (Gold Card) to include a person who is a nuclear test participant (within the meaning of the Australian Participants in British Nuclear Tests (Treatment) Act 2000, and that such examination be completed within 3 months". Senator Ian Macdonald: Mr Deputy President, I ask that the question be read by the Clerk under standing order 195— The question having been read by the C lerk— The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: The question is that the amendment be agreed to. Those of that opinion say aye, against say no. A division is required; ring the bells for one minute. Senator Abetz interjecting— The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Under the provisions of the standing orders the bells can be rung for one minute if warning has been given prior, which I had done earlier. It is irrespective of senators who have left the chamber. The bells will be rung for one minute. A division having been ca l led and the bells being rung. Senator Fifield: Mr Deputy President, a question: in the confusion and some might say the farce that is the current situation, I do not recall the Crimes Legislation Amendment Bill (No.2) 2011 having been dealt with. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: To assist you, Senator Fifield, and all senators, the amendments will be put as we are now putting them. We will deal with all the bills together as a final question at the end after the amendments have been put. I trust that clarifies the matter. Question put. The Senate divided. [22:37] (The Deputy President—Senator Parry) Question negatived. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Is it the wish of the Senate that the statement of reasons accompanying the request for amendment circulated by Senator Xenophon be incorporated in Hansard immediately after the request to which it relates? Senator Ian Macdonald: No. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Senator Macdonald, by convention this has happened over many years. It has always been ordered by the chair and the senators never object. It is so ordered. In respect of the Veteran's Affairs Legislation Amendment (Participants in British Nuclear Tests) Bill 2011, the question is that the request for an amendment circulated by Senator Xenophon on sheet 7184 be agreed to. Senator Xenophon 's circulated requested amendment— (1) Page 5 (after line 22), at the end of the bill, add: Schedule 2—Nuclear test participants eligible for Gold Card Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 1 After subsection 85(10) Insert: (10A) A person is eligible to be provided with treatment under this Part for any injury suffered, or disease contracted, by the person, whether before or after the commencement of this Act, if: (a) the person is a nuclear test participant (within the meaning of the Australian Participants in British Nuclear Tests (Treatment) Act 2006); and (b) either: (i) the Department has notified the person in writing that he or she is or will be eligible for such treatment; or (ii) the person has, by written document lodged at an office of the Department in Australia in accordance with section 5T, notified the Department that he or she seeks eligibility for such treatment. ————— Statement pursuant to the order of the Senate of 26 June 2000 This amendment is framed as a request because it increases expenditure under a standing appropriation. The effect of amendment (1) would be to expand the class of persons – to include a person who is a nuclear test participant (within the meaning of the Australian Participants in British Nuclear Tests (Treatment) Act 2006) – who would be eligible for the Repatriation Health Card—For All Conditions (Gold Card) under the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986. Statement by the Clerk of the Senate pursuant to the order of the Senate of 26 June 2000 The Senate has long followed the practice that it should treat as requests amendments which would result in increased expenditure under a standing appropriation. On the basis that amendment (1) would result in increased expenditure under the standing appropriation in section 199 of the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986, it is in accordance with the precedents of the Senate that this amendment be moved as a request. Senator Ian Macdonald: Mr Deputy President, I know I am not the brightest in this chamber but I have no idea what the amendment is because this has been guillotined through by the Labor Party and the Greens. I would again ask the Clerk to read the amendment that we are voting upon. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Senator Macdonald, the last two requests you have made in that regard I have agreed to. There have been rulings in the past by Presidents that it is not required when the amendments have been circulated in the chamber. In this case the amendments were circulated at least two hours prior to us reaching the conclusion of the bills. So I will not ask the Clerk to read that question again. Question put. Senate divided. [22:43] (The Deputy President—Senator Parry) Question negatived.