| Related Orders, Precedents and Rulings |
|---|
| 2012 Precedent | 1. Question put that a bill be read a second and division called for and Standing Order 181 applied. Question declared resolved in the negative with only two members voting against the motion. PD 31/5/2012, 12158 |
| Notes for the Chair | MEMBER IN THE MINORITY (5 OR FEWER) (SO 181) When it is evident that there are five or fewer Members on one side during a division, the Chair declares the question at once and the names of those Members opposing the majority are recorded in the Votes and Proceedings. DIVISIONS – MEMBER IN THE MINORITY [After question put, division called and bells are ringing
if there are five or fewer Members on either side] Speaker: “There being only …. Member(s) in the minority having challenged my decision I declare the determination of the House to be in the affirmative/ negative. I direct that the names of the/ those Member(s) be taken down and recorded in the Votes and Proceedings.” |
| 2011 Precedent | 1. Question put on a General Business motion and division called for and Standing Order 181 applied. Question declared resolved in the negative with only four members voting for the motion. PD 9/9/2011, 5355-6 |
| 2010 Precedent | 1. A division was called at the conclusion of consideration in detail of amendments to a bill. There being fewer than five members agreeing to the motion, the question was resolved in the negative and the names in the minority were recorded. VP 2/6/2010, 2097 |
| 2008 Precedent | 1. A question was put "That a new sessional order on maximum time limits for debates and speeches and amendments to a number of sessional orders be agreed to." There being fewer than five members against the motion, the question was resolved in the affirmative and the names in the minority were recorded. VP 10/4/2008, 636 2. A division was called in consideration in detail on an amendment to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Amendment Bill. There being fewer than five members against the motion, the question was resolved in the affirmative and the names in the minority were recorded. VP 3/6/2008, 733-734 3. A division was called on agreement in principle on a bill. There being fewer than five members against the motion, the question was resolved in the affirmative and the names in the minority were recorded. VP 24/6/2008, 813; VP 26/6/2008, 843 |
| House Forms | (Before the 4 minutes are up after a division is called) Speaker: There being only ………….. Members in the minority having challenged my decision, I declare the question to be resolved in the affirmative/ negative. I direct that the names of those Members in the minority be taken down and recorded in the Votes and Proceedings. |
| S.O. 191 of 1994 (Repealed) | 191. If there are five or fewer Members on a side on a division, without completing the division, the Speaker shall declare the question resolved and the number in the minority and their names shall be recorded. |
| 2005 Precedent | 1. Question 'That this bill be now read a second time' put and division called. There being only five members against the motion, the question was resolved in the affirmative and the names in the minority were recorded. PD 22/06/2005, p 17296 |
| 2004 Precedent | 1. Question 'That the motion for urgent consideration of the honourable member for Bathurst be proceeded with' put and division called. There being only five members against the motion, the question was resolved in the affirmative and the names in the minority were recorded. PD 16/09/2004, p 11065 2. Question 'That the amendment [to a bill] be agreed to' put and division called. There being only five members in support of the motion, the question was resolved in the negative and the names in the minority were recorded. PD 16/11/2004, p 12921; PD 19/11/2004, pp 13277 - 13278 3. Question 'That standing and sessional orders be suspended to allow: (1) the honourable member for Bathurst to move a motion forthwith dealing with the privatisation of Telstra; and
(2) for the following time limits to apply: Mover of the motion - five minutes; Any nine members - five minutes; Mover of the motion in reply - five minutes' put and division called. There being only two members against the motion, the question resolved in the affirmative. PD 19/11/2004, p 13259 4. Question 'That the word stand' in relation to an amendment to a bill put and division called. There being only five members against the motion, the question was resolved in the affirmative and the names in the minority were recorded. PD 19/11/2004, 13280 - 13281; PD 19/11/2004, p 13288 5. Question 'That [a number of clauses to a bill] stand' put and division called. There being only five members against the motion, the question was resolved in the affirmative and the names in the minority were recorded. PD 19/11/2004, p 13289 6. Question 'That this bill be now read a third time' put and division called for. There being only five members against the motion, the question was resolved in the affirmative and the names in the minority were recorded. PD 19/11/2004, p 13294 7. Question 'That the report [from the Committee of the Whole] be adopted' put and division called for. There being only five members against the motion, the question was resolved in the affirmative and t |
| 2003 Precedent | 1. Question 'That this bill (Government Business) be now read a second time' put and division called. There being only one member against the motion, the name was recorded. PD 27/05/2003, 1209 2. Question put 'That this House disallows the Supreme Court Rules (Amendment No. 380) 2003 made under the Supreme Court Act 1970'. Voices were given and following a call for a division the Acting Speaker declared the question negatived as there were only two members in the minority who had challenged his decision. VP 28/10/2003, 386 |
| 2002 Precedent | 1. Question 'That this bill (General Business) be now read a second time' put and division called. There being only three members in support of the motion, the names were recorded. PD 9/5/02, 1951 |
| 2001 Precedent | 1. Motion moved "That the Member for Gosford inform the House that he has ruled out any challenge to the Member for Lane Cove for the position of Leader of the Opposition". The motion was debated with only the mover and Independent Members speaking. The Opposition did not vote in the division, and there being only 5 noes, the names were recorded. PD 8/3/01, 12512
VP 8/3/01, 1096 2. Question 'That the motion for urgent consideration be proceeded with' put. There being only 4 noes, the names were recorded. PD 25/6/01, 15188
VP 25/6/01, 1325 3. Question 'That the motion for urgent consideration be proceeded with' put. There being only 2 noes, the names were recorded. PD 19/9/01, 16853 4. Question 'That this bill be now read a second time' put. There being only 1 noe, the name was recorded. PD 5/9/01, 16466 5. Question 'That the motion be agreed to' put. There being only two noes, the names were recorded. VP 8/11/01, 1601 6. Question 'That the words stand' put. There being only one noe, the member's name was recorded. PD 28/11/01, 19033 7. Question 'That the bill be now read a third time' put. There being only one noe, the member's name was recorded. PD 28/11/01, 19033 8. Question 'That this bill be now read a second time' put. There being only two noes, the names were recorded. PD 6/12/01, 19883 |
| 2000 Precedent | 1. The Acting Speaker declared the question passed as there were only five Members in the minority who had challenged his decision. VP 09/06/00, 591 2.The Speaker declared the question passed as there was only one Member in the minority who had challenged the decision
PD 16/08/00, 8239 |
| 1999 Precedent | 1. In Committee of the Whole, Chairman declared a question carried as there were only two members voting in the negative. PD 18/11/99, 3281 2. Speaker declared the question to be passed, as there were only two members in the minority who had challenged his decision. VP 18/11/99, 270 |
| 1997 Precedent | 1. Division called for, and the Acting Speaker declared the question to be passed, as there were less than six members in the minority who had challenged his decision. VP 15/05/97, 889
VP 28/05/97, 957
VP 29/05/97, 976 & 977 |
| 1996 Precedent | 1. Speaker stated opinion in "noes", fewer than 5 members challenged and question declared in the negative, names recorded. VP 23/5/96, 168; VP 16/10/96, 475/476 2. Speaker stated opinion in "ayes", fewer than 5 members challenged and question declared in the affirmative, names recorded. VP 12/6/96, 263 |
| 1994 Precedent | 1. Motion moved to amend a motion of no confidence in a Minister. The Speaker declared the determination of the House to be in the negative, as there were only two Members in the minority who challenged his decision that the Noes had it. VP 11/10/94, 378 |
| 1993 Precedent | 1. In Committee of the Whole - Local Government Bill. PD 13/5/93, 2107, 2109, 2110, 2112, 2114, 2117
PD 18/5/93, 2191, 2238 2. Question, 'That this bill be now read a second time' put. There being only 3 noes, the names were recorded. VP 9/3/93, 358 |
| 1992 Precedent | 1. On second reading of Timber Industry (Interim Protection) Bill. VP 8/3/92, 98 2. On second reading and during Committee Stage, adoption of report and third reading of Casino Control Bill. PD 8/4/92, 2413, 2419, 2420, 2437, 2438 3. On second reading of Legal Profession (Practising Certificates) Amendment Bill. PD 16/9/92, 5888 |