Skip to content
Political Tracker

18 Nov 2010 · 10:20 AM · Division 4

Same-Sex Marriage

Insert new words into the motion
Official title
Motions - Same-Sex Marriage - Insert new words into the motion

Ayes in the majority

This says only which side won the vote, because what Aye and No meant here depends on the exact question put in the chamber.

Aye
71
No
70
Not recorded voting
9

“Not recorded voting” is everyone eligible who isn't recorded as Aye or No, for example absent, paired, or presiding.

What was decided

This division is a vote about a motion rather than a bill. According to the House of Representatives Practice [923kb], a motion is “any proposal made for the purpose of eliciting a decision of the House”.

The members were voting on whether:

the words proposed to be inserted be so inserted.

The words proposed to be inserted were from an amendment introduced by Labor Party MP Stephen Jones. The amendment was to a motion introduced by Greens Party MP Adam Bandt.

Someone who voted Aye wanted to replace the words in Bandt MP's motion with the words from the amendment. Since the majority voted Aye, the amendment was successful. The next step is to vote on whether to agree to the newly amended motion (see that division here).

Debate in Parliament

The original substantive motion introduced by Bandt MP was:

That this House:

(1) notes that there is:

(a) a growing list of countries that allow same-sex couples to marry including the Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, Spain, Canada and South Africa; and

(b) widespread support for equal marriage in the Australian community; and

(2) calls on all parliamentarians to gauge their constituents’ views on the issue of marriage equality.

Before introducing the motion, Bandt MP sought leave to amend his motion but leave was not granted. The wording Bandt MP wanted to use was the same as the wording proposed by Jones MP in his amendment, which was:

That all the words after “That” be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: “this House calls on all parliamentarians, consistent with their duties as representatives, to gauge their constituents’ views on ways to achieve equal treatment for same sex couples including marriage”.

This is why Bandt MP joined Jones MP and the rest of the Labor Party in voting ‘Aye’ in this division to amend the substantive motion.

Background to the Motion

The substantive motion introduced by Bandt MP was part of the Greens Party’s campaign to change the law to recognise same-sex marriage. At the time it was introduced, the Senate was considering the Marriage Equality Amendment Bill 2010, which had been introduced by Greens Senator Sarah Hanson-Young.

Summary written by They Vote For You contributors. Read it with the debate

Policies this vote counts towards

How They Vote For You uses this vote when scoring members against each policy.

Votes by party

Both bars use the same scale: number of members.
Aye
73
No
72
Votes by party as a table
PartyAyeNo
Australian Labor Party680
Liberal Party058
National Party012
Independent30
Australian Greens10
CWM10
Country Liberal Party01
Katter's Australian Party01

How each member voted

Aye · 73

No · 72

Spotted a mistake? Report a correction.