Skip to content

Menu

Division

Tim Wilson We're very happy to see that this legislation, the Treasury Laws Amendment (Doubling Penalties for ACCC Enforcement) Bill 2026, is being debated, though we're very disappointed that the government has gone through a shambled process, to introduce the Fair Work Amendment (Fairer Fuel) Bill 2026 this morning. They have tried to force it through the parliament before anyone in the entire country has read it. The Leader of the House understands full well the scale of the legislation he is trying to introduce, and he is now trying to ram it through the parliament on the basis that he has no interest in the opposition or anyone outside this parliament scrutinising it. It's a very dangerous precedent. This is in comparison to the schedules that are being updated in the context of the Competition and Consumer Act which are focused very squarely on making sure penalties are imposed on those who seek to price gouge or harm Australians. It's a straightforward exercise that they have dawdled on every step of the way. The response from the minister has been to not bring the legislation to the House, to bring it to a vote to resolve the matter and to up the penalties, but instead he has allowed time to drift. We are simply asking that that matter, which is simple, straightforward and clear, be resolved. Instead, what the government is now doing is a shambolic process to try and shut down parliamentary scrutiny and parliamentary accountability. I'll remind the House this Fair Work legislation was introduced this morning. A copy has not even, as far as I am aware, been made available to the opposition—or, if it has, we certainly haven't had the chance to read it yet. When you're making such substantial changes to industrial relations legislation—and I know the Labor Party works for the trade union movement; it doesn't work for Australians—at some point you actually have to factor Australians into the conversation. We hope and pray sanity prevails and that the government

House of Representatives, 2026-03-26. negative: ayes 43, noes 93.

Question

Tim Wilson We're very happy to see that this legislation, the Treasury Laws Amendment (Doubling Penalties for ACCC Enforcement) Bill 2026, is being debated, though we're very disappointed that the government has gone through a shambled process, to introduce the Fair Work Amendment (Fairer Fuel) Bill 2026 this morning. They have tried to force it through the parliament before anyone in the entire country has read it. The Leader of the House understands full well the scale of the legislation he is trying to introduce, and he is now trying to ram it through the parliament on the basis that he has no interest in the opposition or anyone outside this parliament scrutinising it. It's a very dangerous precedent. This is in comparison to the schedules that are being updated in the context of the Competition and Consumer Act which are focused very squarely on making sure penalties are imposed on those who seek to price gouge or harm Australians. It's a straightforward exercise that they have dawdled on every step of the way. The response from the minister has been to not bring the legislation to the House, to bring it to a vote to resolve the matter and to up the penalties, but instead he has allowed time to drift. We are simply asking that that matter, which is simple, straightforward and clear, be resolved. Instead, what the government is now doing is a shambolic process to try and shut down parliamentary scrutiny and parliamentary accountability. I'll remind the House this Fair Work legislation was introduced this morning. A copy has not even, as far as I am aware, been made available to the opposition—or, if it has, we certainly haven't had the chance to read it yet. When you're making such substantial changes to industrial relations legislation—and I know the Labor Party works for the trade union movement; it doesn't work for Australians—at some point you actually have to factor Australians into the conversation. We hope and pray sanity prevails and that the government

View original

How each member voted

Per-member votes are not present in this static export. Consult the original division record.

Related bills

Only formal divisions leave a per-member record. A procedural vote is not necessarily a vote for or against a bill.