Division
Milton Dick The question before the House is the bill be agreed to. In accordance with the resolution agreed to yesterday, the question now is the amendments circulated by the member for Wentworth be agreed to. Before I call the member for Wentworth, I'll just explain to the House that we did receive identical amendments from the member for Wannon and the member for Wentworth. The member for Wentworth's amendments were the first to be circulated, so this means they will be dealt with first, as are the traditions and customs of the House. When the House has made a decision on the member for Wentworth's amendments, the member for Wannon's amendments may not be considered by the House, because they're the same piece of work. That's in accordance with standing order 150(e)—if people want to follow where we're at, that's what we're dealing with—and _House of Representatives Practice_ on page 299 and page 375. _Member for_ _Wentworth_ _'s circulated amendment_ _s_ (1) Schedule 1, Part 9, page 18 (line 1) to page 21 (line 25), omit the Part. [exemption from general protections in certain circumstances] (2) Schedule 1, item 62, page 26 (lines 8 to 15), omit Division 7. [exemption from general protections in certain circumstances] Allegra Spender The problem the amendments address is that part 9 of the bill hands the minister sweeping new powers with no statutory limits, no required consultation and no meaningful parliamentary oversight to determine who can access Commonwealth grants, procurement contracts and funding arrangements across an $830 billion annual budget. That is 26.8 per cent of GDP. It is a record, and this bill enables it to be filtered through an industrial relations test. My amendments would omit this part, retaining the other practical measures of the bill. Even though the government is not compelled to use these powers and has indicated it does not plan to use them for the construction industry, I am concerned. I am concerned that, by creating new excepti
House of Representatives, 2026-06-24. negative: ayes 44, noes 88.
Question
Milton Dick The question before the House is the bill be agreed to. In accordance with the resolution agreed to yesterday, the question now is the amendments circulated by the member for Wentworth be agreed to. Before I call the member for Wentworth, I'll just explain to the House that we did receive identical amendments from the member for Wannon and the member for Wentworth. The member for Wentworth's amendments were the first to be circulated, so this means they will be dealt with first, as are the traditions and customs of the House. When the House has made a decision on the member for Wentworth's amendments, the member for Wannon's amendments may not be considered by the House, because they're the same piece of work. That's in accordance with standing order 150(e)—if people want to follow where we're at, that's what we're dealing with—and _House of Representatives Practice_ on page 299 and page 375. _Member for_ _Wentworth_ _'s circulated amendment_ _s_ (1) Schedule 1, Part 9, page 18 (line 1) to page 21 (line 25), omit the Part. [exemption from general protections in certain circumstances] (2) Schedule 1, item 62, page 26 (lines 8 to 15), omit Division 7. [exemption from general protections in certain circumstances] Allegra Spender The problem the amendments address is that part 9 of the bill hands the minister sweeping new powers with no statutory limits, no required consultation and no meaningful parliamentary oversight to determine who can access Commonwealth grants, procurement contracts and funding arrangements across an $830 billion annual budget. That is 26.8 per cent of GDP. It is a record, and this bill enables it to be filtered through an industrial relations test. My amendments would omit this part, retaining the other practical measures of the bill. Even though the government is not compelled to use these powers and has indicated it does not plan to use them for the construction industry, I am concerned. I am concerned that, by creating new excepti
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.