Division
Sophie Mirabella I rise to speak on the so-called Australian Jobs Bill 2013. In doing so I wish to express my frustration with not only the content of the bill but the government's lack of accountability in explaining and justifying the reasons for its introduction and its apparent determination to yet again push through legislation that will increase regulatory and compliance costs for Australian businesses. Given that it has misled the Australian people hundreds and hundreds of times, it is difficult to take almost anything that this government says at face value. But it is even harder to find reason to support one of its bills when there is so little clarification around even the very basic details in the legislation—the precise reasons for the change and exactly how those changes will be financed. Prior to February this year, I cannot recall in my time as a shadow minister ever having been refused a briefing by the government. In February was when my office asked Minister Combet's office if I could receive a briefing from the government following the release of the so-called Industry Innovation Statement—otherwise described as a 'jobs plan', another Orwellian phrase—of which these changes form a part. That request was pointedly refused. One of a number of reasons why I sought that briefing was to try and obtain more detail about the changes to which this bill potentially would give effect. Such conduct points not only to a disturbing lack of accountability on the part of the minister but also to a complete arrogant disregard for accepted protocol, good governance and accountability—especially when a staff member in the minister's office tells a staff member in mine that the basic reason for the refusal is that I apparently had the temerity, the gall, the nerve, to make some public criticisms of a number of elements of the government's policies in this area. 'How dare I criticise the government or question its policies' was effectively what was being said at a ti
House of Representatives, 2013-05-28. affirmative: ayes 71, noes 69.
Question
Sophie Mirabella I rise to speak on the so-called Australian Jobs Bill 2013. In doing so I wish to express my frustration with not only the content of the bill but the government's lack of accountability in explaining and justifying the reasons for its introduction and its apparent determination to yet again push through legislation that will increase regulatory and compliance costs for Australian businesses. Given that it has misled the Australian people hundreds and hundreds of times, it is difficult to take almost anything that this government says at face value. But it is even harder to find reason to support one of its bills when there is so little clarification around even the very basic details in the legislation—the precise reasons for the change and exactly how those changes will be financed. Prior to February this year, I cannot recall in my time as a shadow minister ever having been refused a briefing by the government. In February was when my office asked Minister Combet's office if I could receive a briefing from the government following the release of the so-called Industry Innovation Statement—otherwise described as a 'jobs plan', another Orwellian phrase—of which these changes form a part. That request was pointedly refused. One of a number of reasons why I sought that briefing was to try and obtain more detail about the changes to which this bill potentially would give effect. Such conduct points not only to a disturbing lack of accountability on the part of the minister but also to a complete arrogant disregard for accepted protocol, good governance and accountability—especially when a staff member in the minister's office tells a staff member in mine that the basic reason for the refusal is that I apparently had the temerity, the gall, the nerve, to make some public criticisms of a number of elements of the government's policies in this area. 'How dare I criticise the government or question its policies' was effectively what was being said at a ti
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.