Division
The majority voted against a [motion](http://www.openaustralia.org/debates/?id=2013-06-19.27.2) introduced by Liberal MP [Scott Morrison](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Scott_Morrison&mpc=Cook&house=representatives). The motion amends a prior motion "That this bill be now read a second time" with the following: _That all words after That be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:_ _consideration of the bill not be concluded by the House until a:_ _(1) full research report is completed by the Department of Immigration and Citizenship on the true incidence and nature of abuses and non-compliance within the 457 visas programme in comparison to other programmes to substantiate the requirement for the measures proposed in the bill;_ _(2) full consultation programme with industry and other stakeholders has been conducted by the Department of Immigration and Citizenship on the impacts of the measures contained in the bill; and_ _(3) regulatory impact statement has been completed by the Government in relation to Schedule 2 of the bill relating to the proposed labour market testing regime as required by the Office of Best Practice Regulation and the statement be submitted to the Parliament._ Background to the Bill The [Migration Amendment (Temporary Sponsored Visas) Bill 2013](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r5068) was introduced by Labor MP [Brendan O'Connor](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Brendan_O%26%2339%3BConnor&mpc=Gorton&house=representatives) to “enhance the government's ability to deter sponsor behaviour which is inconsistent with the policy intent of the subclass 457 visa program and other temporary employer sponsored visa programs”.(Read MP O'Connor's comments [here](http://www.openaustralia.org/debates/?id=2013-06-06.3.2). ) At the time this bill was introduced, the [457 visa program](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/45
House of Representatives, 2013-06-26. negative: ayes 69, noes 71.
Question
The majority voted against a [motion](http://www.openaustralia.org/debates/?id=2013-06-19.27.2) introduced by Liberal MP [Scott Morrison](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Scott_Morrison&mpc=Cook&house=representatives). The motion amends a prior motion "That this bill be now read a second time" with the following: _That all words after That be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:_ _consideration of the bill not be concluded by the House until a:_ _(1) full research report is completed by the Department of Immigration and Citizenship on the true incidence and nature of abuses and non-compliance within the 457 visas programme in comparison to other programmes to substantiate the requirement for the measures proposed in the bill;_ _(2) full consultation programme with industry and other stakeholders has been conducted by the Department of Immigration and Citizenship on the impacts of the measures contained in the bill; and_ _(3) regulatory impact statement has been completed by the Government in relation to Schedule 2 of the bill relating to the proposed labour market testing regime as required by the Office of Best Practice Regulation and the statement be submitted to the Parliament._ Background to the Bill The [Migration Amendment (Temporary Sponsored Visas) Bill 2013](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r5068) was introduced by Labor MP [Brendan O'Connor](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Brendan_O%26%2339%3BConnor&mpc=Gorton&house=representatives) to “enhance the government's ability to deter sponsor behaviour which is inconsistent with the policy intent of the subclass 457 visa program and other temporary employer sponsored visa programs”.(Read MP O'Connor's comments [here](http://www.openaustralia.org/debates/?id=2013-06-06.3.2). ) At the time this bill was introduced, the [457 visa program](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/45
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.