Division
Anthony Albanese I move: That all the words after 'That' be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: 'the House: (1) declines to give the bill a second reading as the existence of this Bill is policy-on-the-run in that: (a) an increase in the Passenger Movement Charge bears no relation to the issue of the appropriate level of taxation for backpackers who work in Australia; (b) an increase in the Passenger Movement Charge was not part of the original package in the May 2015 Budget; (c) over sixteen months later, in September 2016, the Government announced further changes to the package and randomly added a $5 increase to the Passenger Movement Charge to fund other unrelated policy decisions; (d) the increase in the Passenger Movement Charge was done without any consultation with the sectors affected – including airlines, cruise ship companies, tourism operators, and tourism peak organisations. (e) the Treasurer indicated in a media conference on November 8 that he would simply seek to double the $5 increase to $10 if other unrelated elements of the package failed; and (f) the increase in the Passenger Movement Charge has real consequences for tourism and will have jobs impacts in the tourism industry, which employs a million Australians, is Australia's largest services export and has been nominated as one of Australia's five super growth sectors; and (2) notes further that the handling of the Passenger Movement in the Parliament has been chaotic in that: (a) no modelling of the economic and jobs impact of this measure accompanies the Bill before the Parliament; (b) this increase breaks an election commitment from the Government not to increase the Charge; (c) this Bill directly contradicts the statement of the Minister for Tourism, who told the Parliament on August 31 that previous increases in the Passenger Movement Charge would choke "the golden goose that is Australia's tourism industry"; (d) the increase failed in the Senate last week after the Go
House of Representatives, 2016-11-29. negative: ayes 69, noes 79.
Question
Anthony Albanese I move: That all the words after 'That' be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: 'the House: (1) declines to give the bill a second reading as the existence of this Bill is policy-on-the-run in that: (a) an increase in the Passenger Movement Charge bears no relation to the issue of the appropriate level of taxation for backpackers who work in Australia; (b) an increase in the Passenger Movement Charge was not part of the original package in the May 2015 Budget; (c) over sixteen months later, in September 2016, the Government announced further changes to the package and randomly added a $5 increase to the Passenger Movement Charge to fund other unrelated policy decisions; (d) the increase in the Passenger Movement Charge was done without any consultation with the sectors affected – including airlines, cruise ship companies, tourism operators, and tourism peak organisations. (e) the Treasurer indicated in a media conference on November 8 that he would simply seek to double the $5 increase to $10 if other unrelated elements of the package failed; and (f) the increase in the Passenger Movement Charge has real consequences for tourism and will have jobs impacts in the tourism industry, which employs a million Australians, is Australia's largest services export and has been nominated as one of Australia's five super growth sectors; and (2) notes further that the handling of the Passenger Movement in the Parliament has been chaotic in that: (a) no modelling of the economic and jobs impact of this measure accompanies the Bill before the Parliament; (b) this increase breaks an election commitment from the Government not to increase the Charge; (c) this Bill directly contradicts the statement of the Minister for Tourism, who told the Parliament on August 31 that previous increases in the Passenger Movement Charge would choke "the golden goose that is Australia's tourism industry"; (d) the increase failed in the Senate last week after the Go
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.