Division
The majority voted in favour of a [motion](http://www.openaustralia.org.au/debates/?id=2017-05-29.126.1) to suspend the [standing orders](http://www.peo.gov.au/learning/fact-sheets/standing-orders.html) so that the House can immediately decide whether they want to pass the bill (known as reading the bill for a [third time](http://www.peo.gov.au/learning/fact-sheets/making-a-law.html)). Standing orders are the procedural rules of parliament. The motion had been introduced by Liberal MP Alan Tudge (for Aston). ### Motion text > *That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent the motion for the third reading being moved without delay.* ### What is this bill all about? The [bill](http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id:legislation/billhome/r5866) was introduced to implement the Coalition Government's new school funding proposal. Unfortunately, at the time of this vote there was still no bills digest to explain exactly what the new proposal is, but there is a [very helpful and easy to understand explanation on The Conversation](http://theconversation.com/confused-about-changes-to-school-funding-heres-what-you-need-to-know-78455) by Associate Professor Misty Adoniou. As a brief summary: * the proposal offers more money for schools, but less than the previous Labor Government had offered; * every student will attract the same amount of funding but the amount of funding that the federal government will provide (as opposed to the state governments) is not equal between government and non-government schools (that is, the federal government will provide 80% of the funding for non-government schools but only 20% for government schools, with the states paying the difference); * those in need will get more funding, but the Government still doesn't have any proposal for how this will work or even how many students will be eligible for this, which leaves a big question mark over the whole proposal. ### How are schools currently fun
House of Representatives, 2017-05-29. affirmative: ayes 77, noes 70.
Question
The majority voted in favour of a [motion](http://www.openaustralia.org.au/debates/?id=2017-05-29.126.1) to suspend the [standing orders](http://www.peo.gov.au/learning/fact-sheets/standing-orders.html) so that the House can immediately decide whether they want to pass the bill (known as reading the bill for a [third time](http://www.peo.gov.au/learning/fact-sheets/making-a-law.html)). Standing orders are the procedural rules of parliament. The motion had been introduced by Liberal MP Alan Tudge (for Aston). ### Motion text > *That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent the motion for the third reading being moved without delay.* ### What is this bill all about? The [bill](http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id:legislation/billhome/r5866) was introduced to implement the Coalition Government's new school funding proposal. Unfortunately, at the time of this vote there was still no bills digest to explain exactly what the new proposal is, but there is a [very helpful and easy to understand explanation on The Conversation](http://theconversation.com/confused-about-changes-to-school-funding-heres-what-you-need-to-know-78455) by Associate Professor Misty Adoniou. As a brief summary: * the proposal offers more money for schools, but less than the previous Labor Government had offered; * every student will attract the same amount of funding but the amount of funding that the federal government will provide (as opposed to the state governments) is not equal between government and non-government schools (that is, the federal government will provide 80% of the funding for non-government schools but only 20% for government schools, with the states paying the difference); * those in need will get more funding, but the Government still doesn't have any proposal for how this will work or even how many students will be eligible for this, which leaves a big question mark over the whole proposal. ### How are schools currently fun
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.