Division
The majority voted against [opposition amendments](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2018-11-28.124.2), which means they failed. The amendments related to the cap the Government is placing on civil penalties, which the Opposition oppose because, according to Labor MP [Clare O'Neil](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/hotham/clare_o'neil): > "*it's very out of step with other pecuniary penalties handed down in Australia and overseas. It is out of step with the contemporary reality of financial service providers and banks, and it creates a regime that's not effectively futureproofed as our financial institutions continue to grow in size.* > *I want to note that the Consumer Action Law Centre was very strong on this point when they made a submission to the ASIC enforcement reviews processes. I'm going to quote a little bit from their submission. They said, 'We are not convinced that theirs is a strong policy justification for introducing a maximum limit on civil penalties of one million penalty units, that's currently $210 million. Setting a maximum does not recognise that there are large differences in size of banks, insurers and superannuation funds and that a penalty in excess of this amount may be appropriate in the context of very large corporations.'*" ### What is this bill about? The [bill](https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id:legislation/billhome/r6213) was introduced to "*introduce a stronger penalty framework for corporate and financial sector misconduct*". It was introduced in response to recommendations made by the [ASIC Enforcement Review Taskforce report](https://treasury.gov.au/review/asic-enforcement-review/).
House of Representatives, 2018-11-28. negative: ayes 68, noes 74.
Question
The majority voted against [opposition amendments](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2018-11-28.124.2), which means they failed. The amendments related to the cap the Government is placing on civil penalties, which the Opposition oppose because, according to Labor MP [Clare O'Neil](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/hotham/clare_o'neil): > "*it's very out of step with other pecuniary penalties handed down in Australia and overseas. It is out of step with the contemporary reality of financial service providers and banks, and it creates a regime that's not effectively futureproofed as our financial institutions continue to grow in size.* > *I want to note that the Consumer Action Law Centre was very strong on this point when they made a submission to the ASIC enforcement reviews processes. I'm going to quote a little bit from their submission. They said, 'We are not convinced that theirs is a strong policy justification for introducing a maximum limit on civil penalties of one million penalty units, that's currently $210 million. Setting a maximum does not recognise that there are large differences in size of banks, insurers and superannuation funds and that a penalty in excess of this amount may be appropriate in the context of very large corporations.'*" ### What is this bill about? The [bill](https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id:legislation/billhome/r6213) was introduced to "*introduce a stronger penalty framework for corporate and financial sector misconduct*". It was introduced in response to recommendations made by the [ASIC Enforcement Review Taskforce report](https://treasury.gov.au/review/asic-enforcement-review/).
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.