Division
The majority voted in favour of keeping the wording of the usual second reading motion unchanged. The usual [second reading motion](https://peo.gov.au/understand-our-parliament/how-parliament-works/bills-and-laws/making-a-law-in-the-australian-parliament/) is "*That the bill be read for a second time*," which is parliamentary jargon for agreeing with the main idea of the bill. The MP for Corio [Richard Marles](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/corio/richard_marles) (Labor) had proposed to delete the words after 'that' and replace them with the words below. ### Motion text > *That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:* > > *"whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House:* > > *(1) notes:* > >> *(a) the desirability of greater oversight and review mechanisms for decisions made under the bill; and* >> >> *(b) the lack of clarity in the definition of 'arrangements' and 'institutional autonomy' in the bill; and* > > *(2) calls on the Government to:* > >> *(a) address the regulatory gap of private universities;* >> >> *(b) provide clarity on the treatment of the Port of Darwin in the bill before the bill proceeds;* >> >> *(c) make clear how this regime will interact with the existing legislation and guidelines that work to safeguard Australia's sovereignty, and provide confidence that the bill does not present a sovereign risk that will undermine investment and cost Australian jobs; engage in genuine consultation with Australian entities covered by the bill on the design of the regime; and* >> >> *(d) redraft the bill and re-present it to the Parliament at the earliest opportunity"*
House of Representatives, 2020-11-11. affirmative: ayes 58, noes 44.
Question
The majority voted in favour of keeping the wording of the usual second reading motion unchanged. The usual [second reading motion](https://peo.gov.au/understand-our-parliament/how-parliament-works/bills-and-laws/making-a-law-in-the-australian-parliament/) is "*That the bill be read for a second time*," which is parliamentary jargon for agreeing with the main idea of the bill. The MP for Corio [Richard Marles](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/corio/richard_marles) (Labor) had proposed to delete the words after 'that' and replace them with the words below. ### Motion text > *That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:* > > *"whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House:* > > *(1) notes:* > >> *(a) the desirability of greater oversight and review mechanisms for decisions made under the bill; and* >> >> *(b) the lack of clarity in the definition of 'arrangements' and 'institutional autonomy' in the bill; and* > > *(2) calls on the Government to:* > >> *(a) address the regulatory gap of private universities;* >> >> *(b) provide clarity on the treatment of the Port of Darwin in the bill before the bill proceeds;* >> >> *(c) make clear how this regime will interact with the existing legislation and guidelines that work to safeguard Australia's sovereignty, and provide confidence that the bill does not present a sovereign risk that will undermine investment and cost Australian jobs; engage in genuine consultation with Australian entities covered by the bill on the design of the regime; and* >> >> *(d) redraft the bill and re-present it to the Parliament at the earliest opportunity"*
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.