Division
The majority voted in favour of *disagreeing* with [amendments](https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Famend%2Fr6821_amend_31568dc0-a744-4ca5-aeb1-faed9126d411%22) moved by Isaacs MP [Mark Dreyfus](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/isaacs/mark_dreyfus) (Labor), which means the amendments failed. There was one rebellion, with Bass MP [Bridget Archer](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/bass/bridget_archer) (Liberal) crossing the floor to vote 'No' against the rest of her party, who voted 'Yes.' ### What do the amendments do? MP Isaacs [explained that](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2022-02-09.157.1): > *The amendments that Labor is moving now would introduce into this bill a provision to protect people from vilification on the grounds of their religious belief or practice. This is a very important provision that the government has deliberately left out of this bill, despite requests from a range of faith communities for such a provision to be included. Indeed, it's difficult to understand how the Prime Minister can insist on what he imagines is the desire of people of faith to be able to make discriminatory statements about other Australians in what would otherwise amount to a breach of state antidiscrimination laws while ignoring their clearly stated desire to be protected from vilification on the grounds of their faith.* ### Amendment text > *(2) Clause 4, page 3, after line 30, insert:* > >> *Religious vilification is unlawful, with certain exceptions (see Part 4A).* > > *(4) Clause 7, page 10 (line 8), omit “this Act”, substitute “Part 4”.* > > *(10) Clause 9, page 12 (line 24), omit “this Act”, substitute “Part 4”.* > > *(17) Clause 12, page 17 (line 15), omit “.”, substitute “; or”.* > > *(18) Clause 12, page 17 (after line 15), after paragraph (2)(c), insert:* > >> *(d) that is unlawful under Part 4A (religious vilification).* > > *(19) Clause 16, page 20 (lin
House of Representatives, 2022-02-09. affirmative: ayes 63, noes 61.
Question
The majority voted in favour of *disagreeing* with [amendments](https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Famend%2Fr6821_amend_31568dc0-a744-4ca5-aeb1-faed9126d411%22) moved by Isaacs MP [Mark Dreyfus](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/isaacs/mark_dreyfus) (Labor), which means the amendments failed. There was one rebellion, with Bass MP [Bridget Archer](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/bass/bridget_archer) (Liberal) crossing the floor to vote 'No' against the rest of her party, who voted 'Yes.' ### What do the amendments do? MP Isaacs [explained that](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2022-02-09.157.1): > *The amendments that Labor is moving now would introduce into this bill a provision to protect people from vilification on the grounds of their religious belief or practice. This is a very important provision that the government has deliberately left out of this bill, despite requests from a range of faith communities for such a provision to be included. Indeed, it's difficult to understand how the Prime Minister can insist on what he imagines is the desire of people of faith to be able to make discriminatory statements about other Australians in what would otherwise amount to a breach of state antidiscrimination laws while ignoring their clearly stated desire to be protected from vilification on the grounds of their faith.* ### Amendment text > *(2) Clause 4, page 3, after line 30, insert:* > >> *Religious vilification is unlawful, with certain exceptions (see Part 4A).* > > *(4) Clause 7, page 10 (line 8), omit “this Act”, substitute “Part 4”.* > > *(10) Clause 9, page 12 (line 24), omit “this Act”, substitute “Part 4”.* > > *(17) Clause 12, page 17 (line 15), omit “.”, substitute “; or”.* > > *(18) Clause 12, page 17 (after line 15), after paragraph (2)(c), insert:* > >> *(d) that is unlawful under Part 4A (religious vilification).* > > *(19) Clause 16, page 20 (lin
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.