Division
The majority voted in favour of a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2022-11-24.19.6) to *disagree* with [amendments (5) and (6)](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2022-11-24.14.1) introduced by Indi MP [Helen Haines](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/indi/helen_haines) (Independent), which means they failed. #### Rebellion Bass MP [Bridget Archer](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/bass/bridget_archer) (Liberal) [crossed the floor](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/help/faq#rebel) to vote "No" against the rest of the Liberal party, who voted "Yes". ### What did the amendment do? Dr Haines [explained that](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2022-11-24.14.1): > *Amendment (5) will strike out the unnecessary and alarming exceptional circumstances requirement. In my mind, this is the single most important change to this bill. My amendment will ensure that the commissioner may decide to hold public hearings if the commissioner is satisfied that it would be in the public interest—tested, simple and safe.* > > *... amendment (6) will make it mandatory for the commissioner to consider certain factors when deciding whether to hold a public hearing, including unfair prejudice to a person's reputation, privacy, safety or wellbeing caused by a public hearing. This amendment boosts the protection of people who would be affected by the decision to hold a hearing in public.* Read more about the bill in its [bills digest](https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd2223a/23bd035). ### Amendment text > *(5) Clause 73, page 68 (lines 10 to 14), omit subclause (2), substitute:* > >> *(2) The Commissioner may decide to hold a hearing, or part of a hearing, in public if the Commissioner is satisfied that it is in the public interest to do so.* > > *(6) Clause 73, page 68 (line 16), omit "may", substitute "must".*
House of Representatives, 2022-11-24. affirmative: ayes 78, noes 14.
Question
The majority voted in favour of a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2022-11-24.19.6) to *disagree* with [amendments (5) and (6)](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2022-11-24.14.1) introduced by Indi MP [Helen Haines](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/indi/helen_haines) (Independent), which means they failed. #### Rebellion Bass MP [Bridget Archer](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/bass/bridget_archer) (Liberal) [crossed the floor](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/help/faq#rebel) to vote "No" against the rest of the Liberal party, who voted "Yes". ### What did the amendment do? Dr Haines [explained that](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2022-11-24.14.1): > *Amendment (5) will strike out the unnecessary and alarming exceptional circumstances requirement. In my mind, this is the single most important change to this bill. My amendment will ensure that the commissioner may decide to hold public hearings if the commissioner is satisfied that it would be in the public interest—tested, simple and safe.* > > *... amendment (6) will make it mandatory for the commissioner to consider certain factors when deciding whether to hold a public hearing, including unfair prejudice to a person's reputation, privacy, safety or wellbeing caused by a public hearing. This amendment boosts the protection of people who would be affected by the decision to hold a hearing in public.* Read more about the bill in its [bills digest](https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd2223a/23bd035). ### Amendment text > *(5) Clause 73, page 68 (lines 10 to 14), omit subclause (2), substitute:* > >> *(2) The Commissioner may decide to hold a hearing, or part of a hearing, in public if the Commissioner is satisfied that it is in the public interest to do so.* > > *(6) Clause 73, page 68 (line 16), omit "may", substitute "must".*
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.