Division
The majority voted in favour of *disagreeing* with a second reading amendment introduced by Bradfield MP [Paul Fletcher](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/bradfield/paul_fletcher) (Liberal), which means it failed. It would have added the text below to the usual second reading amendment: "*that the bill be [read a second time](https://peo.gov.au/understand-our-parliament/how-parliament-works/bills-and-laws/making-a-law-in-the-australian-parliament/)*" (parliamentary jargon for agreeing with the main idea of the bill). ### Amendment 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 notes that the bill is deficient in a number of respects including that:* > > *(1) the bill's purpose is not clear, including whether it is intended to build a pool of skilled entrepreneurs or create more firms;* > > *(2) the value proposition for students is unclear, in that the Startup Year program may result in students incurring a substantial additional debt without obtaining any academic credentials;* > > *(3) the value proposition for higher education institutions is unclear, given that the SY-HELP funds available are unlikely to fund a full year's course;* > > *(4) the bill does not make it clear how SY-HELP loan funds will flow, including whether students will be able to access any of the funding as startup capital;* > > *(5) the bill does not provide funding for shorter courses under six months in duration;* > > *(6) given the barriers to commencing a new accelerator or incubator program, students attending regional or smaller universities which do not have an existing accelerator or incubator program may be at a disadvantage;* > > *(7) the bill does not provide sufficient clarity in relation to whether students in Startup Year programs will retain intellectual property rights in relation to their work funded through SY-HELP; and* > > *(8) the bi
House of Representatives, 2023-03-23. affirmative: ayes 75, noes 58.
Question
The majority voted in favour of *disagreeing* with a second reading amendment introduced by Bradfield MP [Paul Fletcher](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/bradfield/paul_fletcher) (Liberal), which means it failed. It would have added the text below to the usual second reading amendment: "*that the bill be [read a second time](https://peo.gov.au/understand-our-parliament/how-parliament-works/bills-and-laws/making-a-law-in-the-australian-parliament/)*" (parliamentary jargon for agreeing with the main idea of the bill). ### Amendment 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 notes that the bill is deficient in a number of respects including that:* > > *(1) the bill's purpose is not clear, including whether it is intended to build a pool of skilled entrepreneurs or create more firms;* > > *(2) the value proposition for students is unclear, in that the Startup Year program may result in students incurring a substantial additional debt without obtaining any academic credentials;* > > *(3) the value proposition for higher education institutions is unclear, given that the SY-HELP funds available are unlikely to fund a full year's course;* > > *(4) the bill does not make it clear how SY-HELP loan funds will flow, including whether students will be able to access any of the funding as startup capital;* > > *(5) the bill does not provide funding for shorter courses under six months in duration;* > > *(6) given the barriers to commencing a new accelerator or incubator program, students attending regional or smaller universities which do not have an existing accelerator or incubator program may be at a disadvantage;* > > *(7) the bill does not provide sufficient clarity in relation to whether students in Startup Year programs will retain intellectual property rights in relation to their work funded through SY-HELP; and* > > *(8) the bi
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.