Division
The majority voted in favour of an [amendment](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2023-10-18.34.1) introduced by Indi MP [Helen Haines](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/indi/helen_haines) (Independent), which means it will now be included in the bill. ### What does the amendment do? Dr Haines [explained that](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2023-10-18.34.1): > *This amendment relates to the terms of reference for the statutory review of the Water for the Environment Special Account, otherwise known as the WESA. The Water Amendment (Restoring Our Rivers) Bill opens the possibility of the WESA being used to support communities affected by water purchases. However, the bill does not go far enough towards ensuring the adequacy of support for impacted communities. It's here that I want to acknowledge the words of the member for Nicholls in the prior debate about this. We need to make sure, with this new element of the bill, that at every stage we put communities at the centre of compensation.* > > *My amendment would provide a review of government support to affected communities. It would absolutely scrutinise the government's support of communities, ensuring that it's commensurate with impacts experienced, and meaningfully address their needs. The amendment would achieve this by ensuring that the statutory review of WESA considers the effectiveness of payments made using WESA funds to adequately address any social or economic detriment that is associated with purchasing water access rights.* ### Amendment text > *(2) Schedule 1, page 7, after line 16, after item 11, insert:* > >> *11A After subsection 86AJ(3)* >> >> *Insert:* >> >> *(3A) In conducting a review under subsection (1), a panel must also consider the effectiveness of payments made, or expected to be made, under paragraph 86AD(2)(c) in relation to a purchase referred to in paragraph 86AD(2)(b).*
House of Representatives, 2023-10-18. affirmative: ayes 81, noes 49.
Question
The majority voted in favour of an [amendment](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2023-10-18.34.1) introduced by Indi MP [Helen Haines](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/indi/helen_haines) (Independent), which means it will now be included in the bill. ### What does the amendment do? Dr Haines [explained that](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2023-10-18.34.1): > *This amendment relates to the terms of reference for the statutory review of the Water for the Environment Special Account, otherwise known as the WESA. The Water Amendment (Restoring Our Rivers) Bill opens the possibility of the WESA being used to support communities affected by water purchases. However, the bill does not go far enough towards ensuring the adequacy of support for impacted communities. It's here that I want to acknowledge the words of the member for Nicholls in the prior debate about this. We need to make sure, with this new element of the bill, that at every stage we put communities at the centre of compensation.* > > *My amendment would provide a review of government support to affected communities. It would absolutely scrutinise the government's support of communities, ensuring that it's commensurate with impacts experienced, and meaningfully address their needs. The amendment would achieve this by ensuring that the statutory review of WESA considers the effectiveness of payments made using WESA funds to adequately address any social or economic detriment that is associated with purchasing water access rights.* ### Amendment text > *(2) Schedule 1, page 7, after line 16, after item 11, insert:* > >> *11A After subsection 86AJ(3)* >> >> *Insert:* >> >> *(3A) In conducting a review under subsection (1), a panel must also consider the effectiveness of payments made, or expected to be made, under paragraph 86AD(2)(c) in relation to a purchase referred to in paragraph 86AD(2)(b).*
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.