Division
The majority voted in favour of a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debates/?id=2023-10-18.58.1) to agree with the bill's main idea. In parliamentary jargon, they voted to read the bill for a second time. This means they can now consider it in more detail. ### What is the bill's main idea? According to the [bills digest](https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd2324a/24bd24) (which is prepared by the non-partisan parliamentary library): > *Bills with similar purposes were introduced in 2018 and 2019 but lapsed with the dissolution of the House of Representatives in April 2019 and April 2022, respectively. ... The Identity Verification Services Bill 2023 (IVS Bill), as outlined in the Explanatory Memorandum, would:* > > * *authorise 1:1 matching of identity through the identity verification services, with consent of the relevant individual, by public and private sector entities. This will be enabled by:* > >> * *the Document Verification Service which provides 1:1 matching to verify biographic information (such as a name or date of birth), with consent, against government issued identification documents;* >> >> * *the Face Verification Service which provides 1:1 matching to verify biometric information (in this case a photograph or facial image of an individual), with consent, against a Commonwealth, state or territory issued identification document (for example, passports and driver licences); and* >> >> * *the National Driver Licence Facial Recognition Solution which enables the FVS to conduct 1:1 matching against State and Territory identification documents such as driver licences.* > > * *authorise 1:many matching services through the Face Identification Service [FIS] only for the purpose of protecting the identity of persons with a legally assumed identity, such as undercover officers and protected witnesses. The protection of legally assumed identities will also be supported by the use of the FVS. All other uses of 1:many mat
House of Representatives, 2023-10-18. affirmative: ayes 82, noes 52.
Question
The majority voted in favour of a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debates/?id=2023-10-18.58.1) to agree with the bill's main idea. In parliamentary jargon, they voted to read the bill for a second time. This means they can now consider it in more detail. ### What is the bill's main idea? According to the [bills digest](https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd2324a/24bd24) (which is prepared by the non-partisan parliamentary library): > *Bills with similar purposes were introduced in 2018 and 2019 but lapsed with the dissolution of the House of Representatives in April 2019 and April 2022, respectively. ... The Identity Verification Services Bill 2023 (IVS Bill), as outlined in the Explanatory Memorandum, would:* > > * *authorise 1:1 matching of identity through the identity verification services, with consent of the relevant individual, by public and private sector entities. This will be enabled by:* > >> * *the Document Verification Service which provides 1:1 matching to verify biographic information (such as a name or date of birth), with consent, against government issued identification documents;* >> >> * *the Face Verification Service which provides 1:1 matching to verify biometric information (in this case a photograph or facial image of an individual), with consent, against a Commonwealth, state or territory issued identification document (for example, passports and driver licences); and* >> >> * *the National Driver Licence Facial Recognition Solution which enables the FVS to conduct 1:1 matching against State and Territory identification documents such as driver licences.* > > * *authorise 1:many matching services through the Face Identification Service [FIS] only for the purpose of protecting the identity of persons with a legally assumed identity, such as undercover officers and protected witnesses. The protection of legally assumed identities will also be supported by the use of the FVS. All other uses of 1:many mat
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.