Division
The majority voted against an [amendment](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2025-03-25.107.1) to an [original amendment](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debates/?id=2025-03-25.106.1). The original amendment would have amended the usual second reading motion, which is "*that the bill be read a second time*" - parliamentary jargon for agreeing with the main idea of the bill. The amendment was introduced by Brisbane MP [Stephen Bates](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/brisbane/stephen_bates) (Greens). The original amendment was introduced by Fairfax MP [Ted O'Brien](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/fairfax/ted_o'brien) (Liberal). ### Amendment text > *That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:* > > *"The House declines to give the bill a second reading and notes the government is using the cover of the budget to rush through legislation that trashes environment laws instead of passing laws to cut student debt and triple the bulk billing incentive for GPs".* ### Original 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:* > > *(1) on the eve of a federal election, the Albanese Government has been forced to work around their own Environment Minister in an attempt to fix a political mess of their own making;* > > *(2) the Government remains bitterly divided on the future of salmon farming at Macquarie Harbour and has unleashed 15 months of anxiety and uncertainty on thousands of workers, families and communities who rely on the salmon industry, including voting against a Coalition bill to improve the reconsideration process in the most recent sitting week of Parliament;* > > *(3) this legislation is not needed to provide lasting certainty to the Tasmanian salmon industry, and instead the Government should simply have ended the Minister for t
House of Representatives, 2025-03-25. negative: ayes 12, noes 76.
Question
The majority voted against an [amendment](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2025-03-25.107.1) to an [original amendment](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debates/?id=2025-03-25.106.1). The original amendment would have amended the usual second reading motion, which is "*that the bill be read a second time*" - parliamentary jargon for agreeing with the main idea of the bill. The amendment was introduced by Brisbane MP [Stephen Bates](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/brisbane/stephen_bates) (Greens). The original amendment was introduced by Fairfax MP [Ted O'Brien](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/fairfax/ted_o'brien) (Liberal). ### Amendment text > *That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:* > > *"The House declines to give the bill a second reading and notes the government is using the cover of the budget to rush through legislation that trashes environment laws instead of passing laws to cut student debt and triple the bulk billing incentive for GPs".* ### Original 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:* > > *(1) on the eve of a federal election, the Albanese Government has been forced to work around their own Environment Minister in an attempt to fix a political mess of their own making;* > > *(2) the Government remains bitterly divided on the future of salmon farming at Macquarie Harbour and has unleashed 15 months of anxiety and uncertainty on thousands of workers, families and communities who rely on the salmon industry, including voting against a Coalition bill to improve the reconsideration process in the most recent sitting week of Parliament;* > > *(3) this legislation is not needed to provide lasting certainty to the Tasmanian salmon industry, and instead the Government should simply have ended the Minister for t
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.