Division
The majority voted against [amendments](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2025-09-03.108.2) moved by Gippsland MP [Darren Chester](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/gippsland/darren_chester) (Nationals), which means they failed. Mr Chester [explained that](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2025-09-03.108.2): > *Under this legislation, the government is proposing that we will only remember [Australian Defence Force personnel and our veterans], we will only recognise their incredible service, if the action occurred in the past 20 years. That is exactly what this legislation proposes in terms of major medallic recognition of acts of bravery and gallantry that have quite rightly been reviewed by the Defence Honours and Awards Appeals Tribunal over the last 14 years and have resulted in some of the most celebrated Australians receiving due recognition decades—decades—after their brave action. But what this government is trying to do is cut this off at 20 years, saying, 'If your action didn't occur as Australian Defence Force personnel in the Navy, the Army or the Air Force in a more convenient timeframe for us—say, the last 20 years—I'm sorry, but you can't review any decision made by the Department of Defence in relation to honours of such great national significance.'* ### Amendment text > *(1) Schedule 1, item 7, page 4 (line 16), omit "subsections (2) to (9)", substitute "subsections (6) and (9)".* > > *(2) Schedule 1, item 8, page 4 (line 19) to page 5 (line 27), omit subsections 110V(2) to (5).* > > *(3) Schedule 1, item 8, page 6 (line 5) to page 6 (line 24), omit subsections 110V(7) and (8).* > > *(4) Schedule 1, page 6 (after line 32), after item 8, insert:* > >> *8A After section 110V* >> >> *Insert:* >> >>> *110VAAA Notification of review rights* >>> >>> *If a reviewable decision is made, the decision maker must, in writing, notify any person who is affected by the decision of the effect of sections 110VA and 110VAA.* > >
House of Representatives, 2025-09-03. negative: ayes 50, noes 87.
Question
The majority voted against [amendments](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2025-09-03.108.2) moved by Gippsland MP [Darren Chester](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/gippsland/darren_chester) (Nationals), which means they failed. Mr Chester [explained that](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2025-09-03.108.2): > *Under this legislation, the government is proposing that we will only remember [Australian Defence Force personnel and our veterans], we will only recognise their incredible service, if the action occurred in the past 20 years. That is exactly what this legislation proposes in terms of major medallic recognition of acts of bravery and gallantry that have quite rightly been reviewed by the Defence Honours and Awards Appeals Tribunal over the last 14 years and have resulted in some of the most celebrated Australians receiving due recognition decades—decades—after their brave action. But what this government is trying to do is cut this off at 20 years, saying, 'If your action didn't occur as Australian Defence Force personnel in the Navy, the Army or the Air Force in a more convenient timeframe for us—say, the last 20 years—I'm sorry, but you can't review any decision made by the Department of Defence in relation to honours of such great national significance.'* ### Amendment text > *(1) Schedule 1, item 7, page 4 (line 16), omit "subsections (2) to (9)", substitute "subsections (6) and (9)".* > > *(2) Schedule 1, item 8, page 4 (line 19) to page 5 (line 27), omit subsections 110V(2) to (5).* > > *(3) Schedule 1, item 8, page 6 (line 5) to page 6 (line 24), omit subsections 110V(7) and (8).* > > *(4) Schedule 1, page 6 (after line 32), after item 8, insert:* > >> *8A After section 110V* >> >> *Insert:* >> >>> *110VAAA Notification of review rights* >>> >>> *If a reviewable decision is made, the decision maker must, in writing, notify any person who is affected by the decision of the effect of sections 110VA and 110VAA.* > >
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.