Division
Eric Abetz I move: That the committee does not insist on its amendments to which the House has disagreed. Stephen Conroy I ask that the question be divided in respect of the amendments. Could I suggest that the Senate considers amendments (1) to (6) together, with amendment (7) taken separately. I foreshadow that I will have an amendment to move in relation to amendment (7). The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: The House has not agreed to the seven amendments that we have in front of us. Senator Conroy has asked that the question be divided on amendments (1) to (6), so the question is: That the committee not insist on amendments (1) to (6). Larissa Waters I seek some clarification, and, obviously, I would like to insist on (1) to (6) being maintained. I want to ask if this about the substance of those amendments or about Senator Conroy's motion to split (1) to (6) off from (7), in which case we do not object. The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: It is the substance of the amendments. I am not speaking on the issue of whether or not to separate the amendments from the opposition's amendment, which I presume we will come back to at some point. The Greens are moving these amendments because we believe that science has a very crucial role in the process of decision making, and our amendments go to the retention of two advisory bodies that the government really should avail itself of. They are the Product Stewardship Advisory Group and the Oil Stewardship Advisory Council. We are seeing, time and time again, that this government has absolutely no respect for science. It has been cutting workers from the environment department and slashing funding from community groups. It now wants to silence community groups from even enforcing the government's own environmental laws, so this is just another attack in a long line of attacks against science and good sense. The two advisory groups to which I referred are crucial bodies that provide the government with, effectively, free advice on how not to stuff
Senate, 2015-08-19. negative: ayes 34, noes 36.
Question
Eric Abetz I move: That the committee does not insist on its amendments to which the House has disagreed. Stephen Conroy I ask that the question be divided in respect of the amendments. Could I suggest that the Senate considers amendments (1) to (6) together, with amendment (7) taken separately. I foreshadow that I will have an amendment to move in relation to amendment (7). The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: The House has not agreed to the seven amendments that we have in front of us. Senator Conroy has asked that the question be divided on amendments (1) to (6), so the question is: That the committee not insist on amendments (1) to (6). Larissa Waters I seek some clarification, and, obviously, I would like to insist on (1) to (6) being maintained. I want to ask if this about the substance of those amendments or about Senator Conroy's motion to split (1) to (6) off from (7), in which case we do not object. The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: It is the substance of the amendments. I am not speaking on the issue of whether or not to separate the amendments from the opposition's amendment, which I presume we will come back to at some point. The Greens are moving these amendments because we believe that science has a very crucial role in the process of decision making, and our amendments go to the retention of two advisory bodies that the government really should avail itself of. They are the Product Stewardship Advisory Group and the Oil Stewardship Advisory Council. We are seeing, time and time again, that this government has absolutely no respect for science. It has been cutting workers from the environment department and slashing funding from community groups. It now wants to silence community groups from even enforcing the government's own environmental laws, so this is just another attack in a long line of attacks against science and good sense. The two advisory groups to which I referred are crucial bodies that provide the government with, effectively, free advice on how not to stuff
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.