Division
Gavin Marshall The question is that the bill stand as printed. Nick McKim When we were debating the Crimes Legislation Amendment (Proceeds of Crime and Other Measures) Bill 2015 yesterday we had just had confirmation from the minister who yesterday had carriage of this legislation that in fact a court, even if it formed the view that it was in the interests of justice to stay Proceeds of Crime Act proceedings on one of the grounds that are proposed to be inserted into the legislation in proposed new section 319(2), it was not able to do that solely on those grounds. So let us be very clear about this. The Australian Greens absolutely share concerns raised by the Victorian Bar and Criminal Bar Association, by the Law Council of Australia and by the Australian Human Rights Commission about these provisions. We do not support this parliament seeking to intervene in judicial processes in this country to the extent that, even if a court believes that it is in the interests of justice to stay Proceeds of Crime Act proceedings, it will not be able to do that if the grounds on which it forms that belief are contained in the proposed new section 319(2) of the Proceeds of Crime Act. On that basis the Greens oppose schedule 1 in the following terms: (1) Schedule 1, item 4, page 4 (lines 1 to 31), subsections 319(2), (3), (4) and (5) to be opposed. In support of this proposition I will very briefly read into the record the view of various organisations about proposed new section 319. Before I do that I want to be clear that I have a further amendment. If it were taken together, proposed section 319 not forming part of this legislation— Jacinta Collins Move them together. Nick McKim I will not move it now—thank you, Senator Collins—because amendment (2) is consequential on the first proposition being accepted by the chamber. I make the point that if this proposition is not supported then I will not move amendment (2). It is our very firm policy position that proposed section 319
Senate, 2016-02-23. affirmative: ayes 30, noes 11.
Question
Gavin Marshall The question is that the bill stand as printed. Nick McKim When we were debating the Crimes Legislation Amendment (Proceeds of Crime and Other Measures) Bill 2015 yesterday we had just had confirmation from the minister who yesterday had carriage of this legislation that in fact a court, even if it formed the view that it was in the interests of justice to stay Proceeds of Crime Act proceedings on one of the grounds that are proposed to be inserted into the legislation in proposed new section 319(2), it was not able to do that solely on those grounds. So let us be very clear about this. The Australian Greens absolutely share concerns raised by the Victorian Bar and Criminal Bar Association, by the Law Council of Australia and by the Australian Human Rights Commission about these provisions. We do not support this parliament seeking to intervene in judicial processes in this country to the extent that, even if a court believes that it is in the interests of justice to stay Proceeds of Crime Act proceedings, it will not be able to do that if the grounds on which it forms that belief are contained in the proposed new section 319(2) of the Proceeds of Crime Act. On that basis the Greens oppose schedule 1 in the following terms: (1) Schedule 1, item 4, page 4 (lines 1 to 31), subsections 319(2), (3), (4) and (5) to be opposed. In support of this proposition I will very briefly read into the record the view of various organisations about proposed new section 319. Before I do that I want to be clear that I have a further amendment. If it were taken together, proposed section 319 not forming part of this legislation— Jacinta Collins Move them together. Nick McKim I will not move it now—thank you, Senator Collins—because amendment (2) is consequential on the first proposition being accepted by the chamber. I make the point that if this proposition is not supported then I will not move amendment (2). It is our very firm policy position that proposed section 319
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.