Skip to content

Menu

Division

Sarah Hanson-Young The next amendment that I would like to move is on sheet 8110. This is in relation to the income threshold for the safety net. We have just now seen One Nation and the Nick Xenophon political party line up with the government to cut in half the access to child care for some of the country's most vulnerable children. We have just seen the Nick Xenophon political party slash in half care to vulnerable children overnight. We have seen the Nick Xenophon political party, One Nation and the government line up and say to those low-income families: 'It doesn't matter. It doesn't matter whether you struggle or whether you live in an area where there is massive unemployment, where you have been retrenched, where Holden has closed its doors, where Hazelwood Power Station has had to close or a rural or regional area where there just isn't job security. It doesn't matter about that. Because you don't have two people working your kids don't deserve proper access to child care.' Families have just been kicked in the guts tonight. They have lost 12 hours of care just like that, despite everything the experts have said and despite the promises that have previously been made. I do not think that the member for Mayo, Rebekha Sharkie, is going to be particularly happy when she has to go back to her electorate and explain that she was not able to keep her promise of protecting two days of child care for South Australian children. I do not think that families in Queensland, particularly those in rural and regional areas, are going to be particularly happy to hear that Pauline Hanson and One Nation have just kicked them in the guts. Their children, apparently, do not matter. Unless, as a child, your parents are both working, apparently your access to child care does not matter. You are not as valuable to this government; you are not as valuable to One Nation and you are not as valuable to the Nick Xenophon political party unless both your parents are working. Why are th

Senate, 2017-03-23. negative: ayes 27, noes 30.

Question

Sarah Hanson-Young The next amendment that I would like to move is on sheet 8110. This is in relation to the income threshold for the safety net. We have just now seen One Nation and the Nick Xenophon political party line up with the government to cut in half the access to child care for some of the country's most vulnerable children. We have just seen the Nick Xenophon political party slash in half care to vulnerable children overnight. We have seen the Nick Xenophon political party, One Nation and the government line up and say to those low-income families: 'It doesn't matter. It doesn't matter whether you struggle or whether you live in an area where there is massive unemployment, where you have been retrenched, where Holden has closed its doors, where Hazelwood Power Station has had to close or a rural or regional area where there just isn't job security. It doesn't matter about that. Because you don't have two people working your kids don't deserve proper access to child care.' Families have just been kicked in the guts tonight. They have lost 12 hours of care just like that, despite everything the experts have said and despite the promises that have previously been made. I do not think that the member for Mayo, Rebekha Sharkie, is going to be particularly happy when she has to go back to her electorate and explain that she was not able to keep her promise of protecting two days of child care for South Australian children. I do not think that families in Queensland, particularly those in rural and regional areas, are going to be particularly happy to hear that Pauline Hanson and One Nation have just kicked them in the guts. Their children, apparently, do not matter. Unless, as a child, your parents are both working, apparently your access to child care does not matter. You are not as valuable to this government; you are not as valuable to One Nation and you are not as valuable to the Nick Xenophon political party unless both your parents are working. Why are th

View original

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.