Division
George Brandis I table three supplementary explanatory memoranda relating to the government amendments to be moved to this bill and seek leave to move government amendments (1), (2) and (4) on sheet ZA429 together. Leave granted. The government opposes schedule 1 in the following terms: (1) Schedule 1, item 4, page 3 (lines 23 and 24), to be opposed. (2) Schedule 1, item 6, page 4 (lines 7 and 8), to be opposed. (4) Schedule 1, item 11, page 6 (line 28) to page 7 (line 11), to be opposed. I thank the members of the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee and, in particular, the chairman of the committee, the distinguished father of the Senate, Senator Macdonald, for their work in reviewing the bill. The committee's majority report contained two recommendations, the key recommendation being that the bill be passed. This reflects the significant uncertainty that the native title sector was faced with following the decision in McGlade, something I mentioned in closing the second reading debate last night. The government was urged by Indigenous and non-Indigenous stakeholders alike to address the ambiguous situation faced by the parties to an estimated 126 ILUAs following that decision. The committee's other recommendation is for the removal of two separate measures from the bill at this time, with the recommendation that they be considered in a later bill, involving government proposals arising from the 2015 Australian Law Reform Commission report _Connection to country: review of the Native Title Act_. The committee recommended that the proposed amendments to sections 251A and 251B of the act be removed. Those amendments, items 4 and 6 of schedule 1, would have permitted claim groups to authorise an ILUA and to make applications for compensation or the determination of native title by a traditional process or a method agreed upon by the group. These changes implemented recommendations 10-1 and 10-2 of the ALRC report. The Senate committee has taken the
Senate, 2017-06-14. negative: ayes 9, noes 38.
Question
George Brandis I table three supplementary explanatory memoranda relating to the government amendments to be moved to this bill and seek leave to move government amendments (1), (2) and (4) on sheet ZA429 together. Leave granted. The government opposes schedule 1 in the following terms: (1) Schedule 1, item 4, page 3 (lines 23 and 24), to be opposed. (2) Schedule 1, item 6, page 4 (lines 7 and 8), to be opposed. (4) Schedule 1, item 11, page 6 (line 28) to page 7 (line 11), to be opposed. I thank the members of the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee and, in particular, the chairman of the committee, the distinguished father of the Senate, Senator Macdonald, for their work in reviewing the bill. The committee's majority report contained two recommendations, the key recommendation being that the bill be passed. This reflects the significant uncertainty that the native title sector was faced with following the decision in McGlade, something I mentioned in closing the second reading debate last night. The government was urged by Indigenous and non-Indigenous stakeholders alike to address the ambiguous situation faced by the parties to an estimated 126 ILUAs following that decision. The committee's other recommendation is for the removal of two separate measures from the bill at this time, with the recommendation that they be considered in a later bill, involving government proposals arising from the 2015 Australian Law Reform Commission report _Connection to country: review of the Native Title Act_. The committee recommended that the proposed amendments to sections 251A and 251B of the act be removed. Those amendments, items 4 and 6 of schedule 1, would have permitted claim groups to authorise an ILUA and to make applications for compensation or the determination of native title by a traditional process or a method agreed upon by the group. These changes implemented recommendations 10-1 and 10-2 of the ALRC report. The Senate committee has taken the
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.