Division
The majority voted in favour of a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?id=2018-09-17.150.1) to keep schedule 1 unchanged. In parliamentary jargon they voted "Yes" to the question "*that schedule 1 stand as printed*". ### What is schedule 1? Schedule 1 relates to [competition in the financial system](https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1718a/18bd111). According to the [bills digest](https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1718a/18bd111): > *Item 1 of Schedule 1 inserts proposed subsection 1(2A) into the ASIC Act to require ASIC ... to consider the effects that the performance of its functions and the exercise of its powers will have on competition in the financial system. ASIC will be required to consider competition in conjunction with the elements in subsection 1(2), including to:* >> *(a) maintain, facilitate and improve the performance of the financial system and the entities within that system in the interests of commercial certainty, reducing business costs, and the efficiency and development of the economy.* > *ASIC is required to determine the weight it will give to competition based on the relevant circumstances. The measure is not designed to limit or expand the scope of ASIC’s regulatory responsibilities.* When [arguing that schedule 1 should be opposed](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?id=2018-09-17.150.1), Greens Senator [Peter Whish-Wilson](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/tasmania/peter_whish-wilson) said that: > *we [the Greens Party] don't believe we should be giving anything to ASIC at this stage. It's premature. The royal commission hasn't delivered its findings yet.*
Senate, 2018-09-17. affirmative: ayes 33, noes 10.
Question
The majority voted in favour of a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?id=2018-09-17.150.1) to keep schedule 1 unchanged. In parliamentary jargon they voted "Yes" to the question "*that schedule 1 stand as printed*". ### What is schedule 1? Schedule 1 relates to [competition in the financial system](https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1718a/18bd111). According to the [bills digest](https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1718a/18bd111): > *Item 1 of Schedule 1 inserts proposed subsection 1(2A) into the ASIC Act to require ASIC ... to consider the effects that the performance of its functions and the exercise of its powers will have on competition in the financial system. ASIC will be required to consider competition in conjunction with the elements in subsection 1(2), including to:* >> *(a) maintain, facilitate and improve the performance of the financial system and the entities within that system in the interests of commercial certainty, reducing business costs, and the efficiency and development of the economy.* > *ASIC is required to determine the weight it will give to competition based on the relevant circumstances. The measure is not designed to limit or expand the scope of ASIC’s regulatory responsibilities.* When [arguing that schedule 1 should be opposed](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?id=2018-09-17.150.1), Greens Senator [Peter Whish-Wilson](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/tasmania/peter_whish-wilson) said that: > *we [the Greens Party] don't believe we should be giving anything to ASIC at this stage. It's premature. The royal commission hasn't delivered its findings yet.*
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.