Division
**NOTE: Although it appears from [Hansard](https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/chamber/hansards/d636e948-ad32-4123-a451-4f3e200901fa/toc_pdf/Senate_2020_02_26_7549.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf) (PDF 2MB, pp 28-29) that this division is on the amendment set out below, the Greens are reported as voting against this division, which doesn't make sense if it was indeed a division on their own amendment.** --- The same number of senators voted for and against the [amendment](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2020-02-26.54.1) introduced by WA Senator [Rachel Siewert](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/wa/rachel_siewert) (Greens), which means it failed. Senator Siewert explained that: > *While I did hear the government say that they're going to review this, I think, and the Greens believe, that the matter needs to actually be in the legislation itself.* ### Amendment text > *(2) Page 2 (after line 14), after clause 3, insert:* > > *4 Public and independent review of this Act* > >> *(1) The Minister must cause an independent review to be conducted of the operation of the amendments made by this Act.* >> >> *(2) The review must start as soon as practicable after the end of 12 months after this Act commences.* >> >> *(3) The persons who conduct the review must give the Minister a written report of the review within 6 months of the commencement of the review.* >> >> *(4) The persons who conduct the review must consult:* >> >>> *(a) income support recipients impacted by the amendments made by this Act; and* >>> >>> *(b) any stakeholders considered relevant by the persons who conduct the review.* >> >> *(5) The review must provide for public submissions as part of the review.* >> >> *(6) The Minister must cause a copy of the report to be tabled in each House of the Parliament within 15 sitting days of that House after the report is given to the Minister.* >> >> *(7) In this section, Minister means the Minister administering the Social Security Act
Senate, 2020-02-26. negative: ayes 32, noes 32.
Question
**NOTE: Although it appears from [Hansard](https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/chamber/hansards/d636e948-ad32-4123-a451-4f3e200901fa/toc_pdf/Senate_2020_02_26_7549.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf) (PDF 2MB, pp 28-29) that this division is on the amendment set out below, the Greens are reported as voting against this division, which doesn't make sense if it was indeed a division on their own amendment.** --- The same number of senators voted for and against the [amendment](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2020-02-26.54.1) introduced by WA Senator [Rachel Siewert](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/wa/rachel_siewert) (Greens), which means it failed. Senator Siewert explained that: > *While I did hear the government say that they're going to review this, I think, and the Greens believe, that the matter needs to actually be in the legislation itself.* ### Amendment text > *(2) Page 2 (after line 14), after clause 3, insert:* > > *4 Public and independent review of this Act* > >> *(1) The Minister must cause an independent review to be conducted of the operation of the amendments made by this Act.* >> >> *(2) The review must start as soon as practicable after the end of 12 months after this Act commences.* >> >> *(3) The persons who conduct the review must give the Minister a written report of the review within 6 months of the commencement of the review.* >> >> *(4) The persons who conduct the review must consult:* >> >>> *(a) income support recipients impacted by the amendments made by this Act; and* >>> >>> *(b) any stakeholders considered relevant by the persons who conduct the review.* >> >> *(5) The review must provide for public submissions as part of the review.* >> >> *(6) The Minister must cause a copy of the report to be tabled in each House of the Parliament within 15 sitting days of that House after the report is given to the Minister.* >> >> *(7) In this section, Minister means the Minister administering the Social Security Act
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.