Division
The majority voted in favour of item (1) of [Government amendments](https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id:legislation/billhome/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Famend%2Fr6652_amend_49f1e4e9-d99c-4b80-84d4-3225e4f6491a%22;rec=0), which means it will now form part of the bill. South Australian Senator [Rex Patrick](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/sa/rex_patrick) (Independent) opposed item (1) and [explained that](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2021-02-24.274.1): > *It's a small amendment to what is a very significant bill, a very large bill. I would liken it to the two wires on the service module of Apollo 13. They might seem like just small wires, but after launch of this legislation we're going to find that it doesn't accomplish the mission. We're going to find that the Treasurer will simply be able to not designate Facebook and Google in accordance with the act. That would leave all of the small players, all of the regional players, without the ability to bargain properly against these very large digital companies, these foreign companies. We would, in effect, still have the very thing that Mr Rod Sims of the ACCC was most concerned about, which is a huge imbalance in power between Facebook, Google and the small players. So I would urge the chamber, when this is put, to reject item No. (1) of these amendments because it effectively undermines the whole bill.* ### Item (1) text > *(1) Schedule 1, item 1, page 8 (lines 10 to 13), omit subsection 52E(3), substitute:* > >> *(3) In making the determination, the Minister must consider:* >> >>> *(a) whether there is a significant bargaining power imbalance between Australian news businesses and the group comprised of the corporation and all of its related bodies corporate; and* >>> >>> *(b) whether that group has made a significant contribution to the sustainability of the Australian news industry through agreements relating to news content of Australian n
Senate, 2021-02-24. affirmative: ayes 33, noes 12.
Question
The majority voted in favour of item (1) of [Government amendments](https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id:legislation/billhome/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Famend%2Fr6652_amend_49f1e4e9-d99c-4b80-84d4-3225e4f6491a%22;rec=0), which means it will now form part of the bill. South Australian Senator [Rex Patrick](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/sa/rex_patrick) (Independent) opposed item (1) and [explained that](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2021-02-24.274.1): > *It's a small amendment to what is a very significant bill, a very large bill. I would liken it to the two wires on the service module of Apollo 13. They might seem like just small wires, but after launch of this legislation we're going to find that it doesn't accomplish the mission. We're going to find that the Treasurer will simply be able to not designate Facebook and Google in accordance with the act. That would leave all of the small players, all of the regional players, without the ability to bargain properly against these very large digital companies, these foreign companies. We would, in effect, still have the very thing that Mr Rod Sims of the ACCC was most concerned about, which is a huge imbalance in power between Facebook, Google and the small players. So I would urge the chamber, when this is put, to reject item No. (1) of these amendments because it effectively undermines the whole bill.* ### Item (1) text > *(1) Schedule 1, item 1, page 8 (lines 10 to 13), omit subsection 52E(3), substitute:* > >> *(3) In making the determination, the Minister must consider:* >> >>> *(a) whether there is a significant bargaining power imbalance between Australian news businesses and the group comprised of the corporation and all of its related bodies corporate; and* >>> >>> *(b) whether that group has made a significant contribution to the sustainability of the Australian news industry through agreements relating to news content of Australian n
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.