Division
The majority voted against [amendment (1) on sheet 1851 and amendments (1) to (12) on sheet 1815](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2023-03-22.367.1) introduced by ACT Senator [David Pocock](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/act/david_pocock) (Independent), which means they failed. ### What would the amendments have done? Senator Pocock [explained that](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2023-03-22.367.1): > *The first one is about simply having an exclusion zone around polling booths. This is done in Tasmania and the ACT. It works very effectively in taking the heat out of polling booths. In my opinion it's a much nicer experience for voters. Given the sensitivity of this referendum and some of the rhetoric we are already hearing, I believe it is a sensible amendment to ensure that people are safe when they're casting their vote.* > > *The amendments on sheet 1815 truncate the disclosure time frame. To me it's frankly ridiculous in 2023 that, six months after an election, we find out who funded it. We have plenty of technology to be able to do that in a much more timely manner. I'm proposing seven days to disclose, seven days to make that public. I understand the government's reason—that they're waiting for JSCEM [Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters] —but this is something that we know Australians want and something we have the technology to do, and it's disappointing not to have support for a sensible amendment like that.*
Senate, 2023-03-22. negative: ayes 17, noes 27.
Question
The majority voted against [amendment (1) on sheet 1851 and amendments (1) to (12) on sheet 1815](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2023-03-22.367.1) introduced by ACT Senator [David Pocock](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/act/david_pocock) (Independent), which means they failed. ### What would the amendments have done? Senator Pocock [explained that](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2023-03-22.367.1): > *The first one is about simply having an exclusion zone around polling booths. This is done in Tasmania and the ACT. It works very effectively in taking the heat out of polling booths. In my opinion it's a much nicer experience for voters. Given the sensitivity of this referendum and some of the rhetoric we are already hearing, I believe it is a sensible amendment to ensure that people are safe when they're casting their vote.* > > *The amendments on sheet 1815 truncate the disclosure time frame. To me it's frankly ridiculous in 2023 that, six months after an election, we find out who funded it. We have plenty of technology to be able to do that in a much more timely manner. I'm proposing seven days to disclose, seven days to make that public. I understand the government's reason—that they're waiting for JSCEM [Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters] —but this is something that we know Australians want and something we have the technology to do, and it's disappointing not to have support for a sensible amendment like that.*
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.