Division
The majority voted against an [amendment](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2023-08-01.5.8) to the usual second reading motion, which is "that the bill be read a second time" (parliamentary jargon for agreeing with the main idea of the bill). Because this vote was unsuccessful, the text set out below won't be added to the motion. The amendment was introduced by ACT Senator [David Pocock](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/act/david_pocock) (Independent). Note that these types of amendments don't make any legal changes, but instead are politically influential as they represent the will of the Senate. ### Amendment text > *At the end of the motion, add ", but the Senate:* > > *(a) notes that:* > >> *(i) the expert Economic Inclusion Advisory Committee (EIAC) found that the rates of social security payments for working age Australians are seriously inadequate and are creating barriers to paid work,* >> >> *(ii) the EIAC recommended the JobSeeker Payment, Youth Allowance and other related payments be raised to 90 per cent of the aged pension to restore a previous relativity between the payments, reduce financial stress in the community and improve the wellbeing and security of the most vulnerable Australians,* >> >> *(iii) the Albanese Government has rejected the expert advice of the EIAC and has chosen to raise the rates of income support by just $2.85 a day, before the payments are indexed,* >> >> *(iv) the Albanese Government has decided not to remove the Activity Test for the Child Care Subsidy, despite recommendations to do so by the EIAC and the Women's Economic Equality Taskforce given findings that it is perversely reducing economic inclusion, especially for women, and causing hardship for children,* >> >> *(v) the Albanese Government has chosen not to raise the age of eligibility for Parenting Payment (Single) to when a parent's youngest child turns 16 years-of-age, leaving over 18,000 single parents without access to the payment,* >> >> *(v
Senate, 2023-08-01. negative: ayes 10, noes 29.
Question
The majority voted against an [amendment](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2023-08-01.5.8) to the usual second reading motion, which is "that the bill be read a second time" (parliamentary jargon for agreeing with the main idea of the bill). Because this vote was unsuccessful, the text set out below won't be added to the motion. The amendment was introduced by ACT Senator [David Pocock](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/act/david_pocock) (Independent). Note that these types of amendments don't make any legal changes, but instead are politically influential as they represent the will of the Senate. ### Amendment text > *At the end of the motion, add ", but the Senate:* > > *(a) notes that:* > >> *(i) the expert Economic Inclusion Advisory Committee (EIAC) found that the rates of social security payments for working age Australians are seriously inadequate and are creating barriers to paid work,* >> >> *(ii) the EIAC recommended the JobSeeker Payment, Youth Allowance and other related payments be raised to 90 per cent of the aged pension to restore a previous relativity between the payments, reduce financial stress in the community and improve the wellbeing and security of the most vulnerable Australians,* >> >> *(iii) the Albanese Government has rejected the expert advice of the EIAC and has chosen to raise the rates of income support by just $2.85 a day, before the payments are indexed,* >> >> *(iv) the Albanese Government has decided not to remove the Activity Test for the Child Care Subsidy, despite recommendations to do so by the EIAC and the Women's Economic Equality Taskforce given findings that it is perversely reducing economic inclusion, especially for women, and causing hardship for children,* >> >> *(v) the Albanese Government has chosen not to raise the age of eligibility for Parenting Payment (Single) to when a parent's youngest child turns 16 years-of-age, leaving over 18,000 single parents without access to the payment,* >> >> *(v
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.