Division
The majority voted against a [request for amendment](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2025-09-01.82.1) moved by West Australian Senator [Fatima Payman](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/wa/fatima_payman) (Australia's Voice), which means it failed. Senator Payman [explained that](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2025-09-01.82.1): > *The amendment calls for the proposed general patient charge amount of $25 to be reduced to $20. The Pharmacy Guild advocated to reduce it to $19 for it to truly be effective for Australians who are struggling to put food on the table and pay for their medications. This would massively help them with affordability and the cost-of-living crisis.* ### Amendment text > *That the House of Representatives be requested to make the following amendment:* > > *(1) Schedule 1, item 1, page 3 (line 6), omit "$25.00", substitute "$20.00".* Statement pursuant to the order of the Senate of 26 June 2000 > *Amendment (1)* > >> *Amendment (1) is framed as a request because it amends the bill to further reduce the proposed general patient charge amount from $25.00 to $20.00. The amendment will increase expenditure to subsidise the cost of medicines above the general patient charge amount. The amendment would therefore increase the amount of Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme payments made from the Medicare Guarantee Fund (Health) Special Account.* >> >> *As the effect of this amendment is to increase payments made from the Medicare Guarantee Fund (Health) Special Account, it will increase expenditure under the standing appropriation in section 80 of the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 or in certain circumstances the standing appropriation in section 18 of the Medicare Guarantee Act 2017.* Statement by the Clerk of the Senate pursuant to the order of the Senate of 26 June 2000 > *Amendment (1)* > >> *If the effect of the amendment is to increase expenditure under a standing appropriation, then it is in
Senate, 2025-09-01. negative: ayes 15, noes 27.
Question
The majority voted against a [request for amendment](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2025-09-01.82.1) moved by West Australian Senator [Fatima Payman](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/wa/fatima_payman) (Australia's Voice), which means it failed. Senator Payman [explained that](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2025-09-01.82.1): > *The amendment calls for the proposed general patient charge amount of $25 to be reduced to $20. The Pharmacy Guild advocated to reduce it to $19 for it to truly be effective for Australians who are struggling to put food on the table and pay for their medications. This would massively help them with affordability and the cost-of-living crisis.* ### Amendment text > *That the House of Representatives be requested to make the following amendment:* > > *(1) Schedule 1, item 1, page 3 (line 6), omit "$25.00", substitute "$20.00".* Statement pursuant to the order of the Senate of 26 June 2000 > *Amendment (1)* > >> *Amendment (1) is framed as a request because it amends the bill to further reduce the proposed general patient charge amount from $25.00 to $20.00. The amendment will increase expenditure to subsidise the cost of medicines above the general patient charge amount. The amendment would therefore increase the amount of Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme payments made from the Medicare Guarantee Fund (Health) Special Account.* >> >> *As the effect of this amendment is to increase payments made from the Medicare Guarantee Fund (Health) Special Account, it will increase expenditure under the standing appropriation in section 80 of the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 or in certain circumstances the standing appropriation in section 18 of the Medicare Guarantee Act 2017.* Statement by the Clerk of the Senate pursuant to the order of the Senate of 26 June 2000 > *Amendment (1)* > >> *If the effect of the amendment is to increase expenditure under a standing appropriation, then it is in
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.