Division
The majority voted in favour of a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?id=2026-02-05.46.2) to agree with the bill's main idea. In parliamentary jargon, they voted to read the bill for a second time. This means they can now discuss the bill in greater detail. ### What does this bill do? According to the [bills digest](https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd2526/26bd023), which is a document put together by the parliamentary library: > *The security situation in the Indo–Pacific region is challenging and deteriorating. Australian defence spending and activity is increasing in response. Due to security risks, an increasing number of defence matters cannot be properly scrutinised in public hearings of the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade (JSCFADT).* > > *The Defence Amendment (Parliamentary Joint Committee on Defence) Bill 2025 (the Bill) proposes a Parliamentary Joint Committee on Defence (the Committee), to take on JSCFADT’s Defence-related functions. The Committee is modelled on the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security (PJCIS).* > > *A Bill in very similar terms, the Defence Amendment (Parliamentary Joint Committee on Defence) Bill 2024 (the 2024 Bill), was introduced to the 47th Parliament but negatived at third reading in the Senate. Despite proposal of a number of amendments, consensus could not be reached on Committee membership.* > > *There are very few changes from the 2024 Bill and those changes are technical rather than substantive. In particular, the membership provisions are unchanged.* > > *At the time of writing, the Bill had not been referred to or reported on by any parliamentary committees. However, the 2024 Bill was considered by the Senate Scrutiny of Bills Committee and the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights. Those committees raised concerns relating to:* > > * *whether it is appropriate for the executive to be able to limit a parliamentary comm
Senate, 2026-02-05. affirmative: ayes 31, noes 10.
Question
The majority voted in favour of a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?id=2026-02-05.46.2) to agree with the bill's main idea. In parliamentary jargon, they voted to read the bill for a second time. This means they can now discuss the bill in greater detail. ### What does this bill do? According to the [bills digest](https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd2526/26bd023), which is a document put together by the parliamentary library: > *The security situation in the Indo–Pacific region is challenging and deteriorating. Australian defence spending and activity is increasing in response. Due to security risks, an increasing number of defence matters cannot be properly scrutinised in public hearings of the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade (JSCFADT).* > > *The Defence Amendment (Parliamentary Joint Committee on Defence) Bill 2025 (the Bill) proposes a Parliamentary Joint Committee on Defence (the Committee), to take on JSCFADT’s Defence-related functions. The Committee is modelled on the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security (PJCIS).* > > *A Bill in very similar terms, the Defence Amendment (Parliamentary Joint Committee on Defence) Bill 2024 (the 2024 Bill), was introduced to the 47th Parliament but negatived at third reading in the Senate. Despite proposal of a number of amendments, consensus could not be reached on Committee membership.* > > *There are very few changes from the 2024 Bill and those changes are technical rather than substantive. In particular, the membership provisions are unchanged.* > > *At the time of writing, the Bill had not been referred to or reported on by any parliamentary committees. However, the 2024 Bill was considered by the Senate Scrutiny of Bills Committee and the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights. Those committees raised concerns relating to:* > > * *whether it is appropriate for the executive to be able to limit a parliamentary comm
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.