Division Description Changes — Bills — Commonwealth Inscribed Stock Amendment Bill 2013; Consideration of Senate Message — 14th Nov 2013

All changes made to the description and title of this division.

View division | Edit description

Change	Division
representatives vote 2013-11-14#3 Edited by mackay staff on 2014-10-09 15:38:34	Title Description The majority voted in favour of a [motion](http://www.openaustralia.org/debates/?id=2013-11-14.87.2) to disagree with an amendment that would change the proposed rise in the debt ceiling from $500 billion to $400 billion instead. ~~Someone who voted aye to the motion disagreed with the amendment. The majority voted aye, so the amendment was unsuccessful.~~ This amendment was attached to the bill when it was returned from the Senate. The majority of senators had agreed with the amendment.(See the division in which the senators agreed to this amendment [here](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/division.php?date=2013-11-14&number=10&dmp=13&house=senate). ) Since it has been rejected in the House of Representatives, the bill will be returned to the Senate and they will decide whether they will insist on the amendment or not. If they do, it is likely that the bill will fail unless a compromise is found. If they do not insist on it, then it is likely the bill will be passed with an increased debt ceiling of $500 billion. ~~_Background to Bill_~~ On 22 October 2013, the Abbott Government announced that it will raise the debt ceiling from $300 billion to $500 billion.(Read more about this in the media [here](http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/treasurer-joe-hockey-announces-debt-limit-to-increase-to-500-billion-20131022-2vyog.html). ) This was following the August 2013 [Pre-Election Economic and Fiscal Outlook](http://www.treasury.gov.au/PublicationsAndMedia/Publications/2013/PEFO-2013) which reported that the Treasurer's standing borrowing authority would reach the $300 billion limit by December 2013. The purpose of the increase to the debt ceiling is to "provide stability and certainty to financial markets about the Government's ability to issue sufficient debt to manage its budget".(See the [explanatory memorandum](http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r5127_ems_dfe1d5b2-bd7c-424c-afc8-efdd37c905b1/upload_pdf/388079.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf) (106 KB). More about the bill, including its bills digest, is available [here](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r5127).) ~~References~~ The majority voted in favour of a [motion](http://www.openaustralia.org/debates/?id=2013-11-14.87.2) to disagree with an amendment that would change the proposed rise in the debt ceiling from $500 billion to $400 billion instead. Someone who voted aye to the motion disagreed with the amendment. The majority voted aye, so the amendment was unsuccessful. This amendment was attached to the bill when it was returned from the Senate. The majority of senators had agreed with the amendment.(See the division in which the senators agreed to this amendment [here](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/division.php?date=2013-11-14&number=10&dmp=13&house=senate). ) Since it has been rejected in the House of Representatives, the bill will be returned to the Senate and they will decide whether they will insist on the amendment or not. If they do, it is likely that the bill will fail unless a compromise is found. If they do not insist on it, then it is likely the bill will be passed with an increased debt ceiling of $500 billion. _Background to Bill_ On 22 October 2013, the Abbott Government announced that it will raise the debt ceiling from $300 billion to $500 billion.(Read more about this in the media [here](http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/treasurer-joe-hockey-announces-debt-limit-to-increase-to-500-billion-20131022-2vyog.html). ) This was following the August 2013 [Pre-Election Economic and Fiscal Outlook](http://www.treasury.gov.au/PublicationsAndMedia/Publications/2013/PEFO-2013) which reported that the Treasurer's standing borrowing authority would reach the $300 billion limit by December 2013. The purpose of the increase to the debt ceiling is to "provide stability and certainty to financial markets about the Government's ability to issue sufficient debt to manage its budget".(See the [explanatory memorandum](http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r5127_ems_dfe1d5b2-bd7c-424c-afc8-efdd37c905b1/upload_pdf/388079.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf) (106 KB). More about the bill, including its bills digest, is available [here](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r5127).)
representatives vote 2013-11-14#3 Edited by system on 2014-10-07 16:21:24	Title Description The majority voted in favour of a [http://www.openaustralia.org/debates/?id=2013-11-14.87.2 motion] to disagree with an amendment that would change the proposed rise in the debt ceiling from $500 billion to $400 billion instead. ~~Someone who voted aye to the motion disagreed with the amendment. The majority voted aye, so the amendment was unsuccessful.~~ This amendment was attached to the bill when it was returned from the Senate. The majority of senators had agreed with the amendment.(See the division in which the senators agreed to this amendment [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/division.php?date=2013-11-14&number=10&dmp=13&house=senate here]. ) Since it has been rejected in the House of Representatives, the bill will be returned to the Senate and they will decide whether they will insist on the amendment or not. If they do, it is likely that the bill will fail unless a compromise is found. If they do not insist on it, then it is likely the bill will be passed with an increased debt ceiling of $500 billion. ~~''Background to Bill''~~ On 22 October 2013, the Abbott Government announced that it will raise the debt ceiling from $300 billion to $500 billion.(Read more about this in the media [http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/treasurer-joe-hockey-announces-debt-limit-to-increase-to-500-billion-20131022-2vyog.html here]. ) This was following the August 2013 [http://www.treasury.gov.au/PublicationsAndMedia/Publications/2013/PEFO-2013 Pre-Election Economic and Fiscal Outlook] which reported that the Treasurer's standing borrowing authority would reach the $300 billion limit by December 2013. The purpose of the increase to the debt ceiling is to "provide stability and certainty to financial markets about the Government's ability to issue sufficient debt to manage its budget".(See the [http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r5127_ems_dfe1d5b2-bd7c-424c-afc8-efdd37c905b1/upload_pdf/388079.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf explanatory memorandum] (106 KB). More about the bill, including its bills digest, is available [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r5127 here].) ~~References~~ The majority voted in favour of a [motion](http://www.openaustralia.org/debates/?id=2013-11-14.87.2) to disagree with an amendment that would change the proposed rise in the debt ceiling from $500 billion to $400 billion instead. Someone who voted aye to the motion disagreed with the amendment. The majority voted aye, so the amendment was unsuccessful. This amendment was attached to the bill when it was returned from the Senate. The majority of senators had agreed with the amendment.(See the division in which the senators agreed to this amendment [here](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/division.php?date=2013-11-14&number=10&dmp=13&house=senate). ) Since it has been rejected in the House of Representatives, the bill will be returned to the Senate and they will decide whether they will insist on the amendment or not. If they do, it is likely that the bill will fail unless a compromise is found. If they do not insist on it, then it is likely the bill will be passed with an increased debt ceiling of $500 billion. _Background to Bill_ On 22 October 2013, the Abbott Government announced that it will raise the debt ceiling from $300 billion to $500 billion.(Read more about this in the media [here](http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/treasurer-joe-hockey-announces-debt-limit-to-increase-to-500-billion-20131022-2vyog.html). ) This was following the August 2013 [Pre-Election Economic and Fiscal Outlook](http://www.treasury.gov.au/PublicationsAndMedia/Publications/2013/PEFO-2013) which reported that the Treasurer's standing borrowing authority would reach the $300 billion limit by December 2013. The purpose of the increase to the debt ceiling is to "provide stability and certainty to financial markets about the Government's ability to issue sufficient debt to manage its budget".(See the [explanatory memorandum](http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r5127_ems_dfe1d5b2-bd7c-424c-afc8-efdd37c905b1/upload_pdf/388079.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf) (106 KB). More about the bill, including its bills digest, is available [here](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r5127).) References
representatives vote 2013-11-14#3 Edited by system on 2014-10-07 16:16:56	Title Description The majority voted in favour of a [http://www.openaustralia.org/debates/?id=2013-11-14.87.2 motion] to disagree with an amendment that would change the proposed rise in the debt ceiling from $500 billion to $400 billion instead. Someone who voted aye to the motion disagreed with the amendment. The majority voted aye, so the amendment was unsuccessful. This amendment was attached to the bill when it was returned from the Senate. The majority of senators had agreed with the amendment.[1] Since it has been rejected in the House of Representatives, the bill will be returned to the Senate and they will decide whether they will insist on the amendment or not. If they do, it is likely that the bill will fail unless a compromise is found. If they do not insist on it, then it is likely the bill will be passed with an increased debt ceiling of $500 billion. This amendment was attached to the bill when it was returned from the Senate. The majority of senators had agreed with the amendment.(See the division in which the senators agreed to this amendment [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/division.php?date=2013-11-14&number=10&dmp=13&house=senate here]. ) Since it has been rejected in the House of Representatives, the bill will be returned to the Senate and they will decide whether they will insist on the amendment or not. If they do, it is likely that the bill will fail unless a compromise is found. If they do not insist on it, then it is likely the bill will be passed with an increased debt ceiling of $500 billion. ''Background to Bill'' On 22 October 2013, the Abbott Government announced that it will raise the debt ceiling from $300 billion to $500 billion.[2] This was following the August 2013 [http://www.treasury.gov.au/PublicationsAndMedia/Publications/2013/PEFO-2013 Pre-Election Economic and Fiscal Outlook] which reported that the Treasurer's standing borrowing authority would reach the $300 billion limit by December 2013. On 22 October 2013, the Abbott Government announced that it will raise the debt ceiling from $300 billion to $500 billion.(Read more about this in the media [http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/treasurer-joe-hockey-announces-debt-limit-to-increase-to-500-billion-20131022-2vyog.html here]. ) This was following the August 2013 [http://www.treasury.gov.au/PublicationsAndMedia/Publications/2013/PEFO-2013 Pre-Election Economic and Fiscal Outlook] which reported that the Treasurer's standing borrowing authority would reach the $300 billion limit by December 2013. ~~The purpose of the increase to the debt ceiling is to "provide stability and certainty to financial markets about the Government's ability to issue sufficient debt to manage its budget".[3]~~ The purpose of the increase to the debt ceiling is to "provide stability and certainty to financial markets about the Government's ability to issue sufficient debt to manage its budget".(See the [http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r5127_ems_dfe1d5b2-bd7c-424c-afc8-efdd37c905b1/upload_pdf/388079.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf explanatory memorandum] (106 KB). More about the bill, including its bills digest, is available [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r5127 here].) References * [1] See the division in which the senators agreed to this amendment [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/division.php?date=2013-11-14&number=10&dmp=13&house=senate here]. * [2] Read more about this in the media [http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/treasurer-joe-hockey-announces-debt-limit-to-increase-to-500-billion-20131022-2vyog.html here]. * [3] See the [http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r5127_ems_dfe1d5b2-bd7c-424c-afc8-efdd37c905b1/upload_pdf/388079.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf explanatory memorandum] (106 KB). More about the bill, including its bills digest, is available [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r5127 here].
representatives vote 2013-11-14#3 Edited by mackay staff on 2014-03-05 12:34:59	Title Description The majority voted in favour of a [http://www.openaustralia.org/debates/?id=2013-11-14.87.2 motion] to disagree with an amendment that would change the proposed rise in the debt ceiling from $500 billion to $400 billion instead. Someone who voted aye to the motion disagreed with the amendment. The majority voted aye, so the amendment was unsuccessful. This amendment was attached to the bill when it was returned from the Senate. The majority of senators had agreed with the amendment.[1] Since it has been rejected in the House of Representatives, the bill will be returned to the Senate and they will decide whether they will insist on the amendment or not. If they do, it is likely that the bill will fail unless a compromise is found. If they do not insist on it, then it is likely the bill will be passed with an increased debt ceiling of $500 billion. ''Background to Bill'' On 22 October 2013, the Abbott Government announced that it will raise the debt ceiling from $300 billion to $500 billion.[2] This was following the August 2013 [http://www.treasury.gov.au/PublicationsAndMedia/Publications/2013/PEFO-2013 Pre-Election Economic and Fiscal Outlook] which reported that the Treasurer's standing borrowing authority would reach the $300 billion limit by December 2013. The purpose of the increase to the debt ceiling is to "provide stability and certainty to financial markets about the Government's ability to issue sufficient debt to manage its budget".[3] References * [1] See the division in which the senators agreed to this amendment [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/division.php?date=2013-11-14&number=10&dmp=13&house=senate here]. * [2] Read about this amendment in the media [http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/treasurer-joe-hockey-announces-debt-limit-to-increase-to-500-billion-20131022-2vyog.html here]. * [2] Read more about this in the media [http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/treasurer-joe-hockey-announces-debt-limit-to-increase-to-500-billion-20131022-2vyog.html here]. * [3] See the [http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r5127_ems_dfe1d5b2-bd7c-424c-afc8-efdd37c905b1/upload_pdf/388079.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf explanatory memorandum] (106 KB). More about the bill, including its bills digest, is available [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r5127 here].
representatives vote 2013-11-14#3 Edited by mackay staff on 2014-03-03 12:17:02	Title Description The majority voted in favour of a [http://www.openaustralia.org/debates/?id=2013-11-14.87.2 motion] to disagree with an amendment that would change the proposed rise in the debt ceiling from $500 billion to $400 billion instead. Someone who voted aye to the motion disagreed with the amendment. The majority voted aye, so the amendment was unsuccessful. This amendment was attached to the bill when it was returned from the Senate. The majority of senators had agreed with the amendment.[1] Since it has been rejected in the House of Representatives, the bill will be returned to the Senate and they will decide whether they will insist on the amendment or not. If they do, it is likely that the bill will fail unless a compromise is found. If they do not, then it is likely the bill will be passed with an increased debt ceiling of $500 billion. This amendment was attached to the bill when it was returned from the Senate. The majority of senators had agreed with the amendment.[1] Since it has been rejected in the House of Representatives, the bill will be returned to the Senate and they will decide whether they will insist on the amendment or not. If they do, it is likely that the bill will fail unless a compromise is found. If they do not insist on it, then it is likely the bill will be passed with an increased debt ceiling of $500 billion. ''Background to Bill'' On 22 October 2013, the Abbott Government announced that it will raise the debt ceiling from $300 billion to $500 billion.[2] This was following the August 2013 [http://www.treasury.gov.au/PublicationsAndMedia/Publications/2013/PEFO-2013 Pre-Election Economic and Fiscal Outlook] which reported that the Treasurer's standing borrowing authority would reach the $300 billion limit by December 2013. The purpose of the increase to the debt ceiling is to "provide stability and certainty to financial markets about the Government's ability to issue sufficient debt to manage its budget".[3] References * [1] See the division in which the senators agreed to this amendment [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/division.php?date=2013-11-14&number=10&dmp=13&house=senate here]. * [2] Read about this amendment in the media [http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/treasurer-joe-hockey-announces-debt-limit-to-increase-to-500-billion-20131022-2vyog.html here]. * [3] See the [http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r5127_ems_dfe1d5b2-bd7c-424c-afc8-efdd37c905b1/upload_pdf/388079.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf explanatory memorandum] (106 KB). More about the bill, including its bills digest, is available [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r5127 here].
representatives vote 2013-11-14#3 Edited by mackay staff on 2014-03-03 12:15:06	Title Bills - Commonwealth Inscribed Stock Amendment Bill 2013; Consideration of Senate Message Commonwealth Inscribed Stock Amendment Bill 2013 - Consideration of Senate Message - Debt ceiling of $400 billion Description ~~<p> The aye votes succeeded in disagreeing to an amendment that proposed that the debt ceiling should be increased to $400 billion and not $500 billion. </p>~~ <p> Someone who votes aye in this amendment supports these measure to disagree to the amendment. The majority voted aye to this amendment so it was successful. </p> The majority voted in favour of a [http://www.openaustralia.org/debates/?id=2013-11-14.87.2 motion] to disagree with an amendment that would change the proposed rise in the debt ceiling from $500 billion to $400 billion instead. ~~<p><b>Background to Bill</p></b>~~ <p>On 22 October 2013 the Abbott government announced that they will <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/treasurer-joe-hockey-announces-debt-limit-to-increase-to-500-billion-20131022-2vyog.html">raise the debt ceiling</a> from $300 billion to $500 billion. This was following the August 2013 Pre-Election Economic and Fiscal Outlook which reported that the Treasurer's standing borrowing authority would reach the $300 billion limit by December 2013. </p> Someone who voted aye to the motion disagreed with the amendment. The majority voted aye, so the amendment was unsuccessful. <p>In the <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r5127_ems_dfe1d5b2-bd7c-424c-afc8-efdd37c905b1/upload_pdf/388079.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf">explanatory memorandum</a> for this legislation it was noted that this increase was to 'provide stability and certainty to financial markets about the Government's ability to issue sufficient debt to manage its budget'. </p> This amendment was attached to the bill when it was returned from the Senate. The majority of senators had agreed with the amendment.[1] Since it has been rejected in the House of Representatives, the bill will be returned to the Senate and they will decide whether they will insist on the amendment or not. If they do, it is likely that the bill will fail unless a compromise is found. If they do not, then it is likely the bill will be passed with an increased debt ceiling of $500 billion. ~~<p><b>Summary of debate in Parliament</p></b>~~ ''Background to Bill'' ~~<ul><li>Treasurer Joe Hockey MP stated that $400 billion was not enough, and that $500 billion 'is the appropriate level to deal with a legacy of Labor debt'.</li>~~ ~~<li>Shadow Treasurer Chris Bowen criticised the Treasurer for not realising briefs. He also talked about when the $400 debt limit would be reached. </li>~~ <li>In response, Treasurer Joe Hockey criticised the Opposition for having a debt limit lower than what debt was projected to reach. </li> ~~<li>Labor MP Andrew Leigh criticised the Treasurer and came back to the main point that $400 billion was a more reasonable amount. </li></ul>~~ On 22 October 2013, the Abbott Government announced that it will raise the debt ceiling from $300 billion to $500 billion.[2] This was following the August 2013 [http://www.treasury.gov.au/PublicationsAndMedia/Publications/2013/PEFO-2013 Pre-Election Economic and Fiscal Outlook] which reported that the Treasurer's standing borrowing authority would reach the $300 billion limit by December 2013. The purpose of the increase to the debt ceiling is to "provide stability and certainty to financial markets about the Government's ability to issue sufficient debt to manage its budget".[3] References * [1] See the division in which the senators agreed to this amendment [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/division.php?date=2013-11-14&number=10&dmp=13&house=senate here]. * [2] Read about this amendment in the media [http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/treasurer-joe-hockey-announces-debt-limit-to-increase-to-500-billion-20131022-2vyog.html here]. * [3] See the [http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r5127_ems_dfe1d5b2-bd7c-424c-afc8-efdd37c905b1/upload_pdf/388079.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf explanatory memorandum] (106 KB). More about the bill, including its bills digest, is available [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r5127 here].
representatives vote 2013-11-14#3 Edited by Natasha Burrows on 2013-11-19 15:31:24	Title Description
representatives vote 2013-11-14#3 Edited by Natasha Burrows on 2013-11-19 15:31:09	Title ~~Bills — Commonwealth Inscribed Stock Amendment Bill 2013; Consideration of Senate Message~~ Bills - Commonwealth Inscribed Stock Amendment Bill 2013; Consideration of Senate Message Description ~~<p class="speaker">Joe Hockey</p>~~ ~~<p>I move:</p>~~ ~~<p class="italic">That the amendment be disagreed to.</p>~~ <p>The opposition and the Greens have said there is no compelling evidence to have a debt limit of $500 billion and that, rather, there should be a debt limit of $400 billion. I table today the economic statement from the member for McMahon that says debt is going to peak at $370 billion. I table today the executive minute from the Australian Office of Financial Management that says that it would be 'prudent from an operational perspective to set it'—the debt cap—'at a level $40 billion to $60 billion higher—</p> ~~<p class="italic">Ms Owens interjecting—</p>~~ ~~<p>than the peak projected within year CGS'.</p>~~ ~~<p class="speaker">Bruce Scott</p>~~ <p>The member for Parramatta is grossly disorderly.</p> ~~<p class="speaker">Joe Hockey</p>~~ <p>Three hundred and seventy plus 60 equals 430—$430 billion.</p> ~~<p class="italic">Ms Owens interjecting—</p>~~ ~~<p class="speaker">Bruce Scott</p>~~ ~~<p>Member for Parramatta, you are interjecting outside of your place in this chamber.</p>~~ ~~<p class="speaker">Joe Hockey</p>~~ <p>I further add the point that the Labor Party has now declared it is voting against our mining tax repeal package, which reduces the debt by $13½ billion. The opposition have said that they are going to oppose our abolition of the CEFC, the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, which also reduces the debt. The total of the mining tax and CEFC abolition is going to reduce the debt by $20 billion, so that adds $20 billion. The Labor Party failed to deal with the challenges at the Reserve Bank and we had to borrow $8.8 billion to go into that. When you add it all up—and it is on the public record—that well exceeds $400 billion. That is a legacy of Labor.</p> <p>But wait—there's more. As the Reserve Bank identified only last week, growth figures for next year are being downgraded, which will have a negative impact on revenues, which will have a negative impact on the budget. But wait—there's more. As you open each cupboard door in relation to the budget—whether it be the ACCC or one of any number of other areas which will soon be identified and revealed—you will find that $500 billion, including a cap, is the appropriate level to deal with the legacy of Labor debt.</p> <p>The thing is that, whenever the Labor Party released an economic statement, they got the numbers wrong—absolutely wrong. We will not do that. We will not release the Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook until the September national accounts have come in, at the beginning of December. What a revelation that is! The Labor Party always tended to release those figures before they had released the September national accounts, and that is one of the reasons why they always got the numbers wrong. So we are taking the prudent approach. We are fixing up the mess. We are identifying right across the budget where the problems are. We are dealing with the legacy of Labor's debt. It is all on the public record. This chamber is the public record. Now the challenge is for the Labor Party to deal with it.</p> <p>The Labor Party are running around saying that under the Abbott opposition we opposed increasing the debt limit. They are just dead wrong. I know the member for McMahon was never actually in the Senate, but what he does not understand is that we did move a procedural motion in the Senate to separate out the debate on the debt limit but it was rejected by the Senate. It was a procedural motion. We never voted against the debt limit. If Labor did not understand the challenges in relation to the debt limit when they were in government, how can we expect them to understand the challenges from opposition?</p> <p>I am saying this to the Labor Party: on 12 December Australia reaches the $300 billion debt limit that Labor left. The Senate is going to have a bill before it to have the debt limit increased to $500 billion. That is Labor's legacy. The $500 billion is not a target; it is a limit. We do not want to get there, but I tell you what: we are not going to put the stability of the markets and the stability of the CGS program at risk as a result of Labor's incompetence in opposition.</p> ~~<p class="speaker">Chris Bowen</p>~~ <p>We were promised a government of no excuses. We were promised a government of no surprises. We were promised a government with the adults in charge. And we get this childish performance from this trainee Treasurer. The Treasurer could have a debt limit increase right now. We could vote on this and we could have a debt limit increase right now. We voted on this last night and we supported a debt limit increase. But the Liberal Party will insist on transparency and we will insist on a lot more transparency than we are getting from this Treasurer—this Treasurer who is refusing to release the mid-year economic forecast as well as the incoming government brief, this Treasurer who stood at that dispatch box yesterday and said, 'I'd love to release the Reserve Bank documents,' this Treasurer who stood at that dispatch box yesterday and said, 'I'd love to release the request from the Reserve Bank for $8.8 billion.' It was FOIed and rejected. And today at two o'clock the government was obliged to table before the Senate the correspondence from the Reserve Bank, and the government has failed. The government is in breach of a Senate order.</p> <p>What have you got to hide? Why are you going to such lengths to be so duplicitous with the Australian people and not release the request from the Reserve Bank for $8.8 billion? You say the Reserve Bank asked for $8.8 billion this year. Well, show us the request. It is nice and simple. Did they request it? Show us the request. Do not hide behind a breach of a Senate order. We just saw in question time—the second question time of the parliament—an amazing contempt of the parliament. When you are in contempt of the parliament, you are in contempt of the people. This Treasurer is in contempt of the parliament and the people. What have you got to hide?</p> <p>The Reserve Bank transfer of $8.8 billion, of course, increases this year's deficit by that amount. But it goes much further than that. It increases the level of interest required by more than $1 billion over the next four years. Not only has the Treasurer declined to outlined the reasons for that; he has outright refused to release the documentation in breach of an order of one of the houses of the Australian parliament. What levels will you go to to hide the facts from the Australian people?</p> <p>Let us be very clear: there is only one person talking about a crisis here; there is only one person talking about a shutdown of the government; there is only one person talking about a breach in the debt limit—that man there. The only person who is trying to confect a political crisis here is the Treasurer, because he could have a debt limit increase right now, today, of $100 billion. It is not a small amount, not a trifling amount. Does the Treasurer think for one second that he can argue that $400 billion would not be enough to get through to next year? Senator Sinodinos was asked in the other place: 'When will $400 million be breached?' He said, 'Oh, sometime over the forward estimates.' As I outlined to the House yesterday, the Australian Office of Financial Management has made clear that it issues bonds only for the budget year in question.</p> <p>We are more than happy to work cooperatively with the government if they are up-front with the Australian people, if they reveal the impact of their decisions—of this man's decisions—since the election and if there is much more transparency to go with it. Before the election we heard all about the need for transparency when it came to increases in the debt cap. We heard the now Prime Minister—who went on 2GB, for a change, to do an interview—say:</p> <p class="italic">… the Government has to justify this. Our money, our future, is too important to be mortgaged like this without the Government giving us the strongest possible arguments for it, because every dollar that they borrow has got to be repaid.</p> <p>I have got news for the Treasurer. This is actually a hung parliament. The government has a big majority in this House but no majority in that house. A hung parliament requires a bit of cooperation, a bit of negotiation and a bit of transparency. It does not mean being arrogant. It does not mean saying, 'My debt limit or no debt limit.' It does not mean chest beating. It does not mean political stunts. It does not mean saying, 'You'll wear this like a crown of thorns.' It means being responsible, open, transparent and constructive—something this Treasurer is just not capable of.</p> ~~<p class="speaker">Joe Hockey</p>~~ <p>Let me deal with a couple of issues here. The shadow Treasurer talks about being open and honest and responsible. Why did the Labor Party have a $300 billion debt limit when they forecast in the budget the debt would go to $370 billion? Why would you go out and buy a house and finance it on the basis that you will be able to raise $200,000 of debt but the bank will only give you $100,000? Why would you do that? Why would the Labor Party do that? Because they do not understand the implications of what they are doing.</p> <p>I want to give you this promise. I will not bring down a budget that has projected debt that is greater than the debt limit. I will not do that. As you know, the AOFM has advised that you need to have a buffer of $40 billion to $60 billion for refinancing purposes. You do not even understand that. You just said they only ever issue for the year they have got to fund, but actually they have also got a whole lot of other challenges in funding as well, including off-budget funding. I really wonder about this.</p> <p>In relation to the Reserve Bank, yes, I accept responsibility for the decision on behalf of the government. We do not need to hide behind advice. The Governor of the Reserve Bank will appear before the House Standing Committee on Economics, and you can ask the Governor of the Reserve Bank about that. Then you can ask the Secretary of the Treasury before estimates next week about the debt limit, and you can ask him about the advice that might have been provided to the government in relation to the Reserve Bank Reserve Fund.</p> <p>But we are not going to be like your government in a whole lot of areas. One of the areas we are not going to be the same as you were is that we are not going to hide behind the advice. We are going to say, 'We accept responsibility for this decision, and this decision is in the interests of the nation.' That is how we are going to behave.</p> <p>So, if you want to argue about the Reserve Bank Reserve Fund funding, let us argue about it. You tell me why they should not have that money, why the Reserve Bank Reserve Fund should be at 3.8 per cent. You explain that. You explain why the Reserve Bank should be in a position where it cannot deliver dividends for as far as the eye can see and why it has to work damned hard to replenish the Reserve Bank Reserve Fund in the face of potential headwinds coming out of Europe and the United States. You explain that to the Australian people. If that is your policy position, you explain it. But, when it comes to process, Labor are hiding behind a fig leaf, because they always treated the debt limit as a debt target. Last night I could not sleep too well and I wondered who the hell introduced that $75 billion debt limit in the first place. It was old buggerlugs. How about that!</p> ~~<p>And do you know what he said to the parliament when he introduced the $75 billion debt limit? He said, 'This government doesn't need to raise debt to finance its spending.'</p>~~ ~~<p class="italic">Mr Bowen interjecting—</p>~~ <p>I haven't finished with you! You were the one who introduced the $75 billion debt limit. And then, just weeks before the election, he announces that the debt is going to $370 billion. But he wants us to be in a position where the can is kicked down the road.</p> <p>We will not go down the path of the United States. We will not have the parliament kick the can down the road for another moment of attention, if it needs to come to that, to deal with the debt limit. We will not allow that to happen, because we are offering the Australian people stability and certainty, and the Labor Party is offering the Australian people, as they did in government—they are now in opposition—more debt and more deficit. And the Labor Party is going to stand in the way of every attempt to fix up the budget. They trashed the joint, and now they are stopping everyone from going in and trying to fix the house. That is unacceptable. That will be unacceptable to the Australian people. It will be unacceptable, at the end of the day, to the markets. I say this to the member for McMahon and I say this to the Greens: I am keeping to my word that we will not under any circumstances deliver a budget that has forecast peak debt that is higher than the debt limit. And if the Labor Party wants to play games on this, then they can also accept responsibility for the cuts that will need to be made to Labor's expenditure, which is associated with the challenge of trying to live under Labor's poor debt cap.</p> ~~<p class='motion-notice motion-notice-truncated'>Long debate text truncated.</p>~~ <p> The aye votes succeeded in disagreeing to an amendment that proposed that the debt ceiling should be increased to $400 billion and not $500 billion. </p> <p> Someone who votes aye in this amendment supports these measure to disagree to the amendment. The majority voted aye to this amendment so it was successful. </p> <p><b>Background to Bill</p></b> <p>On 22 October 2013 the Abbott government announced that they will <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/treasurer-joe-hockey-announces-debt-limit-to-increase-to-500-billion-20131022-2vyog.html">raise the debt ceiling</a> from $300 billion to $500 billion. This was following the August 2013 Pre-Election Economic and Fiscal Outlook which reported that the Treasurer's standing borrowing authority would reach the $300 billion limit by December 2013. </p> <p>In the <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r5127_ems_dfe1d5b2-bd7c-424c-afc8-efdd37c905b1/upload_pdf/388079.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf">explanatory memorandum</a> for this legislation it was noted that this increase was to 'provide stability and certainty to financial markets about the Government's ability to issue sufficient debt to manage its budget'. </p> <p><b>Summary of debate in Parliament</p></b> <ul><li>Treasurer Joe Hockey MP stated that $400 billion was not enough, and that $500 billion 'is the appropriate level to deal with a legacy of Labor debt'.</li> <li>Shadow Treasurer Chris Bowen criticised the Treasurer for not realising briefs. He also talked about when the $400 debt limit would be reached. </li> <li>In response, Treasurer Joe Hockey criticised the Opposition for having a debt limit lower than what debt was projected to reach. </li> <li>Labor MP Andrew Leigh criticised the Treasurer and came back to the main point that $400 billion was a more reasonable amount. </li></ul>

Change

Division

representatives vote 2013-11-14#3

Edited by mackay staff

on 2014-10-09 15:38:34

Title

Description

The majority voted in favour of a [motion](http://www.openaustralia.org/debates/?id=2013-11-14.87.2) to disagree with an amendment that would change the proposed rise in the debt ceiling from $500 billion to $400 billion instead.
~~Someone who voted aye to the motion disagreed with the amendment. The majority voted aye, so the amendment was unsuccessful.~~
This amendment was attached to the bill when it was returned from the Senate. The majority of senators had agreed with the amendment.(See the division in which the senators agreed to this amendment [here](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/division.php?date=2013-11-14&number=10&dmp=13&house=senate). ) Since it has been rejected in the House of Representatives, the bill will be returned to the Senate and they will decide whether they will insist on the amendment or not. If they do, it is likely that the bill will fail unless a compromise is found. If they do not insist on it, then it is likely the bill will be passed with an increased debt ceiling of $500 billion.
~~_Background to Bill_~~
On 22 October 2013, the Abbott Government announced that it will raise the debt ceiling from $300 billion to $500 billion.(Read more about this in the media [here](http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/treasurer-joe-hockey-announces-debt-limit-to-increase-to-500-billion-20131022-2vyog.html). ) This was following the August 2013 [Pre-Election Economic and Fiscal Outlook](http://www.treasury.gov.au/PublicationsAndMedia/Publications/2013/PEFO-2013) which reported that the Treasurer's standing borrowing authority would reach the $300 billion limit by December 2013.
The purpose of the increase to the debt ceiling is to "provide stability and certainty to financial markets about the Government's ability to issue sufficient debt to manage its budget".(See the [explanatory memorandum](http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r5127_ems_dfe1d5b2-bd7c-424c-afc8-efdd37c905b1/upload_pdf/388079.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf) (106 KB). More about the bill, including its bills digest, is available [here](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r5127).)
~~References~~
The majority voted in favour of a [motion](http://www.openaustralia.org/debates/?id=2013-11-14.87.2) to disagree with an amendment that would change the proposed rise in the debt ceiling from $500 billion to $400 billion instead.
Someone who voted aye to the motion disagreed with the amendment. The majority voted aye, so the amendment was unsuccessful.
This amendment was attached to the bill when it was returned from the Senate. The majority of senators had agreed with the amendment.(See the division in which the senators agreed to this amendment [here](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/division.php?date=2013-11-14&number=10&dmp=13&house=senate). ) Since it has been rejected in the House of Representatives, the bill will be returned to the Senate and they will decide whether they will insist on the amendment or not. If they do, it is likely that the bill will fail unless a compromise is found. If they do not insist on it, then it is likely the bill will be passed with an increased debt ceiling of $500 billion.
_Background to Bill_
On 22 October 2013, the Abbott Government announced that it will raise the debt ceiling from $300 billion to $500 billion.(Read more about this in the media [here](http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/treasurer-joe-hockey-announces-debt-limit-to-increase-to-500-billion-20131022-2vyog.html). ) This was following the August 2013 [Pre-Election Economic and Fiscal Outlook](http://www.treasury.gov.au/PublicationsAndMedia/Publications/2013/PEFO-2013) which reported that the Treasurer's standing borrowing authority would reach the $300 billion limit by December 2013.
The purpose of the increase to the debt ceiling is to "provide stability and certainty to financial markets about the Government's ability to issue sufficient debt to manage its budget".(See the [explanatory memorandum](http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r5127_ems_dfe1d5b2-bd7c-424c-afc8-efdd37c905b1/upload_pdf/388079.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf) (106 KB). More about the bill, including its bills digest, is available [here](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r5127).)

representatives vote 2013-11-14#3

Edited by system

on 2014-10-07 16:21:24

Title

Description

The majority voted in favour of a [http://www.openaustralia.org/debates/?id=2013-11-14.87.2 motion] to disagree with an amendment that would change the proposed rise in the debt ceiling from $500 billion to $400 billion instead.
~~Someone who voted aye to the motion disagreed with the amendment. The majority voted aye, so the amendment was unsuccessful.~~
This amendment was attached to the bill when it was returned from the Senate. The majority of senators had agreed with the amendment.(See the division in which the senators agreed to this amendment [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/division.php?date=2013-11-14&number=10&dmp=13&house=senate here]. ) Since it has been rejected in the House of Representatives, the bill will be returned to the Senate and they will decide whether they will insist on the amendment or not. If they do, it is likely that the bill will fail unless a compromise is found. If they do not insist on it, then it is likely the bill will be passed with an increased debt ceiling of $500 billion.
~~''Background to Bill''~~
On 22 October 2013, the Abbott Government announced that it will raise the debt ceiling from $300 billion to $500 billion.(Read more about this in the media [http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/treasurer-joe-hockey-announces-debt-limit-to-increase-to-500-billion-20131022-2vyog.html here]. ) This was following the August 2013 [http://www.treasury.gov.au/PublicationsAndMedia/Publications/2013/PEFO-2013 Pre-Election Economic and Fiscal Outlook] which reported that the Treasurer's standing borrowing authority would reach the $300 billion limit by December 2013.
The purpose of the increase to the debt ceiling is to "provide stability and certainty to financial markets about the Government's ability to issue sufficient debt to manage its budget".(See the [http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r5127_ems_dfe1d5b2-bd7c-424c-afc8-efdd37c905b1/upload_pdf/388079.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf explanatory memorandum] (106 KB). More about the bill, including its bills digest, is available [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r5127 here].)
~~References~~
The majority voted in favour of a [motion](http://www.openaustralia.org/debates/?id=2013-11-14.87.2) to disagree with an amendment that would change the proposed rise in the debt ceiling from $500 billion to $400 billion instead.
Someone who voted aye to the motion disagreed with the amendment. The majority voted aye, so the amendment was unsuccessful.
This amendment was attached to the bill when it was returned from the Senate. The majority of senators had agreed with the amendment.(See the division in which the senators agreed to this amendment [here](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/division.php?date=2013-11-14&number=10&dmp=13&house=senate). ) Since it has been rejected in the House of Representatives, the bill will be returned to the Senate and they will decide whether they will insist on the amendment or not. If they do, it is likely that the bill will fail unless a compromise is found. If they do not insist on it, then it is likely the bill will be passed with an increased debt ceiling of $500 billion.
_Background to Bill_
On 22 October 2013, the Abbott Government announced that it will raise the debt ceiling from $300 billion to $500 billion.(Read more about this in the media [here](http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/treasurer-joe-hockey-announces-debt-limit-to-increase-to-500-billion-20131022-2vyog.html). ) This was following the August 2013 [Pre-Election Economic and Fiscal Outlook](http://www.treasury.gov.au/PublicationsAndMedia/Publications/2013/PEFO-2013) which reported that the Treasurer's standing borrowing authority would reach the $300 billion limit by December 2013.
The purpose of the increase to the debt ceiling is to "provide stability and certainty to financial markets about the Government's ability to issue sufficient debt to manage its budget".(See the [explanatory memorandum](http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r5127_ems_dfe1d5b2-bd7c-424c-afc8-efdd37c905b1/upload_pdf/388079.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf) (106 KB). More about the bill, including its bills digest, is available [here](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r5127).)
References

representatives vote 2013-11-14#3

Edited by system

on 2014-10-07 16:16:56

Title

Description

The majority voted in favour of a [http://www.openaustralia.org/debates/?id=2013-11-14.87.2 motion] to disagree with an amendment that would change the proposed rise in the debt ceiling from $500 billion to $400 billion instead.
Someone who voted aye to the motion disagreed with the amendment. The majority voted aye, so the amendment was unsuccessful.
This amendment was attached to the bill when it was returned from the Senate. The majority of senators had agreed with the amendment.[1] Since it has been rejected in the House of Representatives, the bill will be returned to the Senate and they will decide whether they will insist on the amendment or not. If they do, it is likely that the bill will fail unless a compromise is found. If they do not insist on it, then it is likely the bill will be passed with an increased debt ceiling of $500 billion.
This amendment was attached to the bill when it was returned from the Senate. The majority of senators had agreed with the amendment.(See the division in which the senators agreed to this amendment [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/division.php?date=2013-11-14&number=10&dmp=13&house=senate here]. ) Since it has been rejected in the House of Representatives, the bill will be returned to the Senate and they will decide whether they will insist on the amendment or not. If they do, it is likely that the bill will fail unless a compromise is found. If they do not insist on it, then it is likely the bill will be passed with an increased debt ceiling of $500 billion.
''Background to Bill''
On 22 October 2013, the Abbott Government announced that it will raise the debt ceiling from $300 billion to $500 billion.[2] This was following the August 2013 [http://www.treasury.gov.au/PublicationsAndMedia/Publications/2013/PEFO-2013 Pre-Election Economic and Fiscal Outlook] which reported that the Treasurer's standing borrowing authority would reach the $300 billion limit by December 2013.
On 22 October 2013, the Abbott Government announced that it will raise the debt ceiling from $300 billion to $500 billion.(Read more about this in the media [http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/treasurer-joe-hockey-announces-debt-limit-to-increase-to-500-billion-20131022-2vyog.html here]. ) This was following the August 2013 [http://www.treasury.gov.au/PublicationsAndMedia/Publications/2013/PEFO-2013 Pre-Election Economic and Fiscal Outlook] which reported that the Treasurer's standing borrowing authority would reach the $300 billion limit by December 2013.
~~The purpose of the increase to the debt ceiling is to "provide stability and certainty to financial markets about the Government's ability to issue sufficient debt to manage its budget".[3]~~
The purpose of the increase to the debt ceiling is to "provide stability and certainty to financial markets about the Government's ability to issue sufficient debt to manage its budget".(See the [http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r5127_ems_dfe1d5b2-bd7c-424c-afc8-efdd37c905b1/upload_pdf/388079.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf explanatory memorandum] (106 KB). More about the bill, including its bills digest, is available [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r5127 here].)
References
* [1] See the division in which the senators agreed to this amendment [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/division.php?date=2013-11-14&number=10&dmp=13&house=senate here].
* [2] Read more about this in the media [http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/treasurer-joe-hockey-announces-debt-limit-to-increase-to-500-billion-20131022-2vyog.html here].
* [3] See the [http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r5127_ems_dfe1d5b2-bd7c-424c-afc8-efdd37c905b1/upload_pdf/388079.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf explanatory memorandum] (106 KB). More about the bill, including its bills digest, is available [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r5127 here].

representatives vote 2013-11-14#3

Edited by mackay staff

on 2014-03-05 12:34:59

Title

Description

The majority voted in favour of a [http://www.openaustralia.org/debates/?id=2013-11-14.87.2 motion] to disagree with an amendment that would change the proposed rise in the debt ceiling from $500 billion to $400 billion instead.
Someone who voted aye to the motion disagreed with the amendment. The majority voted aye, so the amendment was unsuccessful.
This amendment was attached to the bill when it was returned from the Senate. The majority of senators had agreed with the amendment.[1] Since it has been rejected in the House of Representatives, the bill will be returned to the Senate and they will decide whether they will insist on the amendment or not. If they do, it is likely that the bill will fail unless a compromise is found. If they do not insist on it, then it is likely the bill will be passed with an increased debt ceiling of $500 billion.
''Background to Bill''
On 22 October 2013, the Abbott Government announced that it will raise the debt ceiling from $300 billion to $500 billion.[2] This was following the August 2013 [http://www.treasury.gov.au/PublicationsAndMedia/Publications/2013/PEFO-2013 Pre-Election Economic and Fiscal Outlook] which reported that the Treasurer's standing borrowing authority would reach the $300 billion limit by December 2013.
The purpose of the increase to the debt ceiling is to "provide stability and certainty to financial markets about the Government's ability to issue sufficient debt to manage its budget".[3]
References
* [1] See the division in which the senators agreed to this amendment [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/division.php?date=2013-11-14&number=10&dmp=13&house=senate here].
* [2] Read about this amendment in the media [http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/treasurer-joe-hockey-announces-debt-limit-to-increase-to-500-billion-20131022-2vyog.html here].
* [2] Read more about this in the media [http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/treasurer-joe-hockey-announces-debt-limit-to-increase-to-500-billion-20131022-2vyog.html here].
* [3] See the [http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r5127_ems_dfe1d5b2-bd7c-424c-afc8-efdd37c905b1/upload_pdf/388079.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf explanatory memorandum] (106 KB). More about the bill, including its bills digest, is available [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r5127 here].

representatives vote 2013-11-14#3

Edited by mackay staff

on 2014-03-03 12:17:02

Title

Description

The majority voted in favour of a [http://www.openaustralia.org/debates/?id=2013-11-14.87.2 motion] to disagree with an amendment that would change the proposed rise in the debt ceiling from $500 billion to $400 billion instead.
Someone who voted aye to the motion disagreed with the amendment. The majority voted aye, so the amendment was unsuccessful.
This amendment was attached to the bill when it was returned from the Senate. The majority of senators had agreed with the amendment.[1] Since it has been rejected in the House of Representatives, the bill will be returned to the Senate and they will decide whether they will insist on the amendment or not. If they do, it is likely that the bill will fail unless a compromise is found. If they do not, then it is likely the bill will be passed with an increased debt ceiling of $500 billion.
This amendment was attached to the bill when it was returned from the Senate. The majority of senators had agreed with the amendment.[1] Since it has been rejected in the House of Representatives, the bill will be returned to the Senate and they will decide whether they will insist on the amendment or not. If they do, it is likely that the bill will fail unless a compromise is found. If they do not insist on it, then it is likely the bill will be passed with an increased debt ceiling of $500 billion.
''Background to Bill''
On 22 October 2013, the Abbott Government announced that it will raise the debt ceiling from $300 billion to $500 billion.[2] This was following the August 2013 [http://www.treasury.gov.au/PublicationsAndMedia/Publications/2013/PEFO-2013 Pre-Election Economic and Fiscal Outlook] which reported that the Treasurer's standing borrowing authority would reach the $300 billion limit by December 2013.
The purpose of the increase to the debt ceiling is to "provide stability and certainty to financial markets about the Government's ability to issue sufficient debt to manage its budget".[3]
References
* [1] See the division in which the senators agreed to this amendment [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/division.php?date=2013-11-14&number=10&dmp=13&house=senate here].
* [2] Read about this amendment in the media [http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/treasurer-joe-hockey-announces-debt-limit-to-increase-to-500-billion-20131022-2vyog.html here].
* [3] See the [http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r5127_ems_dfe1d5b2-bd7c-424c-afc8-efdd37c905b1/upload_pdf/388079.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf explanatory memorandum] (106 KB). More about the bill, including its bills digest, is available [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r5127 here].

representatives vote 2013-11-14#3

Edited by mackay staff

on 2014-03-03 12:15:06

Title

Bills - Commonwealth Inscribed Stock Amendment Bill 2013; Consideration of Senate Message
Commonwealth Inscribed Stock Amendment Bill 2013 - Consideration of Senate Message - Debt ceiling of $400 billion

Description

~~ The aye votes succeeded in disagreeing to an amendment that proposed that the debt ceiling should be increased to $400 billion and not $500 billion. ~~
 Someone who votes aye in this amendment supports these measure to disagree to the amendment. The majority voted aye to this amendment so it was successful.
The majority voted in favour of a [http://www.openaustralia.org/debates/?id=2013-11-14.87.2 motion] to disagree with an amendment that would change the proposed rise in the debt ceiling from $500 billion to $400 billion instead.
~~Background to Bill~~
On 22 October 2013 the Abbott government announced that they will <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/treasurer-joe-hockey-announces-debt-limit-to-increase-to-500-billion-20131022-2vyog.html">raise the debt ceiling</a> from $300 billion to $500 billion. This was following the August 2013 Pre-Election Economic and Fiscal Outlook which reported that the Treasurer's standing borrowing authority would reach the $300 billion limit by December 2013. 
Someone who voted aye to the motion disagreed with the amendment. The majority voted aye, so the amendment was unsuccessful.
In the <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r5127_ems_dfe1d5b2-bd7c-424c-afc8-efdd37c905b1/upload_pdf/388079.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf">explanatory memorandum</a> for this legislation it was noted that this increase was to 'provide stability and certainty to financial markets about the Government's ability to issue sufficient debt to manage its budget'. 
This amendment was attached to the bill when it was returned from the Senate. The majority of senators had agreed with the amendment.[1] Since it has been rejected in the House of Representatives, the bill will be returned to the Senate and they will decide whether they will insist on the amendment or not. If they do, it is likely that the bill will fail unless a compromise is found. If they do not, then it is likely the bill will be passed with an increased debt ceiling of $500 billion.
~~Summary of debate in Parliament~~
''Background to Bill''
~~<ul><li>Treasurer Joe Hockey MP stated that $400 billion was not enough, and that $500 billion 'is the appropriate level to deal with a legacy of Labor debt'.</li>~~
~~<li>Shadow Treasurer Chris Bowen criticised the Treasurer for not realising briefs. He also talked about when the $400 debt limit would be reached. </li>~~
<li>In response, Treasurer Joe Hockey criticised the Opposition for having a debt limit lower than what debt was projected to reach. </li>
~~<li>Labor MP Andrew Leigh criticised the Treasurer and came back to the main point that $400 billion was a more reasonable amount. </li></ul>~~
On 22 October 2013, the Abbott Government announced that it will raise the debt ceiling from $300 billion to $500 billion.[2] This was following the August 2013 [http://www.treasury.gov.au/PublicationsAndMedia/Publications/2013/PEFO-2013 Pre-Election Economic and Fiscal Outlook] which reported that the Treasurer's standing borrowing authority would reach the $300 billion limit by December 2013.
The purpose of the increase to the debt ceiling is to "provide stability and certainty to financial markets about the Government's ability to issue sufficient debt to manage its budget".[3]
References
* [1] See the division in which the senators agreed to this amendment [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/division.php?date=2013-11-14&number=10&dmp=13&house=senate here].
* [2] Read about this amendment in the media [http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/treasurer-joe-hockey-announces-debt-limit-to-increase-to-500-billion-20131022-2vyog.html here].
* [3] See the [http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r5127_ems_dfe1d5b2-bd7c-424c-afc8-efdd37c905b1/upload_pdf/388079.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf explanatory memorandum] (106 KB). More about the bill, including its bills digest, is available [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r5127 here].

representatives vote 2013-11-14#3

Edited by Natasha Burrows

on 2013-11-19 15:31:24

Title

Description

representatives vote 2013-11-14#3

Edited by Natasha Burrows

on 2013-11-19 15:31:09

Title

~~Bills — Commonwealth Inscribed Stock Amendment Bill 2013; Consideration of Senate Message~~
Bills - Commonwealth Inscribed Stock Amendment Bill 2013; Consideration of Senate Message

Description

~~Joe Hockey~~
~~I move:~~
~~That the amendment be disagreed to.~~
The opposition and the Greens have said there is no compelling evidence to have a debt limit of $500 billion and that, rather, there should be a debt limit of $400 billion. I table today the economic statement from the member for McMahon that says debt is going to peak at $370 billion. I table today the executive minute from the Australian Office of Financial Management that says that it would be 'prudent from an operational perspective to set it'—the debt cap—'at a level $40 billion to $60 billion higher—
~~Ms Owens interjecting—~~
~~than the peak projected within year CGS'.~~
~~Bruce Scott~~
The member for Parramatta is grossly disorderly.
~~Joe Hockey~~
Three hundred and seventy plus 60 equals 430—$430 billion.
~~Ms Owens interjecting—~~
~~Bruce Scott~~
~~Member for Parramatta, you are interjecting outside of your place in this chamber.~~
~~Joe Hockey~~
I further add the point that the Labor Party has now declared it is voting against our mining tax repeal package, which reduces the debt by $13½ billion. The opposition have said that they are going to oppose our abolition of the CEFC, the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, which also reduces the debt. The total of the mining tax and CEFC abolition is going to reduce the debt by $20 billion, so that adds $20 billion. The Labor Party failed to deal with the challenges at the Reserve Bank and we had to borrow $8.8 billion to go into that. When you add it all up—and it is on the public record—that well exceeds $400 billion. That is a legacy of Labor.
But wait—there's more. As the Reserve Bank identified only last week, growth figures for next year are being downgraded, which will have a negative impact on revenues, which will have a negative impact on the budget. But wait—there's more. As you open each cupboard door in relation to the budget—whether it be the ACCC or one of any number of other areas which will soon be identified and revealed—you will find that $500 billion, including a cap, is the appropriate level to deal with the legacy of Labor debt.
The thing is that, whenever the Labor Party released an economic statement, they got the numbers wrong—absolutely wrong. We will not do that. We will not release the Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook until the September national accounts have come in, at the beginning of December. What a revelation that is! The Labor Party always tended to release those figures before they had released the September national accounts, and that is one of the reasons why they always got the numbers wrong. So we are taking the prudent approach. We are fixing up the mess. We are identifying right across the budget where the problems are. We are dealing with the legacy of Labor's debt. It is all on the public record. This chamber is the public record. Now the challenge is for the Labor Party to deal with it.
The Labor Party are running around saying that under the Abbott opposition we opposed increasing the debt limit. They are just dead wrong. I know the member for McMahon was never actually in the Senate, but what he does not understand is that we did move a procedural motion in the Senate to separate out the debate on the debt limit but it was rejected by the Senate. It was a procedural motion. We never voted against the debt limit. If Labor did not understand the challenges in relation to the debt limit when they were in government, how can we expect them to understand the challenges from opposition?
I am saying this to the Labor Party: on 12 December Australia reaches the $300 billion debt limit that Labor left. The Senate is going to have a bill before it to have the debt limit increased to $500 billion. That is Labor's legacy. The $500 billion is not a target; it is a limit. We do not want to get there, but I tell you what: we are not going to put the stability of the markets and the stability of the CGS program at risk as a result of Labor's incompetence in opposition.
~~Chris Bowen~~
We were promised a government of no excuses. We were promised a government of no surprises. We were promised a government with the adults in charge. And we get this childish performance from this trainee Treasurer. The Treasurer could have a debt limit increase right now. We could vote on this and we could have a debt limit increase right now. We voted on this last night and we supported a debt limit increase. But the Liberal Party will insist on transparency and we will insist on a lot more transparency than we are getting from this Treasurer—this Treasurer who is refusing to release the mid-year economic forecast as well as the incoming government brief, this Treasurer who stood at that dispatch box yesterday and said, 'I'd love to release the Reserve Bank documents,' this Treasurer who stood at that dispatch box yesterday and said, 'I'd love to release the request from the Reserve Bank for $8.8 billion.' It was FOIed and rejected. And today at two o'clock the government was obliged to table before the Senate the correspondence from the Reserve Bank, and the government has failed. The government is in breach of a Senate order.
What have you got to hide? Why are you going to such lengths to be so duplicitous with the Australian people and not release the request from the Reserve Bank for $8.8 billion? You say the Reserve Bank asked for $8.8 billion this year. Well, show us the request. It is nice and simple. Did they request it? Show us the request. Do not hide behind a breach of a Senate order. We just saw in question time—the second question time of the parliament—an amazing contempt of the parliament. When you are in contempt of the parliament, you are in contempt of the people. This Treasurer is in contempt of the parliament and the people. What have you got to hide?
The Reserve Bank transfer of $8.8 billion, of course, increases this year's deficit by that amount. But it goes much further than that. It increases the level of interest required by more than $1 billion over the next four years. Not only has the Treasurer declined to outlined the reasons for that; he has outright refused to release the documentation in breach of an order of one of the houses of the Australian parliament. What levels will you go to to hide the facts from the Australian people?
Let us be very clear: there is only one person talking about a crisis here; there is only one person talking about a shutdown of the government; there is only one person talking about a breach in the debt limit—that man there. The only person who is trying to confect a political crisis here is the Treasurer, because he could have a debt limit increase right now, today, of $100 billion. It is not a small amount, not a trifling amount. Does the Treasurer think for one second that he can argue that $400 billion would not be enough to get through to next year? Senator Sinodinos was asked in the other place: 'When will $400 million be breached?' He said, 'Oh, sometime over the forward estimates.' As I outlined to the House yesterday, the Australian Office of Financial Management has made clear that it issues bonds only for the budget year in question.
We are more than happy to work cooperatively with the government if they are up-front with the Australian people, if they reveal the impact of their decisions—of this man's decisions—since the election and if there is much more transparency to go with it. Before the election we heard all about the need for transparency when it came to increases in the debt cap. We heard the now Prime Minister—who went on 2GB, for a change, to do an interview—say:
… the Government has to justify this. Our money, our future, is too important to be mortgaged like this without the Government giving us the strongest possible arguments for it, because every dollar that they borrow has got to be repaid.
I have got news for the Treasurer. This is actually a hung parliament. The government has a big majority in this House but no majority in that house. A hung parliament requires a bit of cooperation, a bit of negotiation and a bit of transparency. It does not mean being arrogant. It does not mean saying, 'My debt limit or no debt limit.' It does not mean chest beating. It does not mean political stunts. It does not mean saying, 'You'll wear this like a crown of thorns.' It means being responsible, open, transparent and constructive—something this Treasurer is just not capable of.
~~Joe Hockey~~
Let me deal with a couple of issues here. The shadow Treasurer talks about being open and honest and responsible. Why did the Labor Party have a $300 billion debt limit when they forecast in the budget the debt would go to $370 billion? Why would you go out and buy a house and finance it on the basis that you will be able to raise $200,000 of debt but the bank will only give you $100,000? Why would you do that? Why would the Labor Party do that? Because they do not understand the implications of what they are doing.
I want to give you this promise. I will not bring down a budget that has projected debt that is greater than the debt limit. I will not do that. As you know, the AOFM has advised that you need to have a buffer of $40 billion to $60 billion for refinancing purposes. You do not even understand that. You just said they only ever issue for the year they have got to fund, but actually they have also got a whole lot of other challenges in funding as well, including off-budget funding. I really wonder about this.
In relation to the Reserve Bank, yes, I accept responsibility for the decision on behalf of the government. We do not need to hide behind advice. The Governor of the Reserve Bank will appear before the House Standing Committee on Economics, and you can ask the Governor of the Reserve Bank about that. Then you can ask the Secretary of the Treasury before estimates next week about the debt limit, and you can ask him about the advice that might have been provided to the government in relation to the Reserve Bank Reserve Fund.
But we are not going to be like your government in a whole lot of areas. One of the areas we are not going to be the same as you were is that we are not going to hide behind the advice. We are going to say, 'We accept responsibility for this decision, and this decision is in the interests of the nation.' That is how we are going to behave.
So, if you want to argue about the Reserve Bank Reserve Fund funding, let us argue about it. You tell me why they should not have that money, why the Reserve Bank Reserve Fund should be at 3.8 per cent. You explain that. You explain why the Reserve Bank should be in a position where it cannot deliver dividends for as far as the eye can see and why it has to work damned hard to replenish the Reserve Bank Reserve Fund in the face of potential headwinds coming out of Europe and the United States. You explain that to the Australian people. If that is your policy position, you explain it. But, when it comes to process, Labor are hiding behind a fig leaf, because they always treated the debt limit as a debt target. Last night I could not sleep too well and I wondered who the hell introduced that $75 billion debt limit in the first place. It was old buggerlugs. How about that!
~~And do you know what he said to the parliament when he introduced the $75 billion debt limit? He said, 'This government doesn't need to raise debt to finance its spending.'~~
~~Mr Bowen interjecting—~~
I haven't finished with you! You were the one who introduced the $75 billion debt limit. And then, just weeks before the election, he announces that the debt is going to $370 billion. But he wants us to be in a position where the can is kicked down the road.
We will not go down the path of the United States. We will not have the parliament kick the can down the road for another moment of attention, if it needs to come to that, to deal with the debt limit. We will not allow that to happen, because we are offering the Australian people stability and certainty, and the Labor Party is offering the Australian people, as they did in government—they are now in opposition—more debt and more deficit. And the Labor Party is going to stand in the way of every attempt to fix up the budget. They trashed the joint, and now they are stopping everyone from going in and trying to fix the house. That is unacceptable. That will be unacceptable to the Australian people. It will be unacceptable, at the end of the day, to the markets. I say this to the member for McMahon and I say this to the Greens: I am keeping to my word that we will not under any circumstances deliver a budget that has forecast peak debt that is higher than the debt limit. And if the Labor Party wants to play games on this, then they can also accept responsibility for the cuts that will need to be made to Labor's expenditure, which is associated with the challenge of trying to live under Labor's poor debt cap.
~~Long debate text truncated.~~
The aye votes succeeded in disagreeing to an amendment that proposed that the debt ceiling should be increased to $400 billion and not $500 billion. 
 Someone who votes aye in this amendment supports these measure to disagree to the amendment. The majority voted aye to this amendment so it was successful.
Background to Bill
On 22 October 2013 the Abbott government announced that they will <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/treasurer-joe-hockey-announces-debt-limit-to-increase-to-500-billion-20131022-2vyog.html">raise the debt ceiling</a> from $300 billion to $500 billion. This was following the August 2013 Pre-Election Economic and Fiscal Outlook which reported that the Treasurer's standing borrowing authority would reach the $300 billion limit by December 2013.
In the <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r5127_ems_dfe1d5b2-bd7c-424c-afc8-efdd37c905b1/upload_pdf/388079.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf">explanatory memorandum</a> for this legislation it was noted that this increase was to 'provide stability and certainty to financial markets about the Government's ability to issue sufficient debt to manage its budget'. 
Summary of debate in Parliament
<ul><li>Treasurer Joe Hockey MP stated that $400 billion was not enough, and that $500 billion 'is the appropriate level to deal with a legacy of Labor debt'.</li>
<li>Shadow Treasurer Chris Bowen criticised the Treasurer for not realising briefs. He also talked about when the $400 debt limit would be reached. </li>
<li>In response, Treasurer Joe Hockey criticised the Opposition for having a debt limit lower than what debt was projected to reach. </li>
<li>Labor MP Andrew Leigh criticised the Treasurer and came back to the main point that $400 billion was a more reasonable amount. </li></ul>