Division Description Changes — Bills — Product Stewardship (Oil) Amendment Bill 2020; Second Reading — 25th Aug 2020

Change	Division
representatives vote 2020-08-25#1 Edited by mackay staff on 2020-08-28 13:14:11	Title Bills — Product Stewardship (Oil) Amendment Bill 2020; Second Reading Product Stewardship (Oil) Amendment Bill 2020 - Second Reading - Keep second reading motion unchanged Description ~~<p class="speaker">Llew O'Brien</p>~~ <p>In accordance with standing order 133(b), I shall now proceed to put the question on the motion moved earlier today by the honourable member for Fremantle on which a division was called for and deferred in accordance with the standing orders. No further debate is allowed.</p> ~~<p class="speaker">Tony Smith</p>~~ The majority voted in favour of a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debates/?id=2020-08-25.96.2) to keep the original second reading motion unchanged. A [second reading motion](https://peo.gov.au/understand-our-parliament/how-parliament-works/bills-and-laws/making-a-law-in-the-australian-parliament/) is a motion "That this bill be now read a second time" - parliamentary jargon for agreeing with the main idea of the bill. This vote was put after Fremantle MP [Josh Wilson](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/fremantle/josh_wilson) (Labor) introduced an amendment. ### Proposed Amendment > That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: > > "whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House notes the Government’s slow and inadequate delivery of meaningful regulatory reform for domestic waste management and product stewardship". <p>The original question was that this bill be now read a second time. To this the honourable member for Fremantle has moved as an amendment that all words after 'That' be omitted with a view to substituting other words. If it suits the House, I will state the question in the form 'That the words proposed to be omitted stand part of the question'. Members should recall that we state the question this way so members do not need to change sides.</p>

~~Llew O'Brien~~
In accordance with standing order 133(b), I shall now proceed to put the question on the motion moved earlier today by the honourable member for Fremantle on which a division was called for and deferred in accordance with the standing orders. No further debate is allowed.
~~Tony Smith~~
The majority voted in favour of a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debates/?id=2020-08-25.96.2) to keep the original second reading motion unchanged. A [second reading motion](https://peo.gov.au/understand-our-parliament/how-parliament-works/bills-and-laws/making-a-law-in-the-australian-parliament/) is a motion "*That this bill be now read a second time*" - parliamentary jargon for agreeing with the main idea of the bill.
This vote was put after Fremantle MP [Josh Wilson](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/fremantle/josh_wilson) (Labor) introduced an amendment.
### Proposed Amendment
> *That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:*
>
> *"whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House notes the Government’s slow and inadequate delivery of meaningful regulatory reform for domestic waste management and product stewardship".*
The original question was that this bill be now read a second time. To this the honourable member for Fremantle has moved as an amendment that all words after 'That' be omitted with a view to substituting other words. If it suits the House, I will state the question in the form 'That the words proposed to be omitted stand part of the question'. Members should recall that we state the question this way so members do not need to change sides.