All changes made to the description and title of this
division.
View division
|
Edit description
| Change |
Division |
|
representatives vote 2021-03-15#7
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2022-07-15 08:31:34
|
Title
Bills — National Consumer Credit Protection Amendment (Supporting Economic Recovery) Bill 2020; Third Reading- National Consumer Credit Protection Amendment (Supporting Economic Recovery) Bill 2020 - Third Reading - Pass the bill
Description
<p class="speaker">Tony Smith</p><p>The question now is that the motion moved by the assistant minister, the contingent motion, be agreed to.</p>-
- The majority voted in favour of a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debates/?id=2021-03-15.118.1) to pass the bill, which is known as giving the bill a [third reading](https://peo.gov.au/understand-our-parliament/how-parliament-works/bills-and-laws/making-a-law-in-the-australian-parliament/). This means the bill will now be sent to the Senate for their consideration.
- ### What does the bill do?
- According to the [bills digest](https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd2021a/21bd052), the bill would introduce:
- > * *amendments to the responsible lending obligations so that they apply only to small amount credit contracts (SACCs), SACC-equivalent loans by authorised deposit-taking institutions (ADIs) and consumer leases and*
- > * *enhancements to the consumer protection framework in relation to small amount credit contracts and consumer leases.*
<p>Question agreed to.</p> <p class="speaker">Trevor Evans</p><p>I move:</p><p class="italic">That this bill be now read a third time.</p> <p class="speaker">Stephen Jones</p><p>Schedule 1 of this bill that we are considering rolls back the very first recommendation of the Hayne royal commission. Recommendation 1.1 of the Hayne royal commission was to leave the national consumer credit protection standards in place.</p><p>I think the House needs to know where the National Party stands on this, because in the second reading stage we heard some very powerful speeches from members representing rural and regional Australia. We saw members talking about stories from consumers and consumer organisations about the harms and potential harms associated with relaxing consumer credit laws. We know that members of the National Party have been historically very outspoken on this issue. We know that former senator John 'Wacka' Williams dedicated a large part of his time in the parliament campaigning against improper lending practices, campaigning in favour of a royal commission into the banking and finance system, and campaigning to ensure that the responsible lending laws stayed in place. We know that members of the National Party threatened to cross the floor when this government had voted 27 times to oppose the implementation of a royal commission. We know that several members from Queensland who are in the chamber right now threatened to cross the floor because of the subject matter that is before the House right now.</p><p>So the question that the minister needs to answer is: is this National Party policy or is this Liberal Party policy? Is the National Party 100 per cent behind the matter that is before the House today? Is every single National Party member going to vote in favour of this Liberal Party proposition or are members of the National Party going to keep the spirit of John 'Wacka' Williams alive?</p><p>He's the man who lost his family farm, the man who lost his marriage and the man who lived in a caravan for several years because these laws did not exist, and the man who has called on every one of his National Party colleagues to do the right thing and oppose these laws. So the question for the minister and the question for all of the National Party people is: are they going to vote with their conscience, or are they going to vote for the Liberal Party?</p> <p class="speaker">Trevor Evans</p><p>I move:</p><p class="italic">That the question be now put.</p><p>An opposition member: What?</p><p>An opposition member: Did the debate just finish?</p> <p class="speaker">Tony Burke</p><p>I rise on a point of order. I appreciate this would normally be put immediately, but, just to assist the House: if this motion is put and not withdrawn, we will have two divisions. If this motion is withdrawn, we will have one and we will have it immediately, on the third reading. It's up to the government. I'm just inviting: if you wish to withdraw that, we will go immediately to the third reading because there are no other speakers. If you want two divisions—</p><p>An opposition member: We're offering to speed it up for you guys!</p> <p class="speaker">Trevor Evans</p><p>Noting there are no further speakers, I withdraw.</p> <p class="speaker">Tony Smith</p><p>The question is that this bill be now read a third time.</p> -
-
|