All changes made to the description and title of this
division.
View division
|
Edit description
| Change |
Division |
|
senate vote 2012-09-18#2
Edited by
system
on
2014-10-07 16:18:11
|
Title
Description
The majority voted in favour of a [http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?gid=2012-09-18.7.14 motion] to read the bill for a second time.(Read more about the stages that a bill must pass through to become law [http://www.peo.gov.au/learning/fact-sheets/making-a-law.html here].
) This means that the majority agreed with the main idea of the bill.''Background to the bill''The [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4883 bill] was introduced "to establish an independent expert panel to conduct an assessment into the potential environmental, social and economic impacts of a declared commercial fishing activity and to prohibit the declared commercial fishing activity while the assessment is undertaken".(Read more about the bill, including the text of the bill and its explanatory memoranda, [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4883 here].
) It was introduced following the controversial arrival of the super trawler [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FV_Margiris FV Margiris] into Australian waters. Opponents to the trawler argue that its presence "will cause localised overfishing and could drive away bluefin tuna".(Read more about the arguments against the super trawler [http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-08-15/super-trawler-debate/4200114 here].
) Supporters disagree, saying the trawler's quota is sustainable.(As above.
) Environment Minister [http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Mr_Tony_Burke&mpc=Watson&house=representatives Tony Burke] position was there "there was significant uncertainty regarding the impact of such a large fishing vessel on the marine environment",(Read more in the [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1213a/13bd018 bills digest].) hence the need for an assessment into the potential impacts.- The majority voted in favour of a [motion](http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?gid=2012-09-18.7.14) to read the bill for a second time.(Read more about the stages that a bill must pass through to become law [here](http://www.peo.gov.au/learning/fact-sheets/making-a-law.html). ) This means that the majority agreed with the main idea of the bill.
- _Background to the bill_
- The [bill](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4883) was introduced "to establish an independent expert panel to conduct an assessment into the potential environmental, social and economic impacts of a declared commercial fishing activity and to prohibit the declared commercial fishing activity while the assessment is undertaken".(Read more about the bill, including the text of the bill and its explanatory memoranda, [here](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4883). )
- It was introduced following the controversial arrival of the super trawler [FV Margiris](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FV_Margiris) into Australian waters. Opponents to the trawler argue that its presence "will cause localised overfishing and could drive away bluefin tuna".(Read more about the arguments against the super trawler [here](http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-08-15/super-trawler-debate/4200114). ) Supporters disagree, saying the trawler's quota is sustainable.(As above. ) Environment Minister [Tony Burke](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Mr_Tony_Burke&mpc=Watson&house=representatives) position was there "there was significant uncertainty regarding the impact of such a large fishing vessel on the marine environment",(Read more in the [bills digest](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1213a/13bd018).) hence the need for an assessment into the potential impacts.
|
|
senate vote 2012-09-18#2
Edited by
system
on
2014-10-07 16:16:08
|
Title
Description
The majority voted in favour of a [http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?gid=2012-09-18.7.14 motion] to read the bill for a second time.[1] This means that the majority agreed with the main idea of the bill.- The majority voted in favour of a [http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?gid=2012-09-18.7.14 motion] to read the bill for a second time.(Read more about the stages that a bill must pass through to become law [http://www.peo.gov.au/learning/fact-sheets/making-a-law.html here].
) This means that the majority agreed with the main idea of the bill.
- ''Background to the bill''
The [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4883 bill] was introduced "to establish an independent expert panel to conduct an assessment into the potential environmental, social and economic impacts of a declared commercial fishing activity and to prohibit the declared commercial fishing activity while the assessment is undertaken".[2] - The [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4883 bill] was introduced "to establish an independent expert panel to conduct an assessment into the potential environmental, social and economic impacts of a declared commercial fishing activity and to prohibit the declared commercial fishing activity while the assessment is undertaken".(Read more about the bill, including the text of the bill and its explanatory memoranda, [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4883 here].
)
It was introduced following the controversial arrival of the super trawler [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FV_Margiris FV Margiris] into Australian waters. Opponents to the trawler argue that its presence "will cause localised overfishing and could drive away bluefin tuna".[3] Supporters disagree, saying the trawler's quota is sustainable.[4] Environment Minister [http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Mr_Tony_Burke&mpc=Watson&house=representatives Tony Burke] position was there "there was significant uncertainty regarding the impact of such a large fishing vessel on the marine environment",[5] hence the need for an assessment into the potential impacts.- It was introduced following the controversial arrival of the super trawler [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FV_Margiris FV Margiris] into Australian waters. Opponents to the trawler argue that its presence "will cause localised overfishing and could drive away bluefin tuna".(Read more about the arguments against the super trawler [http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-08-15/super-trawler-debate/4200114 here].
) Supporters disagree, saying the trawler's quota is sustainable.(As above.
) Environment Minister [http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Mr_Tony_Burke&mpc=Watson&house=representatives Tony Burke] position was there "there was significant uncertainty regarding the impact of such a large fishing vessel on the marine environment",(Read more in the [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1213a/13bd018 bills digest].) hence the need for an assessment into the potential impacts.
''References''* [1] Read more about the stages that a bill must pass through to become law [http://www.peo.gov.au/learning/fact-sheets/making-a-law.html here].* [2] Read more about the bill, including the text of the bill and its explanatory memoranda, [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4883 here].* [3] Read more about the arguments against the super trawler [http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-08-15/super-trawler-debate/4200114 here].* [4] As above.* [5] Read more in the [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1213a/13bd018 bills digest].
|
|
senate vote 2012-09-18#2
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2014-08-01 15:44:38
|
Title
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Declared Commercial Fishing Activities) Bill 2012 - Second Reading - Read a second time- Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Declared Commercial Fishing Activities) Bill 2012 — Second Reading — Read a second time
Description
- The majority voted in favour of a [http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?gid=2012-09-18.7.14 motion] to read the bill for a second time.[1] This means that the majority agreed with the main idea of the bill.
- ''Background to the bill''
- The [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4883 bill] was introduced "to establish an independent expert panel to conduct an assessment into the potential environmental, social and economic impacts of a declared commercial fishing activity and to prohibit the declared commercial fishing activity while the assessment is undertaken".[2]
This bill has been introduced following the controversial arrival of the super trawler [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FV_Margiris FV Margiris] into Australian waters. Opponents to the trawler argue that its presence "will cause localised overfishing and could drive away bluefin tuna".[3] Supporters disagree, saying the trawler's quota is sustainable.[4] Environment Minister [http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Mr_Tony_Burke&mpc=Watson&house=representatives Tony Burke] position was there "there was significant uncertainty regarding the impact of such a large fishing vessel on the marine environment",[5] hence the need for an assessment into the potential impacts.- It was introduced following the controversial arrival of the super trawler [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FV_Margiris FV Margiris] into Australian waters. Opponents to the trawler argue that its presence "will cause localised overfishing and could drive away bluefin tuna".[3] Supporters disagree, saying the trawler's quota is sustainable.[4] Environment Minister [http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Mr_Tony_Burke&mpc=Watson&house=representatives Tony Burke] position was there "there was significant uncertainty regarding the impact of such a large fishing vessel on the marine environment",[5] hence the need for an assessment into the potential impacts.
- ''References''
- * [1] Read more about the stages that a bill must pass through to become law [http://www.peo.gov.au/learning/fact-sheets/making-a-law.html here].
- * [2] Read more about the bill, including the text of the bill and its explanatory memoranda, [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4883 here].
- * [3] Read more about the arguments against the super trawler [http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-08-15/super-trawler-debate/4200114 here].
- * [4] As above.
- * [5] Read more in the [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1213a/13bd018 bills digest].
|
|
senate vote 2012-09-18#2
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2014-08-01 15:44:10
|
Title
Bills — Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Declared Commercial Fishing Activities) Bill 2012; Second Reading- Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Declared Commercial Fishing Activities) Bill 2012 - Second Reading - Read a second time
Description
<p class="motion-notice motion-notice-notext">No motion text available</p>- The majority voted in favour of a [http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?gid=2012-09-18.7.14 motion] to read the bill for a second time.[1] This means that the majority agreed with the main idea of the bill.
- ''Background to the bill''
- The [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4883 bill] was introduced "to establish an independent expert panel to conduct an assessment into the potential environmental, social and economic impacts of a declared commercial fishing activity and to prohibit the declared commercial fishing activity while the assessment is undertaken".[2]
- This bill has been introduced following the controversial arrival of the super trawler [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FV_Margiris FV Margiris] into Australian waters. Opponents to the trawler argue that its presence "will cause localised overfishing and could drive away bluefin tuna".[3] Supporters disagree, saying the trawler's quota is sustainable.[4] Environment Minister [http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Mr_Tony_Burke&mpc=Watson&house=representatives Tony Burke] position was there "there was significant uncertainty regarding the impact of such a large fishing vessel on the marine environment",[5] hence the need for an assessment into the potential impacts.
- ''References''
- * [1] Read more about the stages that a bill must pass through to become law [http://www.peo.gov.au/learning/fact-sheets/making-a-law.html here].
- * [2] Read more about the bill, including the text of the bill and its explanatory memoranda, [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4883 here].
- * [3] Read more about the arguments against the super trawler [http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-08-15/super-trawler-debate/4200114 here].
- * [4] As above.
- * [5] Read more in the [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1213a/13bd018 bills digest].
|