All changes made to the description and title of this
division.
View division
|
Edit description
| Change |
Division |
|
senate vote 2018-03-27#5
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2023-07-14 08:46:12
|
Title
Communications Legislation Amendment (Online Content Services and Other Measures) Bill 2017 - in Committee - Exempt SBS- Communications Legislation Amendment (Online Content Services and Other Measures) Bill 2017 - in Committee - Exempt SBS (second)
Description
|
|
senate vote 2018-03-27#5
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2023-07-14 08:45:10
|
Title
Description
-
- The same number of senators voted for and against an [amendment](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2018-03-27.16.1) introduced by NSW Senator [Deborah O'Neill](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/nsw/deborah_o'neill) (Labor), which means it failed.
- This was the second time this vote was taken. It was repeated at the request of WA Senator [Jordon Steele-John](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/wa/jordon_steele-john) (Greens).
- ### What does this amendment do?
- Senator O'Neill [explained that](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2018-03-27.16.1):
- > *What Labor's amendment does is preserve parliament's intent with respect to the SBS being a broadcaster that's independent of the government, and it maintains the status quo, whereby SBS services on television, radio and online are regulated by the SBS Codes of Practice 2014 (revised 2016). It's really very simple. Labor's amendment means that the SBS will be subject to additional restrictions on gambling promotions during live sport, just like everybody else. But, instead of being regulated by ACMA rules under this bill, SBS will be regulated by the SBS Codes of Practice.*
- >
- > *Labor's amendment simply corrects the wrong-headed approach in this bill, which would include SBS in a regulatory regime that would, quite improperly, make the regulation of SBS content a matter of discretion for the Australian Communications and Media Authority. With all due respect to the ACMA, that is simply not the intent of parliament when it comes to the SBS.*
- ### Amendment text
- > *(1) Schedule 1, item 22, page 18 (after line 25), after paragraph 3(1)(q), insert:*
- >
>> *(qa) a service provided by the Special Broadcasting Service Corporation; or*- >> *(qa) a service provided by the Special Broadcasting Service Corporation; or*
-
-
|
|
senate vote 2018-03-27#5
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2023-07-14 08:34:00
|
Title
Bills — Communications Legislation Amendment (Online Content Services and Other Measures) Bill 2017; in Committee- Communications Legislation Amendment (Online Content Services and Other Measures) Bill 2017 - in Committee - Exempt SBS
Description
<p class="speaker">Rachel Siewert</p><p>Chair, Senator Steele-John was outside the chamber. He was unable to make it here in time, so I'm asking that the vote be recommitted.</p>-
- The same number of senators voted for and against an [amendment](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2018-03-27.16.1) introduced by NSW Senator [Deborah O'Neill](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/nsw/deborah_o'neill) (Labor), which means it failed.
- ### What does this amendment do?
- Senator O'Neill [explained that](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2018-03-27.16.1):
- > *What Labor's amendment does is preserve parliament's intent with respect to the SBS being a broadcaster that's independent of the government, and it maintains the status quo, whereby SBS services on television, radio and online are regulated by the SBS Codes of Practice 2014 (revised 2016). It's really very simple. Labor's amendment means that the SBS will be subject to additional restrictions on gambling promotions during live sport, just like everybody else. But, instead of being regulated by ACMA rules under this bill, SBS will be regulated by the SBS Codes of Practice.*
- >
- > *Labor's amendment simply corrects the wrong-headed approach in this bill, which would include SBS in a regulatory regime that would, quite improperly, make the regulation of SBS content a matter of discretion for the Australian Communications and Media Authority. With all due respect to the ACMA, that is simply not the intent of parliament when it comes to the SBS.*
- ### Amendment text
- > *(1) Schedule 1, item 22, page 18 (after line 25), after paragraph 3(1)(q), insert:*
- >
- >> *(qa) a service provided by the Special Broadcasting Service Corporation; or*
<p>The CHAIR: Senator Siewert, you need to seek leave.</p><p>I seek leave to have the vote recommitted so that it would reflect the views of the chamber, given that Senator Steele-John was unable to get into the chamber in time. He's literally just outside the door.</p><p>The CHAIR: Senator Siewert, it is really up to Senator Steele-John to provide an explanation as to why he was not in the chamber.</p> <p class="speaker">Jordon Steele-John</p><p>Chair, I got my wheels stuck in the grass in the courtyard. It took a little bit to get out.</p><p>Leave granted.</p><p>The CHAIR: The question is that amendment (1) on sheet 8380, as moved by Senator O'Neill, be agreed to.</p> -
-
|