Division Description Changes — Bills — Treasury Laws Amendment (More Flexible Superannuation) Bill 2020; Third Reading — 17th Jun 2021

Change	Division
senate vote 2021-06-17#4 Edited by mackay staff on 2022-04-15 10:42:12	Title Bills — Treasury Laws Amendment (More Flexible Superannuation) Bill 2020; Third Reading Treasury Laws Amendment (More Flexible Superannuation) Bill 2020 - Third Reading - Pass the bill Description ~~<p class="speaker">Jane Hume</p>~~ ~~<p>I move:</p>~~ <p class="italic">That this bill now be read a third time.</p> ~~<p class="speaker">Scott Ryan</p>~~ <p>The question is that the bill be read a third time.</p> The majority voted in favour of a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?id=2021-06-17.58.1), "That this bill now be read a [third time](https://peo.gov.au/understand-our-parliament/how-parliament-works/bills-and-laws/making-a-law-in-the-australian-parliament/)," which is parliamentary jargon for agreeing to pass the bill in the Senate. Because the Senate agreed to several amendments, the bill will now return to the House of Representatives, where our MPs will decide on whether they agree with the changes. ### What does the bill do? *The bill was introduced in order "to enable individuals aged 65 and 66 to make up to three years of non-concessional superannuation contributions under the bring forward rule."* [According to](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debates/?id=2021-06-17.129.1) the Shadow Assistant Treasurer and Whitlam MP [Stephen Jones](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/whitlam/stephen_jones) (Labor): *> This is a provision which benefits a large group of politicians but a very small group of Australians. At a time when we are trying to resolve the complex issues around superannuation, it is extraordinary in the extreme** that this is the priority of this government—a measure that benefits a large group of politicians but a very small group of Australians who earn over $275,000 a year. It's not a priority and Labor won't be supporting the measure.*

~~Jane Hume~~
~~I move:~~
That this bill now be read a third time.
~~Scott Ryan~~
The question is that the bill be read a third time.
The majority voted in favour of a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?id=2021-06-17.58.1), "*That this bill now be read a [third time](https://peo.gov.au/understand-our-parliament/how-parliament-works/bills-and-laws/making-a-law-in-the-australian-parliament/),*" which is parliamentary jargon for agreeing to pass the bill in the Senate. Because the Senate agreed to several amendments, the bill will now return to the House of Representatives, where our MPs will decide on whether they agree with the changes.
### What does the bill do?
The bill was introduced in order "*to enable individuals aged 65 and 66 to make up to three years of non-concessional superannuation contributions under the bring forward rule.*"
[According to](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debates/?id=2021-06-17.129.1) the Shadow Assistant Treasurer and Whitlam MP [Stephen Jones](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/whitlam/stephen_jones) (Labor):
> *This is a provision which benefits a large group of politicians but a very small group of Australians. At a time when we are trying to resolve the complex issues around superannuation, it is extraordinary in the extreme that this is the priority of this government—a measure that benefits a large group of politicians but a very small group of Australians who earn over $275,000 a year. It's not a priority and Labor won't be supporting the measure.*