Division Description Changes — Bills — Australia's Foreign Relations (State and Territory Arrangements) Bill 2020; Second Reading — 11th Nov 2020

Change	Division
representatives vote 2020-11-11#2 Edited by mackay staff on 2020-11-20 15:27:48	Title Bills — Australia's Foreign Relations (State and Territory Arrangements) Bill 2020; Second Reading Australia's Foreign Relations (State and Territory Arrangements) Bill 2020 - Second Reading - Redraft bill Description ~~<p class="motion-notice motion-notice-notext">No motion text available</p>~~ The majority voted in favour of keeping the wording of the usual second reading motion unchanged. The usual [second reading motion](https://peo.gov.au/understand-our-parliament/how-parliament-works/bills-and-laws/making-a-law-in-the-australian-parliament/) is "That the bill be read for a second time," which is parliamentary jargon for agreeing with the main idea of the bill. The MP for Corio [Richard Marles](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/corio/richard_marles) (Labor) had proposed to delete the words after 'that' and replace them with the words below. ### Motion text > 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: > > (1) notes: > >> (a) the desirability of greater oversight and review mechanisms for decisions made under the bill; and >> >> (b) the lack of clarity in the definition of 'arrangements' and 'institutional autonomy' in the bill; and > > (2) calls on the Government to: > >> (a) address the regulatory gap of private universities; >> >> (b) provide clarity on the treatment of the Port of Darwin in the bill before the bill proceeds; >> >> (c) make clear how this regime will interact with the existing legislation and guidelines that work to safeguard Australia's sovereignty, and provide confidence that the bill does not present a sovereign risk that will undermine investment and cost Australian jobs; engage in genuine consultation with Australian entities covered by the bill on the design of the regime; and >> >> (d) redraft the bill and re-present it to the Parliament at the earliest opportunity"

~~<p class="motion-notice motion-notice-notext">No motion text available</p>~~
The majority voted in favour of keeping the wording of the usual second reading motion unchanged. The usual [second reading motion](https://peo.gov.au/understand-our-parliament/how-parliament-works/bills-and-laws/making-a-law-in-the-australian-parliament/) is "*That the bill be read for a second time*," which is parliamentary jargon for agreeing with the main idea of the bill. The MP for Corio [Richard Marles](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/corio/richard_marles) (Labor) had proposed to delete the words after 'that' and replace them with the words below.
### Motion text
> *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:*
>
> *(1) notes:*
>
>> *(a) the desirability of greater oversight and review mechanisms for decisions made under the bill; and*
>>
>> *(b) the lack of clarity in the definition of 'arrangements' and 'institutional autonomy' in the bill; and*
>
> *(2) calls on the Government to:*
>
>> *(a) address the regulatory gap of private universities;*
>>
>> *(b) provide clarity on the treatment of the Port of Darwin in the bill before the bill proceeds;*
>>
>> *(c) make clear how this regime will interact with the existing legislation and guidelines that work to safeguard Australia's sovereignty, and provide confidence that the bill does not present a sovereign risk that will undermine investment and cost Australian jobs; engage in genuine consultation with Australian entities covered by the bill on the design of the regime; and*
>>
>> *(d) redraft the bill and re-present it to the Parliament at the earliest opportunity"*