All changes made to the description and title of this
division.
View division
|
Edit description
| Change |
Division |
|
senate vote 2006-03-28#7
Edited by
system
on
2014-10-07 16:21:09
|
Title
Description
The majority voted against [http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?gid=2006-03-28.149.1 amendments] introduced by Labor Senator [http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Joe_Ludwig&mpc=Senate&house=senate Joe Ludwig], which means that it was rejected. The amendments related to the inclusion of a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunset_clause sunset clause] and a provision for an independent review to take place "within 12 months of the third anniversary of the commencement" of this bill.(Read Senator Ludwig's full explanation of his amendments and the associated debate [http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?id=2006-03-28.138.1 here], after 10:27 pm.
)''Background to the bill''The [http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id:legislation/billhome/R2506 bill] was introduced to implement some of the recommendations of the [http://www.ag.gov.au/Publications/Pages/BlunnreportofthereviewoftheregulationofaccesstocommunicationsAugust2005.aspx Review of the Regulation of Access to Communications] (known as the Blunn Report) in order to, among other things, create a warrant regime to allow access to stored communications held by a telecommunications carrier and enable the interception of communications of a person known to communicate with the person of interest.(Read more about the bill in its [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd0506/06bd102 bills digest].)- The majority voted against [amendments](http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?gid=2006-03-28.149.1) introduced by Labor Senator [Joe Ludwig](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Joe_Ludwig&mpc=Senate&house=senate), which means that it was rejected. The amendments related to the inclusion of a [sunset clause](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunset_clause) and a provision for an independent review to take place "within 12 months of the third anniversary of the commencement" of this bill.(Read Senator Ludwig's full explanation of his amendments and the associated debate [here](http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?id=2006-03-28.138.1), after 10:27 pm. )
- _Background to the bill_
- The [bill](http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id:legislation/billhome/R2506) was introduced to implement some of the recommendations of the [Review of the Regulation of Access to Communications](http://www.ag.gov.au/Publications/Pages/BlunnreportofthereviewoftheregulationofaccesstocommunicationsAugust2005.aspx) (known as the Blunn Report) in order to, among other things, create a warrant regime to allow access to stored communications held by a telecommunications carrier and enable the interception of communications of a person known to communicate with the person of interest.(Read more about the bill in its [bills digest](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd0506/06bd102).)
|
|
senate vote 2006-03-28#7
Edited by
system
on
2014-10-07 16:16:53
|
Title
Description
The majority voted against [http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?gid=2006-03-28.149.1 amendments] introduced by Labor Senator [http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Joe_Ludwig&mpc=Senate&house=senate Joe Ludwig], which means that it was rejected. The amendments related to the inclusion of a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunset_clause sunset clause] and a provision for an independent review to take place "within 12 months of the third anniversary of the commencement" of this bill.[1]- The majority voted against [http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?gid=2006-03-28.149.1 amendments] introduced by Labor Senator [http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Joe_Ludwig&mpc=Senate&house=senate Joe Ludwig], which means that it was rejected. The amendments related to the inclusion of a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunset_clause sunset clause] and a provision for an independent review to take place "within 12 months of the third anniversary of the commencement" of this bill.(Read Senator Ludwig's full explanation of his amendments and the associated debate [http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?id=2006-03-28.138.1 here], after 10:27 pm.
)
- ''Background to the bill''
The [http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id:legislation/billhome/R2506 bill] was introduced to implement some of the recommendations of the [http://www.ag.gov.au/Publications/Pages/BlunnreportofthereviewoftheregulationofaccesstocommunicationsAugust2005.aspx Review of the Regulation of Access to Communications] (known as the Blunn Report) in order to, among other things, create a warrant regime to allow access to stored communications held by a telecommunications carrier and enable the interception of communications of a person known to communicate with the person of interest.[2]- The [http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id:legislation/billhome/R2506 bill] was introduced to implement some of the recommendations of the [http://www.ag.gov.au/Publications/Pages/BlunnreportofthereviewoftheregulationofaccesstocommunicationsAugust2005.aspx Review of the Regulation of Access to Communications] (known as the Blunn Report) in order to, among other things, create a warrant regime to allow access to stored communications held by a telecommunications carrier and enable the interception of communications of a person known to communicate with the person of interest.(Read more about the bill in its [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd0506/06bd102 bills digest].)
''References''* [1] Read Senator Ludwig's full explanation of his amendments and the associated debate [http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?id=2006-03-28.138.1 here], after 10:27 pm.* [2] Read more about the bill in its [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd0506/06bd102 bills digest].
|
|
senate vote 2006-03-28#7
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2014-08-14 15:38:21
|
Title
Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Bill 2006 — In Committee- Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Bill 2006 — In Committee - Sunset clause and review
Description
<p pwmotiontext="moved">That the amendments be agreed to.</p>- The majority voted against [http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?gid=2006-03-28.149.1 amendments] introduced by Labor Senator [http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Joe_Ludwig&mpc=Senate&house=senate Joe Ludwig], which means that it was rejected. The amendments related to the inclusion of a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunset_clause sunset clause] and a provision for an independent review to take place "within 12 months of the third anniversary of the commencement" of this bill.[1]
- ''Background to the bill''
- The [http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id:legislation/billhome/R2506 bill] was introduced to implement some of the recommendations of the [http://www.ag.gov.au/Publications/Pages/BlunnreportofthereviewoftheregulationofaccesstocommunicationsAugust2005.aspx Review of the Regulation of Access to Communications] (known as the Blunn Report) in order to, among other things, create a warrant regime to allow access to stored communications held by a telecommunications carrier and enable the interception of communications of a person known to communicate with the person of interest.[2]
- ''References''
- * [1] Read Senator Ludwig's full explanation of his amendments and the associated debate [http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?id=2006-03-28.138.1 here], after 10:27 pm.
- * [2] Read more about the bill in its [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd0506/06bd102 bills digest].
|