|
senate vote 2013-06-18#9
Edited by
system
on
2014-10-07 16:21:19
|
Title
Description
The majority voted against an [http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?gid=2013-06-18.147.2 amendment] introduced by Greens Senator [http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Lee_Rhiannon&mpc=Senate&house=senate Lee Rhiannon], which means that it was unsuccessful.Senator Rhiannon explained that:''This amendment defines the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Information_Act_1982 FOI] applications that can be made in relation to parliamentary departments and office holders. The amendment is that information relating to the parliamentary departments, office holders' use of public resources and departmental administrative functions should be subject to FOI, while information relating to parliamentary proceedings, matters of political strategy or an MP's activities-for example, when dealing with constituents-are not.''(Read Senator Rhiannon's full explanation and the associated debate [http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?id=2013-06-18.147.1 here], after 7:17 pm.
)Background to the billThe bill was introduced to amend the [http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/psa1999235/ Parliamentary Service Act 1999] to restore the exclusion for the parliamentary departments and office holders from the application of the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Information_Act_1982 Freedom of Information Act 1982].(Read more about the bill, including its explanatory memorandum, [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r5083 here].
) This affects three parliamentary departments: the [http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Department_of_the_Senate Department of the Senate], the [http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Department_of_the_House_of_Representatives Department of the House of Representatives] and the [http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Employment/Department_of_Parliamentary_Services Department of Parliamentary Services].(More information about the background to the bill can be found in its [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1213a/13bd136 bills digest].)- The majority voted against an [amendment](http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?gid=2013-06-18.147.2) introduced by Greens Senator [Lee Rhiannon](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Lee_Rhiannon&mpc=Senate&house=senate), which means that it was unsuccessful.
- Senator Rhiannon explained that:
- _This amendment defines the [FOI](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Information_Act_1982) applications that can be made in relation to parliamentary departments and office holders. The amendment is that information relating to the parliamentary departments, office holders' use of public resources and departmental administrative functions should be subject to FOI, while information relating to parliamentary proceedings, matters of political strategy or an MP's activities-for example, when dealing with constituents-are not._(Read Senator Rhiannon's full explanation and the associated debate [here](http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?id=2013-06-18.147.1), after 7:17 pm. )
- Background to the bill
- The bill was introduced to amend the [Parliamentary Service Act 1999](http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/psa1999235/) to restore the exclusion for the parliamentary departments and office holders from the application of the [Freedom of Information Act 1982](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Information_Act_1982).(Read more about the bill, including its explanatory memorandum, [here](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r5083). ) This affects three parliamentary departments: the [Department of the Senate](http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Department_of_the_Senate), the [Department of the House of Representatives](http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Department_of_the_House_of_Representatives) and the [Department of Parliamentary Services](http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Employment/Department_of_Parliamentary_Services).(More information about the background to the bill can be found in its [bills digest](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1213a/13bd136).)
|
|
senate vote 2013-06-18#9
Edited by
system
on
2014-10-07 16:16:55
|
Title
Description
- The majority voted against an [http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?gid=2013-06-18.147.2 amendment] introduced by Greens Senator [http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Lee_Rhiannon&mpc=Senate&house=senate Lee Rhiannon], which means that it was unsuccessful.
- Senator Rhiannon explained that:
''This amendment defines the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Information_Act_1982 FOI] applications that can be made in relation to parliamentary departments and office holders. The amendment is that information relating to the parliamentary departments, office holders' use of public resources and departmental administrative functions should be subject to FOI, while information relating to parliamentary proceedings, matters of political strategy or an MP's activities-for example, when dealing with constituents-are not.''[1]- ''This amendment defines the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Information_Act_1982 FOI] applications that can be made in relation to parliamentary departments and office holders. The amendment is that information relating to the parliamentary departments, office holders' use of public resources and departmental administrative functions should be subject to FOI, while information relating to parliamentary proceedings, matters of political strategy or an MP's activities-for example, when dealing with constituents-are not.''(Read Senator Rhiannon's full explanation and the associated debate [http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?id=2013-06-18.147.1 here], after 7:17 pm.
)
- Background to the bill
The bill was introduced to amend the [http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/psa1999235/ Parliamentary Service Act 1999] to restore the exclusion for the parliamentary departments and office holders from the application of the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Information_Act_1982 Freedom of Information Act 1982].[2] This affects three parliamentary departments: the [http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Department_of_the_Senate Department of the Senate], the [http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Department_of_the_House_of_Representatives Department of the House of Representatives] and the [http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Employment/Department_of_Parliamentary_Services Department of Parliamentary Services].[3]- The bill was introduced to amend the [http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/psa1999235/ Parliamentary Service Act 1999] to restore the exclusion for the parliamentary departments and office holders from the application of the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Information_Act_1982 Freedom of Information Act 1982].(Read more about the bill, including its explanatory memorandum, [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r5083 here].
) This affects three parliamentary departments: the [http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Department_of_the_Senate Department of the Senate], the [http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Department_of_the_House_of_Representatives Department of the House of Representatives] and the [http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Employment/Department_of_Parliamentary_Services Department of Parliamentary Services].(More information about the background to the bill can be found in its [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1213a/13bd136 bills digest].)
''References''* [1] Read Senator Rhiannon's full explanation and the associated debate [http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?id=2013-06-18.147.1 here], after 7:17 pm.* [2] Read more about the bill, including its explanatory memorandum, [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r5083 here].* [3] More information about the background to the bill can be found in its [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1213a/13bd136 bills digest].
|
|
senate vote 2013-06-18#9
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2014-08-28 14:31:13
|
Title
Description
- The majority voted against an [http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?gid=2013-06-18.147.2 amendment] introduced by Greens Senator [http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Lee_Rhiannon&mpc=Senate&house=senate Lee Rhiannon], which means that it was unsuccessful.
- Senator Rhiannon explained that:
''This amendment defines the [Freedom of Information (FOI)] applications that can be made in relation to parliamentary departments and office holders. The amendment is that information relating to the parliamentary departments, office holders' use of public resources and departmental administrative functions should be subject to FOI, while information relating to parliamentary proceedings, matters of political strategy or an MP's activities-for example, when dealing with constituents-are not.''[1]- ''This amendment defines the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Information_Act_1982 FOI] applications that can be made in relation to parliamentary departments and office holders. The amendment is that information relating to the parliamentary departments, office holders' use of public resources and departmental administrative functions should be subject to FOI, while information relating to parliamentary proceedings, matters of political strategy or an MP's activities-for example, when dealing with constituents-are not.''[1]
- Background to the bill
- The bill was introduced to amend the [http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/psa1999235/ Parliamentary Service Act 1999] to restore the exclusion for the parliamentary departments and office holders from the application of the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Information_Act_1982 Freedom of Information Act 1982].[2] This affects three parliamentary departments: the [http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Department_of_the_Senate Department of the Senate], the [http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Department_of_the_House_of_Representatives Department of the House of Representatives] and the [http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Employment/Department_of_Parliamentary_Services Department of Parliamentary Services].[3]
- ''References''
- * [1] Read Senator Rhiannon's full explanation and the associated debate [http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?id=2013-06-18.147.1 here], after 7:17 pm.
- * [2] Read more about the bill, including its explanatory memorandum, [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r5083 here].
- * [3] More information about the background to the bill can be found in its [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1213a/13bd136 bills digest].
|
|
senate vote 2013-06-18#9
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2014-08-28 14:30:08
|
Title
Description
- The majority voted against an [http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?gid=2013-06-18.147.2 amendment] introduced by Greens Senator [http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Lee_Rhiannon&mpc=Senate&house=senate Lee Rhiannon], which means that it was unsuccessful.
- Senator Rhiannon explained that:
''This amendment defines the FOI applications that can be made in relation to parliamentary departments and office holders. The amendment is that information relating to the parliamentary departments, office holders' use of public resources and departmental administrative functions should be subject to FOI, while information relating to parliamentary proceedings, matters of political strategy or an MP's activities-for example, when dealing with constituents-are not.''[1]- ''This amendment defines the [Freedom of Information (FOI)] applications that can be made in relation to parliamentary departments and office holders. The amendment is that information relating to the parliamentary departments, office holders' use of public resources and departmental administrative functions should be subject to FOI, while information relating to parliamentary proceedings, matters of political strategy or an MP's activities-for example, when dealing with constituents-are not.''[1]
- Background to the bill
- The bill was introduced to amend the [http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/psa1999235/ Parliamentary Service Act 1999] to restore the exclusion for the parliamentary departments and office holders from the application of the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Information_Act_1982 Freedom of Information Act 1982].[2] This affects three parliamentary departments: the [http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Department_of_the_Senate Department of the Senate], the [http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Department_of_the_House_of_Representatives Department of the House of Representatives] and the [http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Employment/Department_of_Parliamentary_Services Department of Parliamentary Services].[3]
- ''References''
- * [1] Read Senator Rhiannon's full explanation and the associated debate [http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?id=2013-06-18.147.1 here], after 7:17 pm.
- * [2] Read more about the bill, including its explanatory memorandum, [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r5083 here].
- * [3] More information about the background to the bill can be found in its [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1213a/13bd136 bills digest].
|
|
senate vote 2013-06-18#9
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2014-08-28 14:29:32
|
Title
Parliamentary Service Amendment (Freedom of Information) Bill 2013 - In Committee - Freedom of certain information- Parliamentary Service Amendment (Freedom of Information) Bill 2013 — In Committee — Freedom of certain information
Description
- The majority voted against an [http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?gid=2013-06-18.147.2 amendment] introduced by Greens Senator [http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Lee_Rhiannon&mpc=Senate&house=senate Lee Rhiannon], which means that it was unsuccessful.
- Senator Rhiannon explained that:
''This amendment defines the FOI applications that can be made in relation to parliamentary departments and office holders. The amendment is that information relating to the parliamentary departments, office holders' use of public resources and departmental administrative functions should be subject to FOI, while information relating to parliamentary proceedings, matters of political strategy or an MP's activities—for example, when dealing with constituents—are not.''- ''This amendment defines the FOI applications that can be made in relation to parliamentary departments and office holders. The amendment is that information relating to the parliamentary departments, office holders' use of public resources and departmental administrative functions should be subject to FOI, while information relating to parliamentary proceedings, matters of political strategy or an MP's activities-for example, when dealing with constituents-are not.''[1]
- Background to the bill
The bill was introduced to amend the [http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/psa1999235/ Parliamentary Service Act 1999] to restore the exclusion for the parliamentary departments and office holders from the application of the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Information_Act_1982 Freedom of Information Act 1982].[1] This affects three parliamentary departments: the [http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Department_of_the_Senate Department of the Senate], the [http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Department_of_the_House_of_Representatives Department of the House of Representatives] and the [http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Employment/Department_of_Parliamentary_Services Department of Parliamentary Services].[2]- The bill was introduced to amend the [http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/psa1999235/ Parliamentary Service Act 1999] to restore the exclusion for the parliamentary departments and office holders from the application of the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Information_Act_1982 Freedom of Information Act 1982].[2] This affects three parliamentary departments: the [http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Department_of_the_Senate Department of the Senate], the [http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Department_of_the_House_of_Representatives Department of the House of Representatives] and the [http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Employment/Department_of_Parliamentary_Services Department of Parliamentary Services].[3]
- ''References''
* [1] Read more about the bill, including its explanatory memorandum, [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r5083 here].* [2] More information about the background to the bill can be found in its [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1213a/13bd136 bills digest].- * [1] Read Senator Rhiannon's full explanation and the associated debate [http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?id=2013-06-18.147.1 here], after 7:17 pm.
- * [2] Read more about the bill, including its explanatory memorandum, [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r5083 here].
- * [3] More information about the background to the bill can be found in its [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1213a/13bd136 bills digest].
|
|
senate vote 2013-06-18#9
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2014-08-28 14:28:18
|
Title
Bills — Parliamentary Service Amendment (Freedom of Information) Bill 2013; in Committee- Parliamentary Service Amendment (Freedom of Information) Bill 2013 - In Committee - Freedom of certain information
Description
<p class="speaker">Ursula Stephens</p><p>The question is that the bill stand as printed.</p> <p class="speaker">Lee Rhiannon</p>- The majority voted against an [http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?gid=2013-06-18.147.2 amendment] introduced by Greens Senator [http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Lee_Rhiannon&mpc=Senate&house=senate Lee Rhiannon], which means that it was unsuccessful.
- Senator Rhiannon explained that:
- ''This amendment defines the FOI applications that can be made in relation to parliamentary departments and office holders. The amendment is that information relating to the parliamentary departments, office holders' use of public resources and departmental administrative functions should be subject to FOI, while information relating to parliamentary proceedings, matters of political strategy or an MP's activities—for example, when dealing with constituents—are not.''
- Background to the bill
- The bill was introduced to amend the [http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/psa1999235/ Parliamentary Service Act 1999] to restore the exclusion for the parliamentary departments and office holders from the application of the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Information_Act_1982 Freedom of Information Act 1982].[1] This affects three parliamentary departments: the [http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Department_of_the_Senate Department of the Senate], the [http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Department_of_the_House_of_Representatives Department of the House of Representatives] and the [http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Employment/Department_of_Parliamentary_Services Department of Parliamentary Services].[2]
- ''References''
- * [1] Read more about the bill, including its explanatory memorandum, [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r5083 here].
- * [2] More information about the background to the bill can be found in its [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1213a/13bd136 bills digest].
<p>I move Greens amendment (1) on sheet 7391 revised:</p><p class="italic">(1) Schedule 1, page 3 (lines 1 to 26), omit Schedule 1, substitute:</p><p class="italic">Schedule 1—Amendments</p><p class="italic"> <i>Freedom of Information Act 1982</i></p><p class="italic">1 After section 6A</p><p class="italic">  Insert:</p><p class="italic">6B Department of the House of Representatives, Department of the Senate and Department of Parliamentary Services</p><p class="italic">(1) This Act does not apply to any request for access to a document of the Department of the House of Representatives, the Department of the Senate or the Department of Parliamentary Services unless the document relates to matters of an administrative nature.</p><p class="italic">(2) For the avoidance of doubt, the reference to a document of an administrative nature in subsection (1) includes a document to the extent that is:</p><p class="italic">  (a) statistical information about the activities of the Department; or</p><p class="italic">  (b) information about the expenditure of public moneys; or</p><p class="italic">  (c) information about payments to a Senator or member of the House of Representatives; or</p><p class="italic">  (d) information about services and facilities provided to a Senator or member of the House of Representatives; or</p><p class="italic">  (e) information about assets, resources, support systems and other administrative matters of the Department.</p><p class="italic">(3) For the avoidance of doubt, the reference to a document of an administrative nature in subsection (1) does not include a document to the extent that it is:</p><p class="italic">  (a) research or advice provided to a Senator or member of the House of Representatives; or</p><p class="italic">  (b) information held on behalf of a Senator or member of the House of Representatives; or</p><p class="italic">  (c) information about how a Senator or member of the House of Representatives performs their role as a Senator or member of the House of Representatives; or</p><p class="italic">  (d) any advice provided to a Senator or member of the House of Representatives; or</p><p class="italic">  (e) information that is otherwise subject to parliamentary privilege.</p><p class="italic">(4) For the avoidance of doubt, nothing in this section limits or infringes the powers, privileges and immunities of the Houses of the Parliament.</p><p>This amendment defines the FOI applications that can be made in relation to parliamentary departments and office holders. The amendment is that information relating to the parliamentary departments, office holders' use of public resources and departmental administrative functions should be subject to FOI, while information relating to parliamentary proceedings, matters of political strategy or an MP's activities—for example, when dealing with constituents—are not.</p><p>I would just like to spell it out and give you some examples of what that means. I would argue strongly that, when you look at the detail, it really is hard to understand why this is being opposed. FOI applications would be limited to statistical information about the department's activities; information about the expenditure of public money—including payments to members and senators, as well as payments to services and facilities to support parliamentarians in Parliament House; and information about the department's assets, resources, support systems and other administrative matters. The following would be excluded from FOI requests: research or advice to members of parliament provided by the Parliamentary Library; information held by the parliamentary departments solely as an agent for or on behalf of the House of Representatives, the Senate or a member of parliament, regardless of whether that information resides on facilities provided by the parliamentary departments; information held by a parliamentary department about a member of parliament in relation to the member's performance or his or her role and functions as a member; and advice provided by the Parliamentary Service Act 1999 staff, irrespective of whether or not parliamentary privilege applies to a member of parliament.</p><p>In fact, when you put those two together—what is in and what is out—it is very responsible. It is actually very limiting. As I said in the second reading debate, there is nothing in this group of amendments that limits or affects any privileges, immunities or powers of the House of Representatives or the Senate. That the Senate FOI regime would not apply to any matter subject to parliamentary privilege is clearly achieved. I commend the Greens amendment (1) to the Senate.</p> <p class="speaker">Scott Ryan</p><p>The coalition does not support the Greens amendment. In our view, the parliamentary departments covered do a very extensive job of making relevant information available and, as I stated in my second reading contribution, this does not preclude the future consideration of it by the parliament. But, due to the unexpected removal of the exemption or the apparent nature of it, being made last year, we believe that this needs to be reinstated. A future parliament can reconsider it.</p><p>I will conclude by saying that I am happy to respectfully disagree with Senator Rhiannon, but I will not be lectured here on bills being rushed through, given I have sat in this very chair on many occasions on bills—that are on electoral matters and on audit matters—where the Greens have supported a government guillotine, where there was no opposition contribution in a second reading debate and there were no opposition, government or minor party contributions to the consideration of amendments to very important legislation. I think Senator Rhiannon might be able to come down a bit off the soapbox before we get a lecture.</p> <p class="speaker">Stephen Conroy</p><p>I indicate that the government rejects this amendment. The effect of the proposed amendment is to make a substantive amendment to the FOI Act: to change the application of the FOI Act to include the parliamentary departments. The application of the FOI Act to the parliamentary departments has been considered by Dr Hawke's FOI review. It is premature for the government to take action to amend the FOI Act before it has had an opportunity to consider and respond to recommendations in the review. The government understands that Dr Hawke has completed his review and is in the process of preparing a report on that review. The Attorney-General expects to receive Dr Hawke's report in coming weeks. In the meantime, the government has agreed to the request of the Presiding Officers to amend the Parliamentary Service Act as an interim measure to ensure that parliamentary departments are not exposed to requests they are not currently in a position to handle.</p><p>The bill as drafted takes into account the views expressed by the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Department of the House of Representatives, the Department of the Senate, the Department of Parliamentary Services, the Joint Standing Committee on the Parliamentary Library, and the Parliamentary Library. Consequently, the government does not support the Greens amendment at this time. Once the government has received and has had an opportunity to consider a response to Dr Hawke's report, the government will make a fully considered decision on the application of the FOI Act to the parliamentary departments.</p> <p class="speaker">Lee Rhiannon</p><p>Minister, could you explain why the legislation has been brought in prior to the Hawke review being available for our consideration, considering that when the former Attorney-General established the Hawke review it was clearly understood that it would review the very issue that we are now grappling with in this legislation?</p> <p class="speaker">Stephen Conroy</p><p>It is an interim measure to return us to where we were. At the moment we have got ahead of the Hawke review, so this is an interim measure to restore the status quo.</p> <p class="speaker">Ursula Stephens</p><p>The question is that amendment (1) on sheet 7391 revised, moved by Senator Rhiannon on behalf of the Australian Greens, be agreed to.</p>
|