Division Description Changes — Bills — Treasury Laws Amendment (Personal Income Tax Plan) Bill 2018; Consideration of House of Representatives Message — 21st Jun 2018

Change	Division
senate vote 2018-06-21#7 Edited by mackay staff on 2023-06-23 10:20:42	Title Description The majority voted in favour of a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2018-06-21.31.1): > That the resolution be reported. > That [the resolution](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/divisions/senate/2018-06-21/6) be reported. The resolution in this case was that the committee does not insist on the Senate amendments that the House of Representatives disagreed with. Note that a bill must be agreed to by both the House of Representatives and the Senate in order to become a law. In this case, the Senate had voted for a number of amendments that the House of Representatives didn't agree with. If the Senate had insisted on their amendments, the bill would have failed.
senate vote 2018-06-21#7 Edited by mackay staff on 2023-06-23 10:20:09	Title Bills — Treasury Laws Amendment (Personal Income Tax Plan) Bill 2018; Consideration of House of Representatives Message Treasury Laws Amendment (Personal Income Tax Plan) Bill 2018 - Consideration of House of Representatives Message - Report resolution Description ~~<p class="speaker">Mathias Cormann</p>~~ ~~<p>I move:</p>~~ ~~<p class="italic">That the resolution be reported.</p>~~ ~~<p class="speaker">Penny Wong</p>~~ <p>A point of clarification: does the motion that the Senate passed yesterday mean that this motion is not debatable and that no suspension of standing orders can be moved in order to debate it?</p> <p>The CHAIR: That's correct.</p> ~~<p>Yet again the government's refusing to debate its tax laws.</p>~~ ~~<p>The CHAIR: Thank you, Senator Wong.</p>~~ <p>I ask a further question, which is whether the government will now grant leave for party leaders, given what has just occurred—that the Senate is not insisting—to be given five minutes.</p> ~~<p>The CHAIR: I'm going to put the question. The question is that—</p>~~ ~~<p>I've asked a question.</p>~~ <p>The CHAIR: There's a motion before us and it needs to be put.</p> ~~<p>Well I'll move an amendment.</p>~~ ~~<p>The CHAIR: There's to be no amendment or debate.</p>~~ ~~<p>I've asked the government if they will—</p>~~ ~~<p>The CHAIR: It's a matter for the government, Senator Wong.</p>~~ ~~<p>Is the minister going to respond?</p>~~ <p>The CHAIR: He hasn't stood, so I'm going to put the question. Senator—</p> ~~<p class="speaker">Gavin Marshall</p>~~ ~~<p>We are past the hard marker and we ought to be moving on to other business.</p>~~ <p>The CHAIR: Senator Marshall, we're already in the process of dealing with these motions, so they now need to be concluded regardless of us having passed that hard marker.</p> ~~<p>The CHAIR: The question, as moved by the minister, is that the resolution be reported.</p>~~ The majority voted in favour of a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2018-06-21.31.1): > That the resolution be reported. The resolution in this case was that the committee does not insist on the Senate amendments that the House of Representatives disagreed with. Note that a bill must be agreed to by both the House of Representatives and the Senate in order to become a law. In this case, the Senate had voted for a number of amendments that the House of Representatives didn't agree with. If the Senate had insisted on their amendments, the bill would have failed.

~~Mathias Cormann~~
~~I move:~~
~~That the resolution be reported.~~
~~Penny Wong~~
A point of clarification: does the motion that the Senate passed yesterday mean that this motion is not debatable and that no suspension of standing orders can be moved in order to debate it?
The CHAIR: That's correct.
~~Yet again the government's refusing to debate its tax laws.~~
~~The CHAIR: Thank you, Senator Wong.~~
I ask a further question, which is whether the government will now grant leave for party leaders, given what has just occurred—that the Senate is not insisting—to be given five minutes.
~~The CHAIR: I'm going to put the question. The question is that—~~
~~I've asked a question.~~
The CHAIR: There's a motion before us and it needs to be put.
~~Well I'll move an amendment.~~
~~The CHAIR: There's to be no amendment or debate.~~
~~I've asked the government if they will—~~
~~The CHAIR: It's a matter for the government, Senator Wong.~~
~~Is the minister going to respond?~~
The CHAIR: He hasn't stood, so I'm going to put the question. Senator—
~~Gavin Marshall~~
~~We are past the hard marker and we ought to be moving on to other business.~~
The CHAIR: Senator Marshall, we're already in the process of dealing with these motions, so they now need to be concluded regardless of us having passed that hard marker.
~~The CHAIR: The question, as moved by the minister, is that the resolution be reported.~~
The majority voted in favour of a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2018-06-21.31.1):
> *That the resolution be reported.*
The resolution in this case was that the committee does not insist on the Senate amendments that the House of Representatives disagreed with.
Note that a bill must be agreed to by both the House of Representatives and the Senate in order to become a law. In this case, the Senate had voted for a number of amendments that the House of Representatives didn't agree with. If the Senate had insisted on their amendments, the bill would have failed.