All changes made to the description and title of this
division.
View division
|
Edit description
| Change |
Division |
|
senate vote 2019-02-14#7
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2019-02-28 14:39:09
|
Title
Motions - Murray-Darling Basin Royal Commission - Reform needed- Motions - Murray-Darling Basin Royal Commission - Respond to recommendations
Description
The majority voted in favour of paragraph (a)(i) to (iv) of a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?id=2019-02-14.58.1) introduced by South Australian Senator [Tim Storer](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/sa/tim_storer) (Independent), which means it succeeded. Motions like these don't have any legal force on their own but are politically influential as they represent the will of the Senate.- The majority voted in favour of paragraph (b)(i) of a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?id=2019-02-14.58.1) introduced by South Australian Senator [Tim Storer](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/sa/tim_storer) (Independent), which means it succeeded. Motions like these don't have any legal force on their own but are politically influential as they represent the will of the Senate.
- ### Motion text
- > *That the Senate—*
- >
> *(a) notes that:*- > *...*
- >
>> *(i) the Murray-Darling Basin needs more water to ensure its survival, the latest evidence of this being the fish-kills at Menindee Lakes,*>>>> *(ii) the management of the Murray-Darling Basin requires urgent reform,*>>>> *(iii) the Murray-Darling Basin Royal Commission delivered its findings on 29 January 2019, including recommendations to:*>>>>> *(A) improve transparency by "requiring real-time data sharing and publication on water extractions",*>>>>>> *(B) abolish the water buybacks cap of 1,500 gigalitres, and*>>>>>> *(C) undertake further research into return flows so that we know the effects of irrigation efficiency projects, and*>>>>> *(iv) the Productivity Commission delivered its findings to the Federal Government on 19 December 2018, pointing out that:*>>>>>> *(A) the Murray-Darling Basin Authority's twin roles as overseer of the Plan and its regulator are "conflicted and the conflicts will intensity in the next five years", and*>>>>>> *(B) structural separation of the Murray-Darling Basin Authority into a Basin Plan Regulator and Murray-Darling Basin Agency is required to ensure effective implementation of the Plan; and*>>- > *(b) calls on the Federal Government to:*
- >> *(i) immediately respond to each and every recommendation proposed by the Murray-Darling Basin Royal Commission and the Productivity Commission's review of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan, and*
- >> *...*
|
|
senate vote 2019-02-14#7
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2019-02-28 14:31:36
|
Title
Description
- The majority voted in favour of paragraph (a)(i) to (iv) of a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?id=2019-02-14.58.1) introduced by South Australian Senator [Tim Storer](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/sa/tim_storer) (Independent), which means it succeeded. Motions like these don't have any legal force on their own but are politically influential as they represent the will of the Senate.
- ### Motion text
- > *That the Senate—*
- >
- > *(a) notes that:*
- >
- >> *(i) the Murray-Darling Basin needs more water to ensure its survival, the latest evidence of this being the fish-kills at Menindee Lakes,*
- >>
- >> *(ii) the management of the Murray-Darling Basin requires urgent reform,*
- >>
- >> *(iii) the Murray-Darling Basin Royal Commission delivered its findings on 29 January 2019, including recommendations to:*
- >>
- >>> *(A) improve transparency by "requiring real-time data sharing and publication on water extractions",*
- >>>
- >>> *(B) abolish the water buybacks cap of 1,500 gigalitres, and*
- >>>
- >>> *(C) undertake further research into return flows so that we know the effects of irrigation efficiency projects, and*
- >>>
- >> *(iv) the Productivity Commission delivered its findings to the Federal Government on 19 December 2018, pointing out that:*
- >>>
- >>> *(A) the Murray-Darling Basin Authority's twin roles as overseer of the Plan and its regulator are "conflicted and the conflicts will intensity in the next five years", and*
- >>>
- >>> *(B) structural separation of the Murray-Darling Basin Authority into a Basin Plan Regulator and Murray-Darling Basin Agency is required to ensure effective implementation of the Plan; and*
>> *...*- >>
- >> *...*
|
|
senate vote 2019-02-14#7
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2019-02-28 14:31:14
|
Title
Motions — Murray-Darling Basin Royal Commission- Motions - Murray-Darling Basin Royal Commission - Reform needed
Description
<p class="speaker">Scott Ryan</p><p>The question is that paragraph (b)(i) of motion No. 1374 be agreed to.</p><p>The question is that paragraph (b)(ii) of motion No. 1374 be agreed to.</p>- The majority voted in favour of paragraph (a)(i) to (iv) of a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?id=2019-02-14.58.1) introduced by South Australian Senator [Tim Storer](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/sa/tim_storer) (Independent), which means it succeeded. Motions like these don't have any legal force on their own but are politically influential as they represent the will of the Senate.
- ### Motion text
- > *That the Senate—*
- >
- > *(a) notes that:*
- >
- >> *(i) the Murray-Darling Basin needs more water to ensure its survival, the latest evidence of this being the fish-kills at Menindee Lakes,*
- >>
- >> *(ii) the management of the Murray-Darling Basin requires urgent reform,*
- >>
- >> *(iii) the Murray-Darling Basin Royal Commission delivered its findings on 29 January 2019, including recommendations to:*
- >>
- >>> *(A) improve transparency by "requiring real-time data sharing and publication on water extractions",*
- >>>
- >>> *(B) abolish the water buybacks cap of 1,500 gigalitres, and*
- >>>
- >>> *(C) undertake further research into return flows so that we know the effects of irrigation efficiency projects, and*
- >>>
- >> *(iv) the Productivity Commission delivered its findings to the Federal Government on 19 December 2018, pointing out that:*
- >>>
- >>> *(A) the Murray-Darling Basin Authority's twin roles as overseer of the Plan and its regulator are "conflicted and the conflicts will intensity in the next five years", and*
- >>>
- >>> *(B) structural separation of the Murray-Darling Basin Authority into a Basin Plan Regulator and Murray-Darling Basin Agency is required to ensure effective implementation of the Plan; and*
- >
- > *...*
|