All changes made to the description and title of this
division.
View division
|
Edit description
| Change |
Division |
|
senate vote 2022-12-01#12
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2022-12-02 12:53:45
|
Title
Description
-
- The majority voted against an [amendment](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2022-12-01.450.1) that would have added the words below to an original motion, which means the original motion will remain unchanged. The amendment was introduced by Tasmanian Senator [Jonathon Duniam](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/tasmania/jonathon_duniam) (Liberal).
- ### Original motion
- > *That the report from the committee be adopted.*
- This means that the changes agreed to by the committee would be agreed to and adopted by the Senate.
- ### Amendment text
- > *At the end of the motion, add “, but the Senate is of the opinion that if this bill is passed, the Government should ensure that:*
- >
- >> *(a) any drug intended for the use of ending human life requires the approval of
- the Therapeutic Goods Administration, by seeking to amend the
- Therapeutic Goods Act 1989 so that there is no capacity for exemptions
- from the provisions of Parts 3-2 and 3-2A of the Act to be granted in
- relation to such drugs; and*
- >>
- >> *(b) the importation of any drug intended for the use of ending human life is
- prohibited and that no regulation is made under the Customs (Prohibited
- Imports) Regulations 1956 to provide for the granting of a licence or
- permission to import any such drug”.*
- ### Why are the major parties split on how to vote?
- This was a [free vote](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/help/faq#free) (also known as a conscience vote), which means our senators voted according to their own beliefs rather than voting along party lines.
-
-
|
|
senate vote 2022-12-01#12
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2022-12-02 12:52:29
|
Title
Bills — Restoring Territory Rights Bill 2022; in Committee- Restoring Territory Rights Bill 2022 - in Committee - Approval and importation of drugs
Description
<p class="speaker">Katy Gallagher</p><p>I move:</p>-
- The majority voted against an [amendment](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2022-12-01.450.1) that would have added the words below to an original motion, which means the original motion will remain unchanged. The amendment was introduced by Tasmanian Senator [Jonathon Duniam](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/tasmania/jonathon_duniam) (Liberal).
- ### Original motion
- > *That the report from the committee be adopted.*
- This means that the changes agreed to by the committee would be agreed to and adopted by the Senate.
- ### Amendment text
- > *At the end of the motion, add “, but the Senate is of the opinion that if this bill is passed, the Government should ensure that:*
- >
- >> *(a) any drug intended for the use of ending human life requires the approval of
- the Therapeutic Goods Administration, by seeking to amend the
- Therapeutic Goods Act 1989 so that there is no capacity for exemptions
- from the provisions of Parts 3-2 and 3-2A of the Act to be granted in
- relation to such drugs; and*
- >>
- >> *(b) the importation of any drug intended for the use of ending human life is
- prohibited and that no regulation is made under the Customs (Prohibited
- Imports) Regulations 1956 to provide for the granting of a licence or
- permission to import any such drug”.*
<p class="italic">That the report be adopted.</p> <p class="speaker">Jonathon Duniam</p><p>AM (—) (): Very briefly—I don't want to detain the Senate or those who are interested in this debate for long at all—I think it is important to note that this debate has been a long time coming and that the resolution of it is important to deliver to those who've been banking on it, so I will be very, very brief in my contribution.</p><p>I have circulated an amendment around this question, that the report of the committee be adopted. It relates to the administration of rules around access to the medicines used in the administration of VAD, bringing them into line with other medications through the processes available through the Therapeutic Goods Administration and its relevant legislation. It's a very straightforward amendment. Obviously, noting the scope of this legislation, it is something that is, in a sense, outside the scope of the bill that we are going to pass tonight. But I did, as I said last week, want to give voice to the issues that have been raised and that's what I'm doing today. It is important that we make sure we are apprised of all the facts and that all the safeguards are in place, much in the same way as we heard in the last debate about protection for vulnerable people in our community.</p><p>Before I conclude my very brief remarks, I also just want to add my thanks to every single senator in this chamber. I'm very proud of the conduct of the debate that took place here. It was sensitive; it's difficult, and everyone has made sure that the views that were expressed were heard in good faith. I particularly want to thank Senator Gallagher and Senator Hanson-Young for so willingly accommodating this and enabling the amendment to be moved. I it added another week, so I'm grateful for your time. If we can do it in this chamber—if we can have a respectful debate in this chamber—I hope that our friends in the Press Gallery can observe what we do and not ascribe motive without understanding why we're doing it. It is important that we are able to do this. As I said, I am proud of my colleagues, who have very different views to my own, for conducting the debate in this way.</p><p>With that I move:</p><p class="italic"> <i>The text of the amendment was unavailable at the time of publishing.</i></p> <p class="speaker">Sue Lines</p><p>The question is that the amendment to the report as moved by Senator Duniam be agreed to.</p><p></p><p></p> -
-
|