The majority voted against amendments introduced by West Australian Senator Michaelia Cash (Liberal), which means they failed.

What do the amendments do?

Senator Cash described her amendments during her second reading speech.

Amendment text

See OpenAustralia.org.au for amendment text.

The majority voted against a second reading amendment introduced by Queensland Senator Gerard Rennick (Liberal), which means it failed.

What are second reading amendments?

Second reading amendments like these don't make legal changes themselves, but instead represent the will of the Senate. They add words to the usual second reading motion, which is "that the bill be read a second time", which is parliamentary jargon for agreeing with the main idea of the bill.

Motion text

At the end of the motion, add ", but the Senate:

(a) notes that with this policy the Government has failed to:

(i) consider the need to dispose of EV car batteries in an environmentally safe manner,

(ii) address the hazardous by-products of redundant EV car batteries and ensure that toxic substances do not leach into the environment,

(iii) consider the costs of recycling EV car batteries,

(iv) introduce regulatory standards or criteria for recycled EV car batteries to be re-sold to the public,

(b) calls on the Government to outline a plan for EV battery recycling and consider other proposals to cover the costs of recycling and disposal of EV car batteries

The majority voted against a second reading amendment introduced by West Australian Senator Dean Smith (Liberal), which means it failed.

What are second reading amendments?

Second reading amendments like these don't make legal changes themselves, but instead represent the will of the Senate. They add words to the usual second reading motion, which is "that the bill be read a second time", which is parliamentary jargon for agreeing with the main idea of the bill.

Motion text

At the end of the motion, add ", but the Senate:

(a) notes that:

(i) with this policy the Government has failed to:

(A) establish clear criteria and metrics of success for the policy,

(B) ensure the expenditure is temporary, proportionate, and linked to tangible productivity gains,

(C) quantify any benefit of the policy to electric vehicle uptake, to emissions reduction, or the budget bottom line,

(D) tangibly address the biggest constraint on electric vehicle uptake, which is supply and infrastructure, and

(E) consult with business and civil society on policy design,

(ii) the legislation does not address the core supply issues of electric vehicles, and will not substantially close the consequent cost gap between electric vehicles and non-electric vehicles,

(iii) the Coalition supports increased uptake of low and zero emissions vehicles and the Coalition government's focus was on enabling consumer choice when it comes to new vehicle and fuel technologies, and

(iv) the Coalition is focused on partnering with industry to support the uptake of new vehicle technologies and creating the necessary enabling environment to support uptake, which includes helping to support the infrastructure roll-out and ensuring that the electricity grid is ready; and

(b) calls on the Government to invest the substantial medium-term cost of the measure in supporting practical electric vehicle infrastructure and cost of living relief for hard working Australians".

The majority voted against amendments introduced by Victorian Senator Bridget McKenzie (Nationals), which means they failed.

Amendment text

(1) Clause 8, page 6 (line 22), after "relevant parties", insert "(including extensive consultation with local communities)".

(2) Clause 8, page 7 (after line 17), after subclause (1), insert:

(1A) In performing the functions mentioned in paragraph (1)(a), the Authority must:

(a) arrange for the Productivity Commission and Infrastructure Australia to:

(i) undertake economic assessments and cost benefit analyses; and

(ii) give the Authority a written report of each assessment and analysis; and

(b) publish a copy of each of those reports on the Authority's website within 14 days after the report is given to the Authority.

(3) Clause 16, page 11 (after line 15), at the end of the clause, add:

(5) The Minister must ensure that at least one Board member is a person who is from rural or regional Australia.

(4) Clause 47, page 24 (line 5), after "plan,", insert "the requirement to give progress reports,".

(5) Page 24 (after line 15), after clause 48, insert:

48A Progress reports

(1) After the end of each progress report period, the Board must prepare a report on the performance of the Authority's functions, including the progress of:

(a) the policy development and planning mentioned in paragraph 8(1)(a); and

(b) the construction or extension of a railway mentioned in paragraph 8(1)(b) or (c).

(2) The Board must cause a copy of the report to be tabled in each House of the Parliament within 15 sitting days of that House after the end of the progress report period.

(3) For the purposes of this section, progress report period means:

(a) the period of 6 months starting on the day this section commences; and

(b) each subsequent 6-month period.

Note: This section applies in addition to section 39 of the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 (which deals with annual performance statements for Commonwealth entities).

The majority voted against amendments introduced by Tasmanian Senator Jonathon Duniam (Liberal), which means they failed.

What were the amendments?

Senator Duniam explained the amendments:

There has been a lot said about our desire to improve the capacity for pensioners and other recipients of income support to contribute to the economy and receive income without it penalising them. Currently, under subsection 1073AA of the Social Security Act 1991, pensioners are limited to earning income concessions of up to 300 bucks over an instalment period of 14 days. The amendment request we're making here is in relation to doubling that amount to $600 and enabling those recipients of the pension payment to continue to receive that without the penalty that they would otherwise be exposed to.

The majority voted against amendments introduced by NSW Senator Mehreen Faruqi (Greens), which means they failed.

What did these amendments do?

Senator Faurqi explained that:

The bill as it's drafted allows providers to give educators employed in their centres a discount on their services. This discount is intended to assist in attracting and retaining educators. It does provide a little bit of that benefit, but it is completely inadequate for that purpose. We support this measure because it does provide support to educators, but, importantly, it is a bit unfair because it excludes many of the other staff at centres. We see no reason why other staff who are not educators but still work at early childhood education and care centres and do important work should not be included in this. These staff are necessary for the functioning of early childhood education and care centres and should not miss out on this discount.

Amendment text

(1) Schedule 5, item 3, page 23 (line 19), omit "educator".

(2) Schedule 5, item 4, page 23 (line 24), omit "educator".

(3) Schedule 5, item 5, page 24 (line 2), omit "educator", substitute "individual".

(4) Schedule 5, item 5, page 24 (line 7), omit "educator".

(5) Schedule 5, item 5, page 24 (lines 12 to 14), omit ", as an educator (within the meaning of the Education and Care Services National Law)".

(6) Schedule 5, item 5, page 24 (line 18), omit "educator".

(7) Schedule 5, item 5, page 24 (line 23), omit "educator".

(8) Schedule 6, item 2, page 27 (line 23), omit "educator".

(9) Schedule 6, item 5, page 28 (line 9), omit "educator".

(10) Schedule 6, item 5, page 28 (line 14), omit "educator".

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Queensland Senator Susan McDonald (Nationals), which means it failed.

Motion text

That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following is a matter of urgency:

That the Senate reaffirms the need for investment to ensure future domestic gas supply and that the Government's axing of policies to increase supply, coupled with its internal divisions on gas market policy, will only drive gas prices higher.