The majority voted against amendments introduced by Western Australian Senator Dean Smith (Liberal) on behalf of Victorian Senator Jane Hume (Liberal), which means they failed.

The amendments related to annual members’ meetings.

The majority voted in favour of a second reading amendment introduced by Victorian Senator James Paterson (Liberal), which means it passed.

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 calls on the Government:

(a) to clarify key definitions in the bill, in particular the meaning of 'serious' and 'repeated' in relation to breaches under the Act;

(b) to develop a tiered penalty regime that could take into account less severe breaches, and that seeks to differentiate between companies that have acted with malice and those that have taken all reasonable steps but have fallen victim to a cyber attack;

(c) to direct the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner to issue guidance material that addresses the application of penalties, and clarifies best practice for compliance with the regime; and

(d) to consider the adequacy of current resourcing and staffing levels for the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner and the Australian Cyber Security Centre for each to perform their functions, and to address all of the concerns raised by the former government in the Privacy Legislation Amendment (Enhancing Online Privacy and Other Measures) Bill 2021".

The majority voted against an amendment introduced by West Australian Senator Dorinda Cox (Greens), which means it failed.

Amendment text

(1) Page 6 (after line 30), at the end of Part 2, add:

11A Middle Arm Sustainable Development Precinct in the Northern Territory

No amount appropriated by this Act is to be spent on equity investment for the development of the Middle Arm Sustainable Development Precinct in the Northern Territory, including common use marine infrastructure and regional logistic hubs, as described on page 163 of Budget Paper No. 2 2022-23, which was tabled in both Houses of the Parliament on 25 October 2022.

What is the Middle Arm Sustainable Development Precinct?

According to ABC News, the Middle Arm Sustainable Development Precinct is:

where the NT government has proposed an industrial precinct featuring petrochemicals, minerals processing and renewables-based hydrogen.

The project, which is expected to include a jetty and other "common user marine infrastructure", was initially backed by the former Morrison government, which allocated the same funding over 10 years in its budget earlier this year.

Labor has described the precinct as a "a pathway to a decarbonised economy", but environmentalists have been highly critical of its expected use of fracked gas.

Though note a more recent report stated that:

The Northern Territory government has been accused of "greenwashing" after removing the term "petrochemicals" from its official documents about a new industrial hub on Darwin Harbour.

The yet-to-be developed site at Middle Arm — which received a $1.5 billion funding commitment in the federal budget — was previously promoted by the NT as a site for "low emission petrochemicals, renewable hydrogen and minerals processing".

But after environmentalists launched a campaign against the planned use of gas for some manufacturing at the site, Chief Minister Natasha Fyles said "mistruths" were being spread.

"This is not a petrochemical plant," Ms Fyles said earlier this month.

"This is a sustainable future project that is based on renewable energy into the future."

Her comments were at odds with multiple online government documents which referred to petrochemicals as being among the mix of industries, including renewables and minerals, that could be developed at the precinct.

But the term "petrochemicals" has now been scrubbed from many of those documents, while a new official website promoting the precinct features no references to the term.

The majority voted against a second reading amendment introduced by Queensland Senator [Malcolm Roberts](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/queensland/malcolm_roberts] (One Nation), which means it failed. The amendment would have added the text below to the usual second reading motion "That the bill be read a second time" - parliamentary jargon for agreeing with the main idea of a bill.

Amendment text

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

(a) notes that many Australians are unable to access medical cannabis owing to the bureaucratic framework in place, and the cost to patients; and

(b) calls on the Government:

(i) to make natural, whole plant, Australian medical cannabis available to any Australian with a medical need, by doctor's prescription, filled by a pharmacist on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme; and

(ii) to ensure that the decision to prescribe medical cannabis is a matter between only the doctor and the patient, which is subject to real time prescription monitoring in the same way as other controlled medicines".

The majority voted against an amendment to the usual second reading motion, which is "that the bill be read a second time". To read a bill for a second time is to agree with its main idea. This amendment was introduced by NSW Senator David Shoebridge (Greens).

Amendment text

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

(a) notes that:

(I) in 2020 the Community Affairs References Committee, as part of its inquiry into the current barriers to patient access to medicinal cannabis in Australia, concluded that 'the significant costs associated with accessing medicinal cannabis legally are causing a large number of Australians to purchase or grow illicit cannabis for self-medication', and

(ii) the committee recommended that the Government encourage a review of state and territory criminal legislation in relation to amnesties for the possession and/or cultivation of cannabis for genuine personal medicinal use; and

(b) calls on the Government to work with state and territory governments to develop a nationwide amnesty from criminal prosecution for people who have a legitimate medicinal cannabis prescription and are home growing cannabis for their personal use".

The majority voted in favour of a motion to agree with the main idea of the bill. In parliamentary jargon, they voted to read the bill for a second time. This means they can now discuss it in more detail.

Why are the major parties split on how to vote?

This was a free vote (also known as a conscience vote), which means our senators voted according to their own beliefs rather than voting along party lines.

What does this bill do?

According to the bills digest:

• The Bill proposes to remove the restrictions currently preventing the Australian Capital Territory and Northern Territory from passing legislation which would allow for voluntary assisted dying (VAD).
• These restrictions were introduced in 1997 through the passage of a private member’s Bill introduced by Mr Kevin Andrews MP.
• There have been a number of attempts by parliamentarians to remove these restrictions in previous Parliaments.

In other words, the purpose of the bill is to remove the prohibition on legalising euthanasia so that the Territories can introduce their own laws on the subject.

The majority voted in favour of a motion introduced by Tasmanian Senator Wendy Askew (Liberal) on behalf of Victorian Senator Bridget McKenzie (Nationals), which means it was successful.

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) notes that:

(i) order for production of documents no. 55 (the order) agreed by the Senate on 26 October 2022, requiring the Minister representing the Prime Minister and the Minister representing the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government to table correspondence, requests for, or approval of, Australian Government funding for projects or programs in the 2022-23 Federal Budget, has not been complied with,

(ii) the Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister, in his response to the order, made a claim of public interest immunity on the basis that it would damage relations between the Commonwealth and states, citing concerns that disclosure of the information would harm the Commonwealth's ongoing relationship with a state government on this and future infrastructure arrangements, and

(iii) the Minister representing the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government is yet to respond to the order;

(b) rejects the public interest immunity claim made by the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government noting that:

(i) when a claim of public interest immunity is made on the basis that it would damage relations between the Commonwealth and states, the agreement of the states to disclose the information should be sought and they should be invited to give reasons for any objection, and

(ii) no such agreement has been sought, nor has the Senate been advised of any objections from a state or territory government; and

(c) requires the Minister representing the Prime Minister and the Minister representing the Minister representing the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government to comply with the order by no later than midday on 28 November 2022.

The majority voted in favour of a motion introduced by Tasmanian Senator Wendy Askew (Liberal) on behalf of Victorian Senator Bridget McKenzie (Nationals), which means it was successful.

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) notes that:

(i) order for production of documents no. 50 (the order) agreed by the Senate on 25 October 2022, requiring the Minister representing the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government to table documents in relation to the Hahndorf Township Improvements and Access Upgrade Project, has not been complied with, and

(ii) the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government, in her response to the order, made a claim of public interest immunity on the basis that it would damage relations between the Commonwealth and states, citing concerns that disclosure of the information would harm the Commonwealth's ongoing relationship with a state government on this and future infrastructure arrangements;

(b) rejects the public interest immunity claim made by the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government, noting that:

(i) when a claim of public interest immunity is made on the basis that it would damage relations between the Commonwealth and states, the agreement of the states to disclose the information should be sought and they should be invited to give reasons for any objection, and

(ii) no such agreement has been sought, nor has the Senate been advised of any objections from the South Australian Government; and

(c) requires the Minister representing the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government to comply with the order by no later than midday on 28 November 2022.

Notice of motion altered 22 November 2022 pursuant to standing order 77.

The majority voted in favour of a motion introduced by Tasmanian Senator Wendy Askew (Liberal) on behalf of Victorian Senator Jane Hume (Liberal), which means it was successful.

Motion text

That there be laid on the table by the Minister for Finance, by no later than midday on Monday, 28 November 2022:

(a) a copy of the Budget Process Operational Rules used in the formation of the 2022-23 October Budget (BPORs);

(b) any briefings, minutes or advice provided to the Minister for Finance by the Department of Finance relating to the BPORs and amendments to the BPORs since 22 May 2022; and

(c) any letter, email, communique or other document that accompanied the BPORs when they were issued as advice to agencies.

The majority voted in favour of a motion introduced by Tasmanian Senator Wendy Askew (Liberal) on behalf of NSW Senator Andrew Bragg (Liberal), which means it was successful.

Motion text

That there be laid on the table by the Minister representing the Assistant Treasurer, by no later than 5 pm on Tuesday 29 November 2022, the following documents in relation to the consultation on 'Crypto asset secondary service providers: Licensing and custody requirements', commenced by the Treasury on 21 March 2022:

(a) all briefings provided to the Assistant Treasurer by the Treasury relating to the Treasury consultation, received between 21 May and 29 November 2022;

(b) all documents detailing any policy options that have been recommended to the Assistant Treasurer by the Treasury relating to the Treasury consultation, received between 21 May and 29 November 2022;

(c) any draft legislation that has been developed by the Treasury to implement the policy recommendations specified in paragraph (b), between 21 May and 29 November 2022;

(d) all documents and/or correspondence between the Assistant Treasurer and the Treasury detailing a determination on why submissions to the Treasury consultation have not been uploaded to the Treasury website received between 21 May and 29 November 2022;

(e) all submissions provided to the Treasury consultation; and

(f) all documents, briefings and/or correspondence detailing meetings between the Assistant Treasurer and the Treasury regarding this Treasury consultation, between 21 May and 29 November 2022.