Helen Kroger (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

(—) (): I present the eighth report of 2014 of the Selection of Bills Committee and I seek to have the report incorporated in Hansard.

Leave granted.

The report read as follows—

SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE

REPORT NO. 8 of 2014

1. The committee met in private session on Wednesday, 25 June 2014 at 7.41 pm.

2. The committee resolved to recommend—That—

(a) the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Amendment (A Stronger Land Account) Bill 2014 be referred immediately to the Community Affairs Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 2 September 2014 (see appendix 1 for a statement of reasons for referral);

(b) the provisions of the Clean Energy Finance Corporation (Abolition) Bill 2014 be referred immediately to the Economics Legislation Committee but was unable to reach agreement on a reporting date (see appendices 2 and 3 for statements of reasons for referral);

(c) the provisions of the Clean Energy Legislation (Carbon Tax Repeal) Bill 2013 [No.2], the Ozone Protection and Synthetic Greenhouse Gas (Import Levy) Amendment (Carbon Tax Repeal) Bill 2013 [No. 2], the Ozone Protection and Synthetic Greenhouse Gas (Manufacture Levy) Amendment (Carbon Tax Repeal) Bill 2013 [No. 2], the True-up Shortfall Levy (General) (Carbon Tax Repeal) Bill 2013 [No. 2], the True-up Shortfall Levy (Excise) (Carbon Tax Repeal) Bill 2013 [No. 2], the Ozone Protection and Synthetic Greenhouse Gas (Import Levy) (Transitional Provisions) Bill 2013 [No. 2], the Customs Tariff Amendment (Carbon Tax Repeal) Bill 2013 [No. 2], the Excise Tariff Amendment (Carbon Tax Repeal) Bill 2013 [No. 2] and the Clean Energy (Income Tax Rates and Other Amendments) Bill 2013 [No. 2] be referred immediately to the Environment and Communications Legislation Committee but was unable to reach agreement on a reporting date (see appendices 4 and 5 for statements of reasons for referral);

(d) the provisions of the Climate Change Authority (Abolition) Bill 2013 [No. 2] be referred immediately to the Environment and Communications Legislation Committee but was unable to reach agreement on a reporting date (see appendices 6 and 7 for statements of reasons for referral);

(e) the provisions of the Family Assistance Legislation Amendment (Child Care Measures) Bill (No. 2) 2014 be referred immediately to the Education and Employment Legislation Committee but was unable to reach agreement on a reporting date (see appendices 8 and 9 for statements of reasons for referral); and

(f) the provisions of the Migration Amendment (Protection and Other Measures) Bill 2014 be referred immediately to the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 26 August 2014 (see appendices 10 and 11 for statements of reasons for referral).

3. The committee resolved to recommend:

That the following bills not be referred to committees:

Public Governance, Performance and Accountability (Consequential Modifications of Appropriation Acts (No. 1), (No. 3) and (No. 5)) Bill 2014

Public Governance, Performance and Accountability (Consequential Modifications of Appropriation Acts (No. 2), (No. 4) and (No. 6)) Bill 2014

Public Governance, Performance and Accountability (Consequential Modifications of Appropriation Acts (Parliamentary Departments)) Bill 2014.

The committee recommends accordingly.

4. The committee deferred consideration of the following bill to its next meeting:

(Helen Kroger)

Chair

26 June 2014

APPENDIX 1

SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE

Proposal to refer a bill to a committee:

Name of bill:

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Amendment (A Stronger Land Account) Bill 2014

Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:

Investigating the role that this Bill can play in:

Possible submissions or evidence from:

Indigenous Land Council

Department of PM&C

Committee to which bill is to be referred:

Finance and Public Administration

Possible hearing date(s):

29 August 2014

Possible reporting date:

2 September 2014

(signed)

Senator Siewert

APPENDIX 2

SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE

Proposal to refer a bill to a committee:

Name of bill:

Clean Energy Finance Corporation (Abolition) Bill

Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:

New Senators need time to get across complex detail of the legislation. Need to understand the negative economic consequences of repeal.

Possible submissions or evidence from:

Clean energy Finance Corporation, ARENA, finance recipients

Committee to which bill is to be referred:

Economics Committee

Possible hearing date(s):

29 July, 12 Aug

Possible reporting date:

28 August

(signed)

Senator Siewert

APPENDIX 3

SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE

Proposal to refer a bill to a committee:

Name of bill:

Clean energy Finance Corporation (Abolition) Bill 2013

Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:

To allow proper scrutiny of this Bill, including the impact of abolishing the Clean Energy Finance Corporation on the Budget bottom line and Australia's efforts to tackle climate change.

Possible submissions or evidence from:

Committee to which bill is to be referred:

Senate Economics Legislation Committee.

Possible hearing date(s):

Possible reporting date:

7 July 2014

(signed)

Senator McEwen

APPENDIX 4

SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE

Proposal to refer a bill to a committee:

Name of bill:

Clean Energy Legislation Package

Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:

New Senators need time to get across complex detail of the legislation and to understand the negative economic consequences of repeal.

Possible submissions or evidence from:

Clean Energy Regulator, Department of Environment, Treasury and affected businesses.

Committee to which bill is to be referred:

Possible hearing date(s):

30 July, 14 Aug, 18 Sept

Possible reporting date:

2 October

(signed)

Senator Siewert

APPENDIX 5

SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE

Proposal to refer a bill to a committee:

Name of bill:

Clean Energy Legislation (Carbon Tax Repeal) Bill 2013

Ozone Protection and Synthetic Greenhouse Gas (Import Levy) Amendment (Carbon Tax

Repeal) Bill 2013

Ozone Protection and Synthetic Greenhouse Gas (Manufacture Levy) Amendment (Carbon

Tax Repeal) Bill 2013

True-up Shortfall Levy (General) (Carbon Tax Repeal) Bill 2013

True-up Shortfall Levy (Excise) (Carbon Tax Repeal) Bill 2013

Ozone Protection and Synthetic Greenhouse Gas (Import Levy) (Transitional Provisions) Bill

2013

Customs Tariff Amendment (Carbon Tax Repeal) Bill 2013

Excise Tariff Amendment (Carbon Tax Repeal) Bill 2013

Clean Energy (Income Tax Rates and Other Amendments) Bill 2013

Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:

To ensure proper scrutiny of these Bills and their impact on Australia's efforts to tackle climate change and carbon pollution.

Possible submissions or evidence from:

Committee to which bill is to be referred:

Possible hearing date(s):

Possible reporting date:

(signed)

Senator McEwen

APPENDIX 6

SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE

Proposal to refer a bill to a committee:

Name of bill:

Climate Change Authority (Abolition) Bill 2013

Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:

To allow scrutiny of the Bill and the impact of the abolition of the Climate Change Authority on the Government's ability to receive independent advice on climate change and on efforts to reduce carbon pollution.

Possible submissions or evidence from:

Committee to which bill is to be referred:

Possible hearing date(s):

Possible reporting date:

7 July 2014

(signed)

Senator McEwen

APPENDIX 7

SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE

Proposal to refer a bill to a committee:

Name of bill:

Climate Change Authority (Abolition) Bill

Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:

New Senators need time to get across the detail of the expert advice that the Climate Change Authority provides to the Parliament and the Australian public.

Possible submissions or evidence from:

Climate Change Authority, Treasury, ABARE, BREE

Committee to which bill is to be referred:

Environment and Communications Committee

Possible hearing date(s):

28 July, 19 Aug

Possible reporting date:

4 September

(signed)

Senator Siewert

APPENDIX 8

SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE

Proposal to refer a bill to a committee:

Name of bill:

Family Assistance legislation Amendment (Child Care Measures) Bill (No.2) 2014

Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:

Detailed scrutiny of this bill is required including information on the impact of these measures on the families currently receiving financial assistance and how this Bill will impact on decisions that parents are making about working, training or improving their education. Submissions and evidence is needed to fully assess and consider the Bill.

Possible submissions or evidence from:

Parents and carers, child care educators, child care service providers, employers, families groups, welfare groups, the Department of Education.

Committee to which bill is to be referred:

Senate Education and Employment Legislation Committee

Possible hearing date(s):

Possible reporting date:

28 Aug 2014

(signed)

Senator McEwen

APPENDIX 9

SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE

Proposal to refer a bill to a committee:

Name of bill:

Family Assistance legislation Amendment (Child Care Measures) Bill (No.2) 2014

Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:

Implications that this Bill will have on Australian families

Possible submissions or evidence from:

Goodstart Early Learning

Early Childhood Australia

Australian Childcare Alliance

Committee to which bill is to be referred:

Education and Employment Committee

Possible hearing date(s):

18-22 September 2014.

Possible reporting date:

Wednesday, 3 September, 2014

(signed)

Senator Siewert

APPENDIX 10

SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE

Proposal to refer a bill to a committee:

Name of bill:

Migration Amendment (Protection and Other Measures) Bill 2014

Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:

Implications that this Bill will have on asylum seekers seeking protection in Australia

Possible submissions or evidence from:

Amnesty International Australia

Human Rights Law Centre of Australia

Law Council

Refugee Council of Australia

Refugee and Immigration legal Centre

Committee to which bill is to be referred:

Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee

Possible hearing date(s):

8-11 September 2014.

Possible reporting date:

Tuesday, 21 October, 2014

(signed)

Senator Siewert

APPENDIX 11

SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE

Proposal to refer a bill to a committee:

Name of bill:

Migration Amendment (Protection and Other Measures) Bill 2014

Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:

To clarify the operation of schedules contained within the Bill, in particular to ensure procedural fairness is afforded to visa applicants throughout the application process including during merits review.

To ensure the Bill does not breach or negatively impact upon Australia's non-refoulement obligations under the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and to investigate the impact of possible changes to the threshold engaged when considering risk of harm from potential refoulement.

Possible submissions or evidence from:

Department of Immigration and Border Protection

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees

Australian Human Rights Commissioner

Law Council of Australia

Committee to which bill is to be referred:

Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee

Possible hearing date(s):

Possible reporting date:

26 August 2014

(signed)

Senator McEwen

I move:

That the report be adopted.

Claire Moore (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Women) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

At the end of the motion, add, "but, in respect of:

(a) the Clean Energy Finance Corporation (Abolition) Bill 2014, the provisions of the bill NOT be referred to a committee;

(b) the Clean Energy Legislation (Carbon Tax Repeal) Bill 2013 [No.2] and associated bills, the Environment and Communications Legislation Committee report by 14 July 2014; and

(c) the Climate Change Authority (Abolition) Bill 2013[No. 2], the Environment and Communications Legislation Committee report by 14 July 2014.".

Christine Milne (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

(1) Paragraphs (b) and (c), omit "14 July 2014", and substitute "2 October 2014".

The reason I am changing the reporting date is because, on 1 July, we are going to have a number of new senators arriving in this chamber. I do not think it is fair to ask new those senators to vote on and speak on a complex suite of bills, which have such a critical impact on the future of this country, without giving them the opportunity to have a reasonable length of time to get across the issues and then make up their minds in a considered way.

It is unprecedented that people would be expected to be sworn into the parliament and then thrown into such a complex debate so early in their career. Every single one of us had the opportunity to come into the Senate and settle in. They will not even be able to employ staff until 1 July, and you are expecting that by 14 July the committee will have reported and they will be ready to deal with these bills which seek to repeal the emissions trading scheme. It is not just one bill but many bills and it is incredibly complex. I think that natural justice demands that people are informed when they are making a decision so critical to the future of the country. It really does not serve democracy well to bring people in here and, before they even make their inaugural speeches—or at the same time they are being asked to make their inaugural speeches—they are being asked to participate in a debate of such complexity. It is on that basis that I am seeking to change the reporting date on all of the bills relating to our emissions trading scheme and to ask that they report on 2 October. That would provide the time that the new senators need.

This is an area which, we have learned in the last 24 hours, is moving very quickly in terms of where the debate is going. That is why I think it would be a bad mistake to throw people in here. I do not think people have realised the gravity of the decision that is going to be made, because for evermore people are going to be named as having voted one way or another, and future generations are going to care. I just find it extraordinary that we would not give people the ability to get across the detail. That is why I am seeking to have a longer reporting date than is being proposed by the Labor Party. I say to the Labor Party: if you are serious about keeping the emissions trading scheme that we have got, if you are serious about a chance to persuade people, I ask that you consider supporting the longer reporting date of 2 October 2014.

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move an amendment to the amendment:

in respect of paragraphs (b) and (c), omit "14 July", substitute "7 July"

This is a curious set of circumstances we find ourselves in today, and it follows a pattern that we have seen from the Australian Labor Party over the past couple of days, where those forums which have been established in this place to achieve consensual outcomes have been bypassed or abrogated. Yesterday we saw Senator Wong bypass the Procedure Committee by bringing forward motions to seek to alter the operation of the Senate estimates committees and other proceedings of this place. As I indicated in my remarks in the suspension debate yesterday, the purpose of the Procedure Committee is to allow leaders of all parties to come together to work in a consensual way to a common end. We are seeing the second manifestation of that abrogation of these consensual processes today with the amendment from the Australian Labor Party, which Senator Milne has, in turn, sought to further amend. I refer of course to the Selection of Bills Committee. The Selection of Bills Committee is another forum where representatives of senators from across the chamber come together to seek to achieve consensual outcomes in relation to bills which are referred to the committees of the Senate.

The reason this is particularly peculiar is that the Australian Labor Party yesterday submitted to the Selection of Bills Committee a referral for the clean energy legislation package of bills for 7 July—the very date I am proposing today. They also submitted a referral for the Climate Change Authority (Abolition) Bill for consideration by a committee, again with a reporting date of 7 July. So last night the Australian Labor Party thought that 7 July was an appropriate time frame for reporting by these committees, and we were prepared to accept that.

I do not understand what has happened between last night and this moment now. What is the purpose of the Selection of Bills Committee process if we cannot take at face value the submission of senators—senators who have duly signed a submission, a proposed referral, to the Selection of Bills committee, who have put forward that that is the date they think is appropriate? I do not understand what has happened between last night and today. The Selection of Bills Committee report did actually reflect that agreement could not be reached, and the reason agreement could not be reached was that the Australian Greens had a later reporting date in mind. I acknowledge that. The Selection of Bills Committee report accurately reflected that agreement could not be reached, but there was agreement between the government and the opposition. The Australian Greens have not changed their position, the government has not changed its position overnight—only the opposition have changed their position overnight. I can only surmise that is for purely base political reasons—in other words, to seek to delay the consideration of this legislation by this chamber.

I am deeply concerned that the very basis upon which the Selection of Bills Committee operates is being undermined by the amendment that has been moved by the Australian Labor Party and that now subsequently is being amended by the Greens and by me. I would urge colleagues in this place to reflect on the operation of the Selection of Bills Committee and acknowledge that it is appropriate that we should be able to take at face value what colleagues from other parties put in writing and say at the Selection of Bills Committee. A reporting date of 7 July is eminently reasonable. We know it is eminently reasonable because the Australian Labor Party agreed with that reporting date last night, for the clean energy package of bills and also for the Climate Change Authority legislation.

Anne McEwen (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I want to put on the record the situation with regard to the Selection of Bills Committee, as I have had to do before. People should know that the Selection of Bills Committee makes recommendations to the Senate about referrals of bills to committees and reporting dates for those bills. That report of the Selection of Bills Committee, whether or not it is adopted and whether or not it is amended, is always subject to the will of the Senate. That is the process we are going through here at the moment. The Manager of Government Business in the Senate, Senator Fifield, well knows that quite often things change between the deliberations of the Selection of Bills Committee, which usually occurs on a Wednesday night, and the presentation of the report for the consideration of the Senate the following day. Often the recommendations in the report do need to be amended to accommodate what has happened overnight. What happened in Australia overnight was that we had some significant pronouncements from members of the party that will be occupying some of the crossbenches after 1 July about matters relating to the very bills that are being considered by the Selection of Bills Committee. The Labor Party took account, in its deliberations, of those public announcements that were made last night.

There is nothing untoward going on in this process at all. It is quite proper for the Selection of Bills Committee, which is not a deliberative committee, to make recommendations to the Senate and for the Senate to amend or revise those recommendations. The indication by the Manager of Government Business that all is sweetness and light at the Selection of Bills Committee is not factually correct. There are often robust discussions about the appropriate time frame for referral of bills, and those time frames are contingent on many other factors apart from what the government wants. I wanted to put that on the record, and I look forward to continuing in the proper place, which is the Senate, the debate about the final outcome of this Selection of Bills Committee issue.

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Here we go again—Labor and the Greens are still playing games, still wanting to abuse the processes of the Senate in order to act in defiance of the will of the Australian people. The Labor Party might still not have got used to the fact that they lost the last election. At the last election the Australian people voted to get rid of the carbon tax, and Labor are playing procedural games in order to frustrate the process, in order to slow down the process, in order to slow down the opportunity for the Senate to deal with important legislation efficiently, effectively and swiftly in order to provide necessary and important certainty to businesses, to families, to pensioners and to people right across Australia who are waiting for this parliament to get on with it, who are waiting for the Senate to get on with it, who are waiting for the Senate to pass legislation which will reduce costs for average households by $550 a year.

People across Australia, businesses across Australia, are waiting for the Senate to get on with it and here we have the Labor Party and the Greens continuing to play games in direct defiance of the will of the Australian people expressed at the last election. They come in and they speak with forked tongues. This is the party that went to the 2010 election saying there would be no carbon tax, only to introduce one. This is the party which went to the last election saying that they would remove the carbon tax, only to vote in this chamber again and again to keep it.

On the very day that the Labor Party was voting in this chamber to keep the carbon tax, to keep $550 in costs for the average family in place, the senator-elect from the great state of Western Australia—the only senator representing the Labor Party in the half-Senate election, Senator-elect Bullock—was out there saying that Labor is voting to scrap the carbon tax. In here today, the Labor Party is still joining with the Greens to frustrate the process to ensure the Senate can deal with it. You do not even want us to deal with it. You want to put roadblocks in place. Everybody knows the games you are playing. You cannot get over the fact that you lost the last election or that the Australian people have roundly rejected your broken promise of imposing a carbon tax which pushes up the cost of electricity, the cost of living and the cost of doing business and which makes it harder for businesses across Australia to employ people. You are using procedural games to frustrate efforts to build a stronger, more prosperous economy where everyone can get ahead. You are trying to have your cake and eat it too; to have it both ways. You were trying to send a message out there into the community in the lead-up to an election by saying, 'No, we are not in support of the carbon tax. Either we are not going to introduce it, or we have already removed it'. Whenever an election is on, the Labor Party joins us in a bipartisan way and says: 'We are as against the carbon tax as everybody else', and as soon as the election is out of the way you play these sorts of games to prevent the Senate from dealing with important legislation for our economic future. We want to deal with it efficiently and effectively. This is our job. There is absolutely no reason this process should be delayed until October, and no reason it should be delayed until 14 July.

Senator Milne is saying, 'People who come in on 1 July will not know what they are voting on.' But this debate has been taking place across Australia and across the community for years. Anybody who comes into the Senate on 1 July and does not know what we are dealing with must have been living under a rock. Maybe some of the Greens have been living under a rock and do not know what is happening, because they are now the party that is promoting regular reductions in taxes on fuel. But anybody who is joining this Senate after 1 July will know what they are voting on. Of course they should have an opportunity to deal with this issue swiftly; it is in the national interest for us to do so. And it is in the interest of families and pensioners across Australia that we take the cost burden of the Labor/Green carbon tax off their shoulders. Frankly, people deserve the $550 saving a year in the cost of living expenses, and businesses across Australia should be encouraged to employ more people. (Time expired)

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Employment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Today's procedural manoeuvres by the Labor and the Green parties in this place once again highlight that the Labor Party and the Australian Greens resent the decision of the Australian people of 7 September last year to elect a government that was absolutely committed to the repeal of the carbon tax. The Australian people know that the carbon tax has impacted viciously on their cost of living to the tune of more than $550 per annum, because it will now clock over to a higher rate as of 1 July. Not only does it viciously attack household budgets, but it also destroys jobs. We know that. Yet the Labor-Green majority in this place will continue to defy the wish of the Australian people and deliberately manoeuvre using the numbers whilst they last in this place to try to defer the repeal of this carbon tax legislation which the Australian people so overwhelmingly voted in favour of.

I recall that the last time the Senate changed, which I think was in 2011, certain things like the carbon tax had to be rushed through very, very quickly. There was no concern by the Australian Greens then that new senators might need to find their feet and get their heads around legislation. Once again it is what I, over my 20 years in this place, have become heartily sick and tired of. Greens do something—it must be good per se; government does something identical—it must be bad. It is a very simple equation: Green, good; everything else, bad. Can I simply say that trying to tie up the new Senate with these sorts of timetables shows an absolute disregard for the new senators coming in. It is saying to them, 'No matter what your view is, we will seek to frustrate the expression of the views of the people who elected you in relation to these matters, and especially the carbon tax.' But I plead with my friends on the Labor Party side—why don't you lance this boil? You know how this collusion with the Greens has destroyed your base. Why don't you lance the boil? I don't know why I am giving gratuitous advice to the Labor Party in relation to this; it must just be coming out of the goodness of my heart that I want to say to my colleagues on the Labor Party side: 'Why do you continue to destroy yourself?'

We see Senator Bishop in this Senate, and we know his views on it. We know what happened in Western Australia; we know what happened in the state of South Australia, where the Labor Party was reduced to the re-election of only one senator out of six possible positions—a devastating result. I would have thought the Labor Party would have said, 'Yes, we know what the problem was—the carbon tax. Let's lance the boil, repeal the tax, get rid of it and move on.' If I might say, it is what we did with WorkChoices. We heard the voice of the Australian people; we said the new government had a mandate; we moved on; and we apologised to the Australian people. But the Labor Party are not two-faced in this debate, Senator Cormann—and I hate to disagree with you—but they are actually three-faced. First of all they say, 'No carbon tax if we are elected,' and they then introduce one. They then say, at the next election, 'We've already got rid of the carbon tax.' Their third position is that, when they actually get the opportunity to vote against the carbon tax, they vote to keep it—flip-flop, flip-flop. They have shown us three faces in this debate, none of them with any credibility and none of them with any endorsement from the Australian people.

I simply plead with those on the other side: show some respect to the incoming Senate and allow them to determine for themselves the future of the legislative agenda. Let us not have the hangover of this Senate, which is unrepresentative of the Australian people and which will change on 1 July— (Time expired)

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the question be now put.

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the question be now put.

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question therefore is that the amendment moved by Senator Fifield be agreed to.

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question now is that the amendment moved by Senator Milne be agreed to.

Question negatived.

Rachel Siewert (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move an amendment to Senator Moore's amendment:

At the end of the proposed amendment, add the following new paragraphs:

(d) the Family Assistance Legislation Amendment (Child Care Measures) Bill (No. 2) 2014, the Education and Employment Legislation Committee report by 28 August 2014;

(e) the Migration Amendment (Protection and Other Measures) Bill 2014, the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee report by 22 September 2014."

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move an amendment to Senator Siewert's amendment:

In respect of paragraph (d), omit "28 August", substitute "7 July", and in respect of paragraph (e), omit "22 September" and substitute "26 August".

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the amendment moved by Senator Fifield be agreed to.

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question now is that the amendment moved by Senator Siewert be agreed to.

Question agreed to.

The question now is that Senator Moore's amendment, as amended, be agreed to.

Question agreed to.

The question now is that the motion, as amended, be agreed to.

Question agreed to.