Andrew Bartlett (Queensland, Australian Democrats) Share this | Hansard source

My understanding is that the amendment further reinforced the principle in place. It may be, as the minister says, that it is unnecessary because of the amendments made in the House of Representatives. It should be noted that the bill before the chambers is not the same bill that was before the Senate committee, because it was subsequently amended many months later by the House of Representatives, which included changes being made in response to the Senate committee report and one key change in particular regarding the period of residency requirement, which was not flagged at all when the Senate committee considered the legislation a year ago. However, in any case, my understanding is that the Democrat amendments here just reinforce the principle sought to be applied from the issues that were brought up in the Senate committee hearings.

From time to time I hear government ministers say, ‘All these amendments aren’t necessary because they are already covered,’ which in my view usually means that it does not hurt if they are passed. But I am quite happy to accept the minister’s assurance regarding the effect of the amendments that have already been made in the House of Representatives.

Question negatived.