Richard Colbeck (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Hansard source

By leave—Seeing that the opposition's amendments are listed first on the running sheet, I move opposition amendments (1), (7), (8), (15) to (18), (23), (24), (26) to (51) and (54) to (63) on sheet 7011 together:

(1)   Clause 3, page 2 (table), omit the table (but not the note), substitute:

(7)   Schedule 1, item 1, page 12 (line 11), omit "1 July 2010", substitute "1 July 2011".

(8)   Schedule 1, item 1, page 12 (line 13), omit "1 July 2010", substitute "1 July 2011".

(R9)   Schedule 1, item 1, page 15 (lines 27 to 29), omit paragraph 355-225(1)(a), substitute:

  (a)   expenditure of a capital nature that is incurred to acquire or construct:

     (i)   a building or a part of a building; or

     (ii)   an extension, alteration or improvement to a building;

     that is to be *held by the R&D entity;

(R10)   Schedule 1, item 1, page 21 (line 8) to page 22 (line 4), section 355-405 TO BE OPPOSED.

(15)   Schedule 1, item 1, page 29 (line 31), omit "1 July 2010", substitute "1 July 2011".

(16)   Schedule 1, item 1, page 29 (line 33), omit "1 July 2010", substitute "1 July 2011".

(17)   Schedule 1, item 1, page 38 (line 21), omit "1 July 2010", substitute "1 July 2011".

(18)   Schedule 1, item 1, page 38 (line 23), omit "1 July 2010", substitute "1 July 2011".

(23)   Schedule 3, page 99 (line 2), omit the Division heading.

(24)   Schedule 3, item 42, page 99 (lines 6 and 7), omit the note.

(26)   Schedule 4, item 1, page 112 (line 7), omit "1 July 2010", substitute "1 July 2011".

(27)   Schedule 4, item 1, page 112 (lines 9 and 10), omit "1 July 2010", substitute "1 July 2011".

(28)   Schedule 4, item 1, page 112 (line 14), omit "1 July 2010", substitute "1 July 2011".

(29)   Schedule 4, item 1, page 112 (lines 15 and 16), omit "1 July 2010", substitute "1 July 2011".

(30)   Schedule 4, item 1, page 112 (lines 18 and 19), omit "1 July 2010", substitute "1 July 2011".

(31)   Schedule 4, item 1, page 112 (line 21), omit "2010-11", substitute "2011-12".

(32)   Schedule 4, item 3, page 113 (line 29), omit "1 July 2010", substitute "1 July 2011".

(33)   Schedule 4, item 3, page 113 (line 31), omit "1 July 2010", substitute "1 July 2011".

(34)   Schedule 4, item 3, page 113 (line 34), omit "1 July 2010", substitute "1 July 2011".

(35)   Schedule 4, item 3, page 113 (line 35), omit "1 July 2010", substitute "1 July 2011".

(36)   Schedule 4, item 3, page 113 (line 38), omit "1 July 2010", substitute "1 July 2011".

(37)   Schedule 4, item 3, page 114 (line 2), omit "1 July 2010", substitute "1 July 2011".

(38)   Schedule 4, item 3, page 114 (line 15), omit "1 July 2010", substitute "1 July 2011".

(39)   Schedule 4, item 3, page 114 (line 18), omit "1 July 2010", substitute "1 July 2011".

(40)   Schedule 4, item 3, page 114 (line 21), omit "1 July 2010", substitute "1 July 2011".

(41)   Schedule 4, item 3, page 114 (line 23), omit "1 July 2010", substitute "1 July 2011".

(42)   Schedule 4, item 8, page 116 (line 10), omit "1 July 2010", substitute "1 July 2011".

(43)   Schedule 4, item 12, page 118 (line 6), omit "1 July 2010", substitute "1 July 2011".

(44)   Schedule 4, item 12, page 120 (line 21), omit "1 July 2010", substitute "1 July 2011".

(45)   Schedule 4, item 14, page 123 (line 13), omit "1 July 2010", substitute "1 July 2011".

(46)   Schedule 4, item 15, page 124 (line 18), omit "2010-11", substitute "2011-12".

(47)   Schedule 4, item 15, page 124 (line 24), omit "2010-11", substitute "2011-12".

(48)   Schedule 4, item 15, page 124 (line 27), omit "2010-11", substitute "2011-12".

(49)   Schedule 4, item 15, page 124 (line 28), omit "2010-11", substitute "2011-12".

(50)   Schedule 4, item 15, page 125 (line 17), omit "1 July 2010", substitute "1 July 2011".

(51)   Schedule 4, item 15, page 128 (line 22), omit "1 July 2010", substitute "1 July 2011".

(54)   Schedule 4, item 15, page 132 (line 10), omit "2010-11", substitute "2011-12".

(55)   Schedule 4, item 15, page 132 (line 12), omit "2010-11", substitute "2011-12".

(56)   Schedule 4, item 15, page 132 (line 17), omit "1 July 2010", substitute "1 July 2011".

(57)   Schedule 4, item 15, page 132 (line 27), omit "1 July 2010", substitute "1 July 2011".

(58)   Schedule 4, item 15, page 132 (line 33), omit "1 July 2010", substitute "1 July 2011".

(59)   Schedule 4, item 15, page 133 (line 6), omit "1 July 2010", substitute "1 July 2011".

(60)   Schedule 4, item 15, page 133 (line 24), omit "1 July 2010", substitute "1 July 2011".

(61)   Schedule 4, item 15, page 133 (lines 29 and 30), omit "1 July 2010", substitute "1 July 2011".

(62)   Schedule 4, item 15, page 134 (line 16), omit "1 July 2010", substitute "1 July 2011".

(63)Schedule 4, item 15, page 134 (line 25), omit "1 July 2010", substitute "1 July 2011".

Statement by the Clerk of the Senate pursuant to the order of the Senate of 26 June 2000

The Senate has long accepted that an amendment should take the form of a request if it would have the effect of increasing expenditure under a standing appropriation. If it is correct that these amendments require the Commissioner of Taxation to refund amounts payable from a standing appropriation, it is in accordance with the precedents of the Senate that the amendments be moved as requests.

These amendments extend the com­mencement date from 1 July 2010 to 1 July 2011. This particular issue is one that has been of significant contention right throughout the process and one that the opposition suggested should occur from the outset of the discussion of this legislation. Unfortunately the minister, in the initial stage, was not prepared to consider this but, of course, the passing of time that we have all discussed and noted since the legislation was first put into the chamber has effectively necessitated the fact that this date should be changed. I do note that we have gone past the second commencement date as well but, given that we both agree that these amend­ments should be passed, I think that we might as well get on with that. Even though the opposition does not support the legislation as it stands for the reasons I stated earlier in the second reading debate, these amendments should be passed as part of this process.