Financial Framework Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 3) 2012

The majority disagreed that the National School Chaplaincy Program should be replaced with a "program offering genuine counselling" (see the wording below).

Wording of the motion

The Greens wanted to add the following at the end of the motion "That the bill be read a second time":

but the Senate considers that the National School Chaplaincy and Student Welfare Program should be replaced with a program offering genuine counselling and other assistance to students by professionals with appropriate tertiary qualifications.

Main idea of the bill

The bill was introduced to make sure that the National School Chaplaincy Program could continue after the High Court's decision in Williams v Commonwealth [2012] HCA 23 (read the decision).

Background to the bill

Williams v Commonwealth was about an agreement between the Federal Government and the Scripture Union Queensland (SCU) which funded chaplaincy services in Queensland state schools (the National School Chaplaincy Program). A parent, Ronald Williams, argued that this agreement was invalid because the Executive branch of the Federal Government didn't have the power to enter it. Because Mr Williams was successful, the agreement was invalid.

Read more in the bills digest.