4 Dec 2014 · 10:42 AM · Division 2
Family Tax Benefit (Tighter Income Test) Bill 2014
- Official title
- Family Tax Benefit (Tighter Income Test) Bill 2014 - Second Reading - Agree with the bill's main idea
Second reading defeated
- Aye
- 1
- No
- 45
- Not recorded voting
- 30
“Not recorded voting” is everyone eligible who isn't recorded as Aye or No, for example absent, paired, or presiding.
What was decided
Almost every senator was against the main idea of the bill (in parliamentary jargon, they voted against reading the bill a second time). This means that the bill has been rejected and won't be discussed any more.
Only Liberal Democratic Party Senator David Leyonhjelm, who had introduced the bill, voted in favour of it.
Main idea of the bill
The bill was introduced to reduce the Family Tax Benefit Part A payments by 20% of any income in excess of the ‘income free area’ until the payment reaches zero.
Currently, the reduction is capped at a particular base rate so families whose income is more than the 'income free area' but less than the 'higher income free area' all receive at least that base rate. As Senator Leyonhjelm explained, this means that "[t]he welfare payment for a family with one child remains at $2,204.60 whether their income is around $70,000 or $90,000".
Why is only one senator voting 'aye'?
Usually, at least two senators need to call for a division in order for a division to occur. In this case, the Acting Deputy President had thought that there were two senators voting 'aye' and only realised his mistake after the division was called.
Background to the bill
The 2014-15 Budget was designed to reduce government spending and start bringing the budget back to surplus. However, many of the measures proposed in the Budget have been very unpopular and have not passed through Parliament.
This bill is an attempt by Senator Leyonhjelm to contribute towards reducing the current budget deficit.
Summary written by They Vote For You contributors. Read it with the debate
Policies this vote counts towards
- Tighter means testing of family payments Supporters vote Aye · counts strongly
Votes by party
Votes by party as a table
| Party | Aye | No |
|---|---|---|
| Australian Labor Party | 0 | 16 |
| Australian Greens | 0 | 9 |
| Liberal Party | 0 | 9 |
| Liberal National Party | 0 | 2 |
| National Party | 0 | 2 |
| Palmer United Party | 0 | 2 |
| Australian Motoring Enthusiast Party | 0 | 1 |
| Democratic Labor Party | 0 | 1 |
| Family First Party | 0 | 1 |
| Jacqui Lambie Network | 0 | 1 |
| Liberal Democratic Party | 1 | 0 |
| Senate President | 0 | 1 |
How each member voted
Aye · 1
- David LeyonhjelmNSW · Liberal Democrats
No · 45
- Sarah Hanson-YoungSA · Greens
- Scott LudlamWA · Greens
- Christine MilneTasmania · Greens
- Lee RhiannonNSW · Greens
- Janet RiceVictoria · Greens
- Rachel SiewertWA · Greens
- Larissa WatersQueensland · Greens
- Peter Whish-WilsonTasmania · Greens
- Penny WrightSA · Greens
- Catryna BilykTasmania · Labor
- Joe BullockWA · Labor
- Doug CameronNSW · Labor
- Kim CarrVictoria · Labor
- Sam DastyariNSW · Labor
- Alex GallacherSA · Labor
- Chris KetterQueensland · Labor
- Kate LundyACT · Labor
- Anne McEwenSA · Labor
- Jan McLucasQueensland · Labor
- Claire MooreQueensland · Labor
- Deborah O'NeillNSW · Labor
- Nova PerisNT · Labor
- Helen PolleyTasmania · Labor
- Lisa SinghTasmania · Labor
- Glenn SterleWA · Labor
- Ricky MuirVictoria · Motoring Enthusiast
- John MadiganVictoria · Labor
- Bob DaySA · Family First
- Jacqui LambieTasmania · Jacqui Lambie Network
- Matthew CanavanQueensland · LNP
Spotted a mistake? Report a correction.