Skip to content
Political Tracker

28 Mar 2023 · 5:20 PM · Division 1

Social Security (Administration) Amendment (Income Management Reform) Bill 2023

Second Reading - Against compulsory income management
Official title
Social Security (Administration) Amendment (Income Management Reform) Bill 2023 - Second Reading - Against compulsory income management

Ayes in the majority

This says only which side won the vote, because what Aye and No meant here depends on the exact question put in the chamber.

Aye
95
No
6
Not recorded voting
49

“Not recorded voting” is everyone eligible who isn't recorded as Aye or No, for example absent, paired, or presiding.

What was decided

The majority voted in favour of disagreeing with an amendment introduced by Brisbane MP Stephen Bates (Greens) to the original amendment introduced by Deakin MP Michael Sukkar (Liberal), which means that amendment will remain as it is.

Amendment text

That all words after "whilst" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:

"the Government committed to abolish compulsory income management in opposition, the House is of the opinion that the bill should not proceed and calls on the Government to:

(1) provide a clear plan for an end to all compulsory income management, which disproportionately impacts First Nations peoples; and

(2) urgently and significantly increase the funding for community and support services through a jobs and services plan, including redirecting any savings from the abolition of compulsory income management to these services".

Original amendment

That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:

"whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House:

(1) notes:

(a) the Coalition introduced the Cashless Debit Card to protect vulnerable communities reducing the amount of welfare payments available to spend on alcohol, gambling and illegal drugs;

(b) since the Cashless Debit Card program commenced more than $988 million has been spent using cashless debit card accounts; participants making more than 20 million approved transactions with over $273 million spent where the primary business is food;

(c) the harm and hardship the Government's abolition of the Cashless Debit Card has caused some of Australia's most vulnerable communities;

(d) the Government's hypocrisy by reintroducing the Cashless Debit Card and rebranding it the SmartCard with the new card supported by the same provider Indue;

(e) the Government has committed over $217 million of taxpayers' funds to this expensive rebranding exercise;

(f) the Government has failed to provide details of the total cost to taxpayers of the new SmartCard; and

(g) the Government's rushed and total mismanaged transition to the SmartCard; and

(2) calls on the Government to without delay, reverse its decision to abolish the Cashless Debit Card program and stop the alcohol-fuelled violence, drug abuse, and childhood neglect in our most vulnerable communities".

Summary written by They Vote For You contributors. Read it with the debate

Policies this vote counts towards

How They Vote For You uses this vote when scoring members against each policy.

Votes by party

Both bars use the same scale: number of members.
Aye
95
No
6
Votes by party as a table
PartyAyeNo
Australian Labor Party700
Liberal Party110
Independent72
Australian Greens04
Liberal National Party30
National Party30
Centre Alliance10

How each member voted

Aye · 95

No · 6

Spotted a mistake? Report a correction.