The majority voted in favour of a motion to disagree with amendment (7) introduced by Indi MP Helen Haines (Independent), which means it failed.
Rebellion
Bass MP Bridget Archer (Liberal) crossed the floor to vote "No" against the rest of the Liberal party, who voted "Yes".
What did the amendment do?
Dr Haines explained that:
If exceptional circumstances is to remain in this bill, it should be defined. The public deserves to know what circumstances justify the holding of a public hearing. My amendment will define 'exceptional circumstances' to mean 'circumstances where it is preferable or appropriate for evidence to be heard in public'. This will ensure the number of private hearings are not unreasonably increased due to the ambiguity of the phrase.
Read more about the bill in its bills digest.
Amendment text
(7) Clause 73, page 69 (after line 10), at the end of the clause, add:
Meaning of exceptional circumstances
(6) For the purposes of paragraph (2)(a), exceptional circumstances means circumstances in which it is preferable or appropriate for evidence to be given in public.
Summary
Date and time: 10:13 AM on 2022-11-24
Allegra Spender's vote: No
Total number of "aye" votes: 54
Total number of "no" votes: 16
Total number of abstentions: 81
Related bill: National Anti-Corruption Commission Bill 2022
Adapted from information made available by theyvoteforyou.org.au