The majority voted in favour of disagreeing with amendments introduced by Brisbane MP Stephen Bates (Greens), which means they failed.

What do the amendments do?

Mr Bates explained that:

Amendments (1) through (5) on the sheet set out an approach to ensure that we do not have compulsory income management. Because of the limited time between the introduction of this bill and its debate we have had limited time and have drawn on the approach used in the government's bill to repeal the cashless debit card...

As I set out in my second reading speech, we fundamentally oppose compulsory income management. We think it is a flawed and a failed approach. This amendment would enable people who are subject to compulsory income management to exit. That is why it is so important. It is important that we are respecting an individual's human rights and ensuring that there is free, prior and informed consent. This amendment reflects what we've heard from so many people—that compulsory income management is disempowering and harmful. It runs directly to the principle of free, prior and informed consent. This amendment would enable people who are subject to compulsory income management—either the BasicsCard or the Indue card—to request an exit. The secretary would need to respond, confirming their exit within a week.

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".

The majority voted in favour of agreeing with the bill as amended. This means they can now decide on whether they agree with its final wording and so pass it in the House, which is known as giving it a third reading.

What does the bill do?

The bills digest, which is a document put together by the parliamentary library, sets out the following key points:

• Proposed revision of the existing ‘Safeguard Mechanism’ applying to Australia’s largest emitters is a central element of the Australian Government’s commitment to achieve a 43% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 and net zero by 2050.
• The Safeguard Mechanism commenced operation on 1 July 2016 and has, to date, operated as a greenhouse gas emissions reporting mechanism for around 212 of Australia’s largest industrial facilities.
• The Safeguard Mechanism (Crediting) Amendment Bill 2022 amends relevant Acts to alter the Safeguard Mechanism so that covered facilities must reduce their scope 1 (direct) emissions in future.
• The primary amendments to the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act 2007 and Australian National Registry of Emissions Units Act 2011 establish the administrative architecture to create ‘safeguard mechanism credit units’ (SMCs). The amendments provide for dealings in SMCs in the same manner as Australian Carbon Credit Units (ACCUs).
• Key elements of the revised scheme will be implemented via amendments to existing legislative instruments (rules) made by the Minister. The Clean Energy Regulator (CER) will also be able to make key determinations, as provided for in these instruments.
• Stakeholders have expressed concern about the limited timeframe for consultation and staggered release of key documents (including legislative instruments and the Independent Review of Australian Carbon Credit Units (Chubb Review)), which they regard as limiting a fulsome consideration of the proposed amendments.
• Moreover, whilst environment and climate focused groups have argued that amendments are insufficient, key industry stakeholders acknowledge the need for change but have expressed concern about particular aspects of the proposed amendments.

The majority voted in favour of government amendments introduced by the Minister for Climate Change and Energy and McMahon MP Chris Bowen (Labor), which means they will now be included as part of the bill.

What were the amendments?

The amendments were introduced along with a supplementary explanatory memorandum. Mr Bowen also provided a brief explanation in his speech:

Today I'm introducing government amendments to the Safeguard Mechanism (Crediting) Amendment Bill 2022 which will enact some of the recommendations of the ACCU review. These are legislative changes to the Carbon Credits (Carbon Farming Initiative) Act 2011 that will increase transparency and robustness of the scheme while we continue to consult on the implementation of other recommendations. These recommendations will: require publication of carbon estimation area information and other information prescribed by the rules, recommendation 4.1; require the minister to be satisfied that a methodology determination or a varied methodology determination complies with the offsets integrity standards before the minister can make or vary the determination, recommendation 5.22; and change the Emissions Reduction Assurance Committee, ERAC, chair's position from part time to full time, recommendation 2.1—consistent with the recommendations of the review. I will appoint a full-time chair and a First Nations member of ERAC through an open and transparent process. The government will also establish an independent secretariat, reporting directly to the chair once they're appointed.

The majority voted in favour of agreeing with the main idea of the bill. In parliamentary jargon, they voted to read the bill for a second time. This means that they can now consider it in more detail.

What is the bill's main idea?

The bills digest, which is a document put together by the parliamentary library, sets out the following key points:

• Proposed revision of the existing ‘Safeguard Mechanism’ applying to Australia’s largest emitters is a central element of the Australian Government’s commitment to achieve a 43% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 and net zero by 2050.
• The Safeguard Mechanism commenced operation on 1 July 2016 and has, to date, operated as a greenhouse gas emissions reporting mechanism for around 212 of Australia’s largest industrial facilities.
• The Safeguard Mechanism (Crediting) Amendment Bill 2022 amends relevant Acts to alter the Safeguard Mechanism so that covered facilities must reduce their scope 1 (direct) emissions in future.
• The primary amendments to the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act 2007 and Australian National Registry of Emissions Units Act 2011 establish the administrative architecture to create ‘safeguard mechanism credit units’ (SMCs). The amendments provide for dealings in SMCs in the same manner as Australian Carbon Credit Units (ACCUs).
• Key elements of the revised scheme will be implemented via amendments to existing legislative instruments (rules) made by the Minister. The Clean Energy Regulator (CER) will also be able to make key determinations, as provided for in these instruments.
• Stakeholders have expressed concern about the limited timeframe for consultation and staggered release of key documents (including legislative instruments and the Independent Review of Australian Carbon Credit Units (Chubb Review)), which they regard as limiting a fulsome consideration of the proposed amendments.
• Moreover, whilst environment and climate focused groups have argued that amendments are insufficient, key industry stakeholders acknowledge the need for change but have expressed concern about particular aspects of the proposed amendments.

The majority voted in favour of a motion to agree with the bill's main idea. In other words, they voted to read it for a second time. They can now discuss it in greater detail.

What is the bill's main idea?

According to the bills digest:

The purpose of the Migration Amendment (Australia’s Engagement in the Pacific and Other Measures) Bill 2023 (the Amendment Bill) is to amend the Migration Act 1958 to provide for a visa pre-application process to be conducted as part of the application validity criteria for a particular visa.

The majority voted in favour of a motion to agree with the bill after it was considered by the Federation Chamber. This means that they can now vote on whether to pass it in the House of Representatives.

What does this bill do?

According to the bills digest:

The purpose of the Migration (Visa Pre-application Process) Charge Bill 2023 (the Charge Bill) is to impose a charge on a person who registers in a visa pre-application process as set out in the provisions of the Amendment Bill. A separate Bill is required to impose the charge as there is a possibility the proposed charges may amount to a tax and section 55 of the Constitution requires that a law imposing taxation must not deal with any other matter.