Bill Debate · First Reading
Senate · Monday 22 June 2026
Official Hansard for this day (APH) · Read this debate on OpenAustralia
The debate centred on a motion to allow two tax reform bills to proceed without formalities. The Shadow Minister for Finance opposed this expedited process, arguing the legislation was rushed, complex, and lacked adequate scrutiny. The Leader of the Government in the Senate moved to put the question immediately, bypassing further debate on the procedural motion. The Senate voted to allow the bills to proceed without formalities and to be read a first time.
The Senate passed the motions to proceed without formalities and to read the bills a first time, with divisions recorded as 32-23.
Summary in reported speech - not a transcript. AI-generated, so check the official record before quoting.
Opened the debate
Gallagher moved the motion for the bills to proceed without formalities and be read a first time. As the government member initiating the procedural motion, Gallagher supported the standard parliamentary process for introducing legislation. No substantive policy arguments were presented by Gallagher in this brief intervention.
Government response
Wong moved that the question be put immediately after the Shadow Minister's speech. Wong did not engage in substantive debate on the merits of the tax reforms or the procedural motion. The minister's actions facilitated the rapid conclusion of the first reading stage.
Opposition response
Chandler argued against proceeding without formalities, stating the bills increased taxes on housing, savings, and small business while complicating the system. Chandler claimed the Senate inquiry was rushed and that Treasury officials could not separate revenue estimates for capital gains tax and negative gearing changes. Chandler asserted the government had broken election promises and lacked clarity on the legislation's impacts.
Brockman identified the specific questions before the chair regarding proceeding without formalities and reading the bills a first time. Brockman did not offer substantive commentary on the legislation or the procedural motion.