Set a timetable that forces this week's votes on both a fuel excise cut and a workplace relations bill — back it or block it?

The Leader of the House proposed a schedule to push two bills through by set deadlines: a fuel excise relief bill would clear all its stages today with votes from 5pm, and a workplace relations bill would be voted on tomorrow. The plan caps debate on amendments and limits when members can move alternatives.

The Coalition backed the fuel excise bill (calling it their own idea) and the early finish so members could attend a War Memorial event, but moved to strip the workplace relations parts out, accusing the government of bundling an uncontroversial bill with a contested one. The government then moved to shut down debate, which passed 90 votes to 46; the timetable was then agreed without a further recorded vote.

🗳 A public mood-check, not a scientific poll. Vote to reveal how the chamber voted.

🔒 Your vote is private — only the totals are ever shown. How we handle your data

🗳 be the first to weigh in🏛 18m debated

📄 House Hansard, 23 Jun 2026 — Suspension of Standing and Sessional Orders

why? — the case each way ▸close ▾

The strongest case each way

For · Government (Labor)Argued the timetable is needed because some legislation must pass before the end of the financial year, and set clear deadlines for votes on both the fuel excise bill and the workplace relations bill. Noted the early Tuesday finish had unanimous support so members could attend the War Memorial.

Against · CoalitionBacked the fuel excise bill and the early finish, but objected to bundling an uncontroversial bill together with a contested workplace relations bill, and moved to remove the workplace relations parts. Accused the government of using procedure to wedge the opposition rather than dealing with each bill on its merits.