Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Finance) Share this | Hansard source

Thank heaven the Leader of the House used the time there as a limit rather than a target and did not try to go for any longer than he did. What we have in front of us is not the motion for the purposes that the Leader of the House said, as though he is bravely bringing on a disallowance motion. If he does not move to bring it on, it takes effect anyway. That is how standing orders work. If he had not come in here to bravely bring it on and force the debate, it would have been carried. That is what would have happened. So for all the nonsense that we just heard from the Leader of the House, what we have in front of us is a very routine procedure that needs to occur every time someone moves a disallowance motion. The motivation for the Leader of the House there, as though this is some brave act by the Liberal Party and the government—it is not. It is procedurally required unless they want the disallowance motion from the member for Gorton to take effect automatically.

In terms of the quotations we heard: if they want to come up with a union official to get stuck into the Labor Party, as though there is some revelation in this person's words, do not pick someone we expelled from the Labor Party. The words from Dean Mighell are not exactly going to be given on behalf of the party that he was expelled from. It is just extraordinary.

If the government is serious that they want to bravely bring on for debate issues where the Labor Party and the union movement are closely aligned, then once we have dealt with the disallowance I would urge the Leader of the House to bring on the Leader of the Opposition's penalty rates bill. If they actually have a view that they are willing to take on any debate that is happening in the community, then straight after this one bring the penalty rates bill on for debate, because that is one that does not take effect automatically if it is not brought on. If there is any of the courage of the convictions that the Leader of the House just claimed to have, then immediately after this debate there is a piece of legislation on the books that should be brought on for debate and vote. But he wants to shield his backbench from having to formally vote in favour of the pay cut for 700,000 workers across Australia. If the Leader of the House believes any of the words he articulated a moment ago, that will be the next item of business.

See this speech in context