Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the honourable member for his question. There is nothing more important than that the voting system that we use to elect this House and the Senate translates as effectively and accurately as possible the wishes of the Australian people. So Australians are entitled to expect that, when they vote for the Senate, the outcomes will reflect their choice, and that is why the government has introduced legislation to reform the Senate voting system. It will simplify the ballot paper and stop the gaming of the system by preference whisperers and backroom deals.

We know that what has been happening with the Senate voting system has been anything but democratic and anything but transparent. The reality is that dozens of micro-parties were established and group voting tickets were filed and negotiated—in some cases, three per party. Voters had no idea where their preferences were going to go, and, in reality, many of the outcomes of the Senate election did not fairly reflect the wishes of the people. The only solution is to ensure that the Australian people have the choice that they make and that they decide where their preferences go.

This was not, until recently, a controversial matter. The Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters, as we know, had unanimously recommended changes to the voting system, and, consistent with those recommendations, our reforms will deliver just that transparency. As honourable members know, the member for Brand, Gary Gray, said in this place on 12 May last year:

It would be a travesty for Australian democracy if these careful and thought-through reforms were not in place in time for the next federal election. These reforms will significantly strengthen our democratic process …

Labor were 100 per cent committed to these reforms until, in a cynical and hypocritical exercise of political gamesmanship, it suited them to change their mind.

The reforms will ensure that there will be optional preferential voting above the line, with advice to voters to number one to six boxes, at least, in the order of their choice; but, if they number fewer than six but at least one, the vote will still be valid. So that is a good saving provision to ensure it does not result in informal votes. Optional preferential voting below the line will be established, with advice to number least 12 of the boxes in the order of the voter's choice. Group and individual voting tickets will be abolished. Who will succeed? Who will win out of this? The voter. The voter will make the decision, and their decision will be reflected in the composition of the Senate.

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The members for Bendigo, Wakefield, Parramatta and Moreton were consistently interjecting. They will cease interjecting if they want to remain in the chamber.

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. Isn't it the case that the Prime Minister has made a deal with the Greens political party to change the Senate voting rules so that, if he wins the election, he can force absolutely anything he wants through the parliament, just like John Howard did with Work Choices? Isn't this part of the government's plan to force through measures from the 2014 budget which are still listed in the Senate?

Government Members:

Government members interjecting—

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Members on my right will cease interjecting—the members for Bass, Lyons and Deakin.

Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his question. I have to say I am surprised; after such a stirring address at the National Press Club, when he talked about unemployment and the economy, I thought we may have got a question on that. But it is extraordinary—the Leader of the Opposition has such a short attention span that, in the time it took him to get from the Press Club to the House of Representatives, he has forgotten all the economic issues he was talking about earlier.

The Leader of the Opposition's question is no more than a rather miserable conspiracy theory. He knows full well that the reason we are supporting the reform of the Senate voting system is precisely the reason he and his party supported it until very recently. It is precisely the reason the member for Brand still supports it. The member for Brand knows, and the Labor Party know full well, but they choose not to say it anymore, that the system has been gamed and that it did not and does not accurately or fairly reflect the will of the people.

Our job is to ensure that the dysfunction in the Senate ends and that every member of the Senate can say that they have been the result of a considered decision by the Australian people voting collectively. That means that Australian voters should choose the preferences. They should determine how votes are cast, not backroom deals and preference whisperers who, until very recently, the Labor Party used to condemn.

It says a lot about the shameful cynicism of the Leader of the Opposition that, until recently—and I say this with great respect to the former chairman of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters—there was no more eloquent advocate of Senate voting reform than the member for Brand. He was committed to it; he explained it. He is a former general secretary of the Labor Party. He understood it perfectly and he understood the importance that the parliament is seen to work, that the parliament does work and that it is seen to represent the will of the people. That is why he advocated those changes. That is why we all advocated them. That is why everybody supported them—until now, when, in this very cynical switch, the Labor Party is opposing them. The Leader of the Opposition should go back to his better nature and support these changes to the Senate voting system in the Senate today.

Ms Owens interjecting—

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Parramatta will cease interjecting.