Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source

I understand that, but there might be some on the other side who do not follow those niceties.

The program that is now being put forward is very similar to the program that was put forward last year. I will take the Senate through the program briefly. We usually come back around the first week in February, and in this case we are doing so again. We usually sit for two weeks then. In addition, we have to fit in the supplementary estimates, which are again there for a week for the Senate. If you look between February and April, you see that Easter comes early next year, which effectively limits the amount of time we can sit up to Easter. We are sitting quite a number of days during that period.

The Senate, like the House, has a non-sitting period between the end of Easter and May, for the budget to be able to be delivered on 11 May. The government would argue strenuously against the addition of two weeks of sitting in the middle of that period. That period is taken up by the Senate in two ways. It deals with committee inquiries that are put forward in February or which have been carried over from the previous year. The work of the Senate of course is not only within the chamber when the chamber is sitting but also dealing with committees. We also have a number of select committees currently operating—more than at any time in the past, I would imagine. In addition to that—and this is a matter that I might raise in another motion—there is substantial committee work now being referred by the opposition and the Greens to committees of the Senate to be dealt with. The Senate needs time to be able to deal with those references in a sensible way.

The period between the budget and July follows the usual sitting pattern. The budget week is, as usual, three days, when the budget work is dealt with. Then we have budget estimates, which follow that for two weeks, which is also the usual sitting pattern. Then we come back to deal with the budget bills for two weeks before what is commonly referred to as the winter recess. The second half of the year provides ‘two on, two off’—two weeks on followed by two weeks off—right through to the end of November.

I think you have to put this into two other frames. The first frame is that next year is a year in which an election could fall. Two things come from that. The first is that you would expect less legislation to occur during that period. The second is that you would expect, depending on how things occur, that part of the sitting pattern would then not be completed, although I cannot second-guess what the Prime Minister may determine.

The second frame—and this is always an issue that is raised—is that, if there are requirements for additional sitting days, the government can request those. In the past, that has generally met with agreement from the Senate, where it can be demonstrated that the government does have legislation to be dealt with and passed and there is work of the Senate to be done.

There is little practical benefit in scheduling sitting days where it could be perceived that there is no practical work—and that is a matter that has been complained of in the past with respect to bills and sitting days. As always, if there is a requirement for additional work the government has a prerogative to add sitting days to the program. In the past we have expanded the program or set aside particular times to accommodate bills.

I do not agree with Senator Brown’s proposition that we could schedule additional sitting days and then simply go home early. I think the reverse of that is a much better position to adopt. If there are bills to be dealt with, the government can indicate that additional time is required and then we can negotiate, depending on what particular type of bill it is. We can request those additional hours or days for the legislation to be dealt with. That is the process that has been adopted in the past and it is a more sensible program to adopt.

With Easter, the winter recess and what could happen in the course of the year, the 2010 sitting pattern allows the legislation of the Senate to be dealt with in a sensible way. In addition to that, in an election year the legislative requirements are sometimes slightly less. Senator Xenophon indicated that he prefers longer sitting days for the Senate. I agree with that, and that does occasionally occur. We usually deal with bills in the usual way. We ensure that we can have the second reading debate on Monday or Tuesday nights. The Senate has had long experience and practice in managing its program based on the government’s prerogative to put forward a program that is sensible and pragmatic—and the 2010 program recognises the realities of 2010.

Senator Brown has brought forward a range of arguments in this debate. I do not necessarily agree with Senator Brown’s arguments, but I do understand that the Senate always manages to deal with the legislative program and, up to this point, has been dealing with it in the way you would expect. The Senate does get through its legislative requirements in a workmanlike way.