Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to close the debate. I notice that the opposition will actually be voting in favour of this because it is a good schedule that has been worked out with the interests of the parliament in mind. The fact is that we have an extra Senate-only week in this schedule, and the Senate budget estimates will sit on 17 October through to 20 October without the House sitting. Of course that is the lead-up to CHOGM, which is being held in Perth next year. Indeed, in order to ensure that the Prime Minister has been in the parliament she has in fact, as all Australians would be aware, travelled to represent the nation for three of the last four weekends, including last weekend travelling to Lisbon to represent Australia at the meeting concerning Afghanistan.

We needed to work into the schedule the UN General Assembly, APEC, the G20 meeting, the G20 finance ministers’ meeting and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change—the important international conferences at which Australia, thanks to the advocacy of this government, is represented. Being represented at senior forums like the G20 forum is surely something that would be supported by everyone here in the House.

The Manager of Opposition Business sought to make a distinction and essentially argued that 17 weeks plus a reserve week—an 18th week, which is in there—is bad, but 18 weeks is good. There is this big distinction over what is effectively one day. That is, of course, a nonsense. He would be aware that originally it was the intention of the government to resume the parliament on 1 February. I received, as Leader of the House, a number of representations, because school goes back in that first week of February. Parents on this side of the House—and, I am sure, on the other side of the House—will be very pleased, particularly those who have a child attending their first day of school, by the fact that they will be able to be there for that first day of school, engage as a parent with the new teacher and engage with the settling of the child into their new class. I make no apologies for that. Therefore, we are coming back on 8 February rather than 1 February. That is a good thing.

I also, towards the end of the year, have tried to envisage, after representations from both sides of the chamber, parliament not sitting into the period in which there are school functions—that first week of December. This is just a sensible position moving forward. It is not party political and it is not ideological; it is a sensible reform. Indeed, in order to accommodate that we are even sitting in the first week of July—again, sensible—so that new senators who are sworn in can actually sit in their places. The position adopted after some elections was that people became senators on 1 July but were not actually sworn in until many weeks later.

In the last parliament, the House sat for 36 hours per week. Prior to the last parliament it sat even less. The new parliament will sit for a total of 56 hours per week, with 40 hours in the main chamber here. Previously, the House sat for 36 hours and the Main Committee for 10, for a total of 46 hours. Now, it will be 40 plus 16, for a total of 56 hours, which is an increase of 10 hours, or 21 per cent—not a bad productivity improvement. That includes an additional 6½ hours dedicated to private members’ business, bringing the total allocated time to nine hours per week.

I cannot let the extraordinary contribution of the member for Mackellar go without a response. The member for Mackellar raised a fuss here the other night over the tabling of this document. She pretends she is an expert and moves points of order every question time. She came into this chamber and created chaos to the point where Kevin Andrews, the member for Menzies, was named, but the Speaker chose to withdraw that naming. Today, having had this schedule in front of her for days, she looks at it and tells the parliament that we are sitting up to 24 December and that there are reserve weeks including a sitting on New Year’s Eve. I say to the member for Mackellar: it is time to retire when you look at a sitting schedule that you have had for days and you think we are sitting up to 24 December. That was one of the most extraordinary performances from someone whom time has just forgotten. It is time for the member for Mackellar to simply move on.

In between all that, she thought she was so clever by crossing the rule that we do not have a go at members of parliament through members of their family. She breached that understanding that all of us have and that all of us honour in this chamber. The member for Mackellar embarrassed herself with that contribution. She is an embarrassment to the Liberal Party, and she is an embarrassment to this parliament.

Question put:

That the motion (Mr Albanese’s) be agreed to.

Question agreed to.

See this speech in context