Helen Haines (Indi, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

I add my voice to those on this side to say that I'll also be voting against this motion today, and I want to record that, once again, we're being asked by the Labor government to limit debate in this place. In fact, we've been asked twice in the same day. Limiting debate on such important issues—particularly as sensitive an issue as offshore detention—to just one hour is absolutely unacceptable. There's no way that issues of this gravity can be debated in such a short period of time. Indeed, in this family friendly new parliament that we have, I don't think the intention to halt debates till 6.30 pm is about pulling the doona up over proper debate on such important issues.

I note also the exquisite irony that we're being asked to limit debate today on something as sensitive as offshore detention when Behrouz Boochani has, historically, just been in this Parliament House speaking to us about offshore detention. I find this an excruciating and exquisite irony, actually. The other thing that I would say is that I found giving us notice last night that this motion would be brought forward, after what was a pretty quiet sitting day yesterday, rather disturbing, I have to admit, and I think the process is really, really poor.

Now, I was in the last parliament and I heard my colleagues who are now in government but were then in opposition make considerable noise about gagging debate, and I'm very disappointed, to be truthful, that we're in this position again today. I spoke in this House when the motion was put by the Leader of the House to change standing orders around urgent matters and I asked the question then: what would be considered urgent? To my knowledge, from what I've gleaned in the very short period I've had time to consider it, this issue of the Republic of Nauru has been known about for some months and, indeed, expired in October, so, having found this out last night and been asked to ram this through today with limited debate, I will be voting against this motion.

See this speech in context