Mark Dreyfus (Isaacs, Australian Labor Party, Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

Adam Bandt (Melbourne, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'll respond very briefly to two matters that the Attorney just referred to in his summing-up speech in relation to the Bankruptcy Amendment (Discharge from Bankruptcy) Bill 2023. Firstly, the Attorney knows full well that a member of the Greens was in attendance at the briefing, as I, in fact, referred to, and it was our relevant spokesperson. So, for there to be some implication that we hadn't been briefed—I made exactly the opposite comment.

Secondly, I note that, despite an invitation, nothing in the Attorney's summing-up speech went to the urgency of this, in terms of why it is that members of the crossbench are being asked to vote on a bill which we only got briefed about this morning and which has been on the Notice Paper for about 12 hours. Transparency matters in this place. If there was a compelling case for urgency, the Attorney could have made it, and he chose not to. We repeat the point, especially as we head towards the end of the year, that, when legislation is introduced into this place, every one of us here as members of the crossbench are entitled to the time to consider legislation and take advice on it. Who knows? We may well have ended up supporting it, had we been given that time.

I repeat that we are going to oppose the rushed passage of this bill through the House and reserve our position in the Senate. Next time, I implore the government to treat the crossbench with a bit more respect and give us time to consider this legislation.

Government Members:

Government members interjecting—

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Members on my right interjecting not from their seats—it is highly disorderly.

Mark Dreyfus (Isaacs, Australian Labor Party, Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I say to the Leader of the Australian Greens party, that, as I understand it, two bills were briefed to members of the crossbench this week by me and by representatives of my office. On the other bill, which is the bill that is next on the Notice Paper, a parliamentary representative of the Australian Greens party did attend, but not for this bill—the Bankruptcy Amendment (Discharge from Bankruptcy) Bill 2023—where a member of staff was sent. For the member for Melbourne to stand up and complain when the Greens party did not bother to send a member of parliament for the briefing that was offered is a bit rich.

But I'll just say on this bill: the discharge from bankruptcy bill is directed at providing certainty and order in the Australian bankruptcy system—an important part of our insolvency law. For the Australian Greens to not make one single comment about the content of the bill and to make this complaint as they have about process simply shows the irresponsibility of their party and their lack of interest in real legislative work in this place. After this bill is passed, as I expect it to be, if they are really interested in it, I'm happy to talk to them anytime about it. But I will say again: this bill is to provide order and certainty to all involved in the Australian bankruptcy system. It's an entirely appropriate use of the processes of this parliament, and members of the Greens party should reflect on their own conduct.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a third time.