Jonathon Duniam's recent appearances (OpenAustralia.org)
type: channel
language: en-gb
creator: OpenAustralia.org, mprss.php script
date: 2025-12-11T22:05:14+00:00
items: g251.5
items: g246.3
items: Rearrangement | Business | Senate debates
items: g76.11
items: g76.9
items: g76.6
items: g76.1
items: Selection of Bills Committee; Report | Committees | Senate debates
items: g41.13
items: g33.4
items: g16.3
items: Answers to Questions | Questions without Notice: Take Note of Answers | Senate debates
items: Crime: Illicit Tobacco | Questions without Notice | Senate debates
items: Australian Public Service Commission; Order for the Production of Documents | Documents | Senate debates
items: Environment | Ministerial Statements | Senate debates
items: Question Time | Motions | Senate debates

g251.5
type: item
title: Environment Protection Reform Bill 2025, National Environmental Protection Agency Bill 2025, Environment Information Australia Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Customs Charges Imposition) Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Excise Charges Imposition) Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (General Charges Imposition) Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Restoration Charge Imposition) Bill 2025; In Committee | Bills | Senate debates
description: It'll be very good for your Facebook.
encoded: It'll be very good for your Facebook.
date: 2025-11-27T18:21:00+00:00

g246.3
type: item
title: Environment Protection Reform Bill 2025, National Environmental Protection Agency Bill 2025, Environment Information Australia Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Customs Charges Imposition) Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Excise Charges Imposition) Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (General Charges Imposition) Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Restoration Charge Imposition) Bill 2025; In Committee | Bills | Senate debates
description: We can extend again!
encoded: We can extend again!
date: 2025-11-27T18:09:00+00:00

Rearrangement | Business | Senate debates
type: item
description: Pursuant to contingent notice standing in the name of the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate, I move: That so much of standing orders be suspended as would prevent further consideration of...
encoded: Pursuant to contingent notice standing in the name of the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate, I move: That so much of standing orders be suspended as would prevent further consideration of the bills until 6.30 pm. In moving this motion, I think it's a great opportunity to continue to ventilate this dodgy deal that we've seen over here between Labor and the Greens, done in a smoke filled room in the ministerial wing of this building away from prying eyes, or maybe it was in the new sumptuous Greens party room down the corridor. We will never know, because these deals will never come out, but I think it is good to have this extended time for scrutiny. I now have realised why Labor and the Greens want to get out of this building tonight. The last speaker belled the cat on why. I now suspect that Senator Wong, Senator Gallagher and others are joining the Greens at this paddle-out in Newcastle. I did not know that the Labor Party were surfers as well, but they're going to go out, and they're going to blockade this coal port and prevent these important fossil fuels from getting in or out of our country and prevent the economy from functioning. I think it is important that this sham process that these poor members of the Public Service have had to sit through—forced to sit here and watch the sausage being made. I'm sorry. I really am. There's no time for scrutiny, no proper accountability, no respect for this chamber of the parliament, no ability to answer basic questions and no respect for the people of Australia and the people of the forestry industry. We have established that here by the simple fact that the Australian Greens have celebrated this victory today. This deal done between Labor and the Greens is something that they've been wanting for a very long time because it brings about the death of the native forestry industry in Australia. They would not be voting for this if it didn't do that. The ridiculous claims by the minister of, 'No, no. The Greens are voti…
date: 2025-11-27T16:59:00+00:00

g76.11
type: item
title: Environment Protection Reform Bill 2025, National Environmental Protection Agency Bill 2025, Environment Information Australia Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Customs Charges Imposition) Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Excise Charges Imposition) Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (General Charges Imposition) Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Restoration Charge Imposition) Bill 2025; In Committee | Bills | Senate debates
description: Yes. I'm about to ask a question, Senator David Pocock. I've got three minutes to ask my question. I will do that. Let's not forget, though, that we had 700 pages of legislation thumped on the...
encoded: Yes. I'm about to ask a question, Senator David Pocock. I've got three minutes to ask my question. I will do that. Let's not forget, though, that we had 700 pages of legislation thumped on the table. We had a Senate committee inquiry process out to the end of March. I'll try and find it in this pile of paper that's been put on my desk today by the government, who want these bills passed—I'm just going to quote Senator Sarah Hanson-Young again. She said in a Senate inquiry last week, 'The people know it stinks'—'it' is this legislation—'It absolutely stinks, and that's why it needs scrutiny.' Senator Hanson-Young also just said to the chamber, in asking her question before, that she appreciates the urgency with which this is now being attended to. I don't know what's happened in the last week. Something big, something seismic, has shifted here. Senator Hanson-Young, who is normally so strident in her opposition to terrible bills, has suddenly found a way to agree with the government on this arrangement. It was, as I say, a deal to make it harder for resources projects to start. It will make it harder to get more gas into the grid, so we're going to have problems with supply when it comes to this critical resource of energy. It will make it harder to get housing developments up, despite any rhetoric we hear from the government on this. It's just going to be ridiculous. Of course, the crown jewel in their achievements of this week is to shut down the native forest industry and take away tens of thousands of jobs. And, of course, we won't be getting the beautiful timbers that adorn this chamber from Australia forests; we'll be ripping them out of the Congo Basin and we'll be displacing human populations and endangering even more species overseas. But, hey, if it's over the horizon, we don't care. My question to the minister is: can the minister guarantee that not one job will be lost in the forest industry as a result of the arrangement that has been put in place here t…
date: 2025-11-27T12:29:00+00:00

g76.9
type: item
title: Environment Protection Reform Bill 2025, National Environmental Protection Agency Bill 2025, Environment Information Australia Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Customs Charges Imposition) Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Excise Charges Imposition) Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (General Charges Imposition) Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Restoration Charge Imposition) Bill 2025; In Committee | Bills | Senate debates
description: Thank you, Chair. Now that the temperature has been taken down a couple of degrees, we might get back to the truth of the matter, and that is that the Australian Labor Party have teamed up with...
encoded: Thank you, Chair. Now that the temperature has been taken down a couple of degrees, we might get back to the truth of the matter, and that is that the Australian Labor Party have teamed up with the Greens to kill forestry. Let's not forget, though, that this is the same party that was toying with the idea of—
date: 2025-11-27T12:29:00+00:00

g76.6
type: item
title: Environment Protection Reform Bill 2025, National Environmental Protection Agency Bill 2025, Environment Information Australia Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Customs Charges Imposition) Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Excise Charges Imposition) Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (General Charges Imposition) Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Restoration Charge Imposition) Bill 2025; In Committee | Bills | Senate debates
description: 'Save the forests,' says Senator Faruqi. I will take that interjection. What the Labor Party and the Greens have signed up to today is a deal to kill native forestry and, of course, take away all...
encoded: 'Save the forests,' says Senator Faruqi. I will take that interjection. What the Labor Party and the Greens have signed up to today is a deal to kill native forestry and, of course, take away all of the jobs that go with it. We can't escape that fact. It is just that simple. The Greens would not have signed on if it did not mean this industry would now be brought to its knees. Ms White, the member for Lyons; Ms Collins, the member for Franklin in Tasmania; and my good friends in the Labor Senate team from Tasmania—we should go out on a road trip and talk to the forest workers of Tasmania who have been let down by this Labor government and have had their jobs suddenly pulled out from underneath them. These are people who have mortgages. They live in regional communities like those on the north-west coast of Tasmania. These are people who have kids in schools. These are people who are a part of communities, volunteer fire brigades and sporting clubs. And the Australian government have decided that they don't support these individuals anymore. They've cast them on the scrap heap. Their jobs are not important. They do have a $300 million bailout package—buyout package, scale-down package, whatever it is—to try and ease the pain of shutting down this industry, to soften the blow of the news that today the Labor Party have sold you out. It is interesting, though. I do wonder how the Greens managed to be talked into providing a further $300 million to the native forest industry, an industry that just last Friday Senator Hanson-Young said— Honourable senators interjecting— Sorry, Chair. I can't hear myself.
date: 2025-11-27T12:29:00+00:00

g76.1
type: item
title: Environment Protection Reform Bill 2025, National Environmental Protection Agency Bill 2025, Environment Information Australia Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Customs Charges Imposition) Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Excise Charges Imposition) Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (General Charges Imposition) Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Restoration Charge Imposition) Bill 2025; In Committee | Bills | Senate debates
description: The proponents of the legislation we are dealing with here seem to have a bet each way when it comes this legislation. They say it's terrible and it's bad and it's written by these awful people...
encoded: The proponents of the legislation we are dealing with here seem to have a bet each way when it comes this legislation. They say it's terrible and it's bad and it's written by these awful people in Labor, but they're backing it; they're signing up to it. Have your cake and eat it too, Australian Greens! That's exactly what's going on here. I will say that I understand that the amendments before the chair are identical to the government's amendments relating to unacceptable impact. Hopefully, the government will support these amendments when they're moved. I want to reflect more generally on the debate before— No? We'll talk about it later, I'm sure, Minister. I have to commend the minister for being able to pull off this deal. It was masterful. I don't like it. I think it's terrible. I think it's dirty. I think it's dodgy. But you did a great job of getting this mob down here, the Australian Greens, to again name a price they were willing to pay. Of course it's the shutdown of the native forest industry. The workers out there are screaming into the phones now on radio stations across the country, and they're providing comments to journalists in print and the TV newsrooms. They are wondering how a Labor government that once used to stand for the worker has today said that they will sign the death warrant of the native forest logging industry. The Prime Minister, ahead of the 2022 election, wrote a letter to Tasmanian forest workers committing that he would never do this. He reiterated that commitment in 2025, saying he would never do this. Guess what, he's gone and done it now. There's a bit of a concern now in Tasmania; I think there's a missing person report for the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Ms Collins, who's nowhere to be seen on this issue. Has she popped up to justify what the government have done? Has she popped up to defend this dirty, dodgy deal with the Greens? The Greens are celebrating. I heard Senator McKim on the radio just before …
date: 2025-11-27T12:29:00+00:00

Selection of Bills Committee; Report | Committees | Senate debates
type: item
description: I move an amendment to the motion, as circulated: At the end of the motion, add: "and, in respect of the Communications Legislation Amendment (Australian Content Requirement for Subscription...
encoded: I move an amendment to the motion, as circulated: At the end of the motion, add: "and, in respect of the Communications Legislation Amendment (Australian Content Requirement for Subscription Video On Demand (Streaming) Services) Bill 2025, the bill be referred immediately to the Environment and Communications Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 3 February 2026".
date: 2025-11-27T11:48:00+00:00

g41.13
type: item
title: Environment Protection Reform Bill 2025, National Environmental Protection Agency Bill 2025, Environment Information Australia Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Customs Charges Imposition) Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Excise Charges Imposition) Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (General Charges Imposition) Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Restoration Charge Imposition) Bill 2025; Limitation of Debate | Bills | Senate debates
description: I was wondering if we could put paragraph (b) separately.
encoded: I was wondering if we could put paragraph (b) separately.
date: 2025-11-27T11:34:00+00:00

g33.4
type: item
title: Environment Protection Reform Bill 2025, National Environmental Protection Agency Bill 2025, Environment Information Australia Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Customs Charges Imposition) Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Excise Charges Imposition) Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (General Charges Imposition) Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Restoration Charge Imposition) Bill 2025; Limitation of Debate | Bills | Senate debates
description: We ask that paragraph (c) be put separately.
encoded: We ask that paragraph (c) be put separately.
date: 2025-11-27T11:21:00+00:00

g16.3
type: item
title: Environment Protection Reform Bill 2025, National Environmental Protection Agency Bill 2025, Environment Information Australia Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Customs Charges Imposition) Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Excise Charges Imposition) Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (General Charges Imposition) Bill 2025, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (Restoration Charge Imposition) Bill 2025; Second Reading | Bills | Senate debates
description: What a great opportunity this is to have a little bit of scrutiny of the legislation that's before the chamber, which will now be rammed through in record time. This is a pattern of behaviour of...
encoded: What a great opportunity this is to have a little bit of scrutiny of the legislation that's before the chamber, which will now be rammed through in record time. This is a pattern of behaviour of the Greens down the end there. At the end of every sitting year we see this arrangement. The mighty new Labor-Greens alliance comes together. They've been behind closed doors for a couple of weeks now, hatching this one up. I'd very much love to know what the price of this latest agreement between the government and their natural bedfellows the Australian Greens political party is this time. Last time, as we know, it was that sumptuous party room down the end of the corridor, lined with myrtle and Huon pine and other endangered old-growth species. But, hey, that doesn't matter. That was the price last time. What have they got this time? Let's not forget that these laws were so important they had to be fully interrogated through the Senate committee process. We had the Greens environment spokesperson, Senator Hanson-Young, saying, 'We must have a full interrogation of these bills by the committee and we cannot report before the end of March.' Well, here we are, and who's voting to ram the Environment Protection Reform Bill 2025 and related bills through the Senate today? None other than the Australian Greens environment spokesperson, Senator Hanson-Young, and all of her colleagues. If you look at the Greens press release issued today about the dirty, dodgy deal they've done, with the price unspecified—the price tag we can't find anywhere on the product before us—there are criticisms of the legislation that the Greens are supporting. This is them wanting to have their cake and eat it too. It says, 'Despite significant wins for nature, the bill is still woefully short of what the climate needs, with Labor's refusal to take meaningful climate action,' et cetera, et cetera. You've got the whip hand here, Australian Greens. You signed up. You're supporting the legislation, but you…
date: 2025-11-27T09:27:00+00:00

Answers to Questions | Questions without Notice: Take Note of Answers | Senate debates
type: item
description: I move: That the Senate take note of answers to all questions asked by coalition senators during questions without notice today. In moving that motion, I want to start with the question that I...
encoded: I move: That the Senate take note of answers to all questions asked by coalition senators during questions without notice today. In moving that motion, I want to start with the question that I asked, and that was in relation to the exploding industry of illegal tobacco in this country that has happened on this government's watch. It didn't just happen overnight. It's happened over the last three or more years now while this government has been on the Treasury benches, and it has had devastating impacts on the lives of many Australians. Indeed, the government itself is not immune to the impacts of the illicit tobacco trade, losing billions of dollars of revenue in excise collections every year as a result of their hands off approach when it comes to dealing with this insidious issue. There's not an Australian—particularly in major population centres like Melbourne or Sydney, Brisbane perhaps, or even, indeed, some of the regional communities around Australia—that cannot see firsthand the impacts of the illicit tobacco trade. I understand that every day in this country these cartel operations, these crime gangs, are making a $13 million profit off illegal tobacco, and this government has sat on its hands for the last 3½ years. They talk about hundreds of millions of dollars being ploughed into enforcement initiatives. The problem is that it is not stopping the problem. It is not stemming the flow of these terrible products coming into our country, be they illegal cigarettes, loose leaf tobacco or illegal vape products. Of course, we know that these products can be laced with some of the most harmful chemicals with terrible consequences for human health with no approval from the Therapeutic Goods Administration. Again this government and the Minister representing the Minister for Home Affairs say, 'Virtually nothing to see here.' This is a terrible indictment on government that should have, in its top few priorities, a desire to keep this nation secure and a desire to …
date: 2025-11-06T15:12:00+00:00

Crime: Illicit Tobacco | Questions without Notice | Senate debates
type: item
description: I was after an exact figure. Anyway, in light of the answers to both of those questions, what is the minister's response to the clear exasperation of the New South Wales health minister, Ryan...
encoded: I was after an exact figure. Anyway, in light of the answers to both of those questions, what is the minister's response to the clear exasperation of the New South Wales health minister, Ryan Park, who told reporters yesterday that he was very disappointed with the lack of action from the federal government, including that the government has no intention to change anything in this area despite the near constant pledge from state governments to do something about it?
date: 2025-11-06T14:36:00+00:00

Crime: Illicit Tobacco | Questions without Notice | Senate debates
type: item
description: In 2023, Minister Mark Butler forecast the tobacco excise would deliver an extra $3.3 billion in revenue over the forward estimates instead of what's now turned into a roughly $25 billion loss as...
encoded: In 2023, Minister Mark Butler forecast the tobacco excise would deliver an extra $3.3 billion in revenue over the forward estimates instead of what's now turned into a roughly $25 billion loss as a result of the exploding illegal tobacco trade. Minister, can you tell the Senate exactly how much worse off the bottom line will be as a result of this hands-off approach and the lack of any effective action being taken by your government?
date: 2025-11-06T14:35:00+00:00

Crime: Illicit Tobacco | Questions without Notice | Senate debates
type: item
description: My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Home Affairs, Senator Watt. Given the rapid acceleration in the illicit tobacco trade in the years of the Albanese government and all...
encoded: My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Home Affairs, Senator Watt. Given the rapid acceleration in the illicit tobacco trade in the years of the Albanese government and all of the dangerous black market and organised crime activity associated with it, does the minister accept that the lack of any meaningful or decisive practical action by your government is severely hampering state and territory governments' efforts to shut down this illegal activity within their jurisdictions.
date: 2025-11-06T14:33:00+00:00

Australian Public Service Commission; Order for the Production of Documents | Documents | Senate debates
type: item
description: I move: At the end of the motion add: (c) if order for the production of documents no. 10 has not been fully complied with by 31 December 2025: (i) the order of the call for question time be as...
encoded: I move: At the end of the motion add: (c) if order for the production of documents no. 10 has not been fully complied with by 31 December 2025: (i) the order of the call for question time be as follows: (ii) the Senate requires the Minister for the Public Service to attend the Senate at the start of proceedings each sitting day to provide an explanation of the failure to comply with the order, and that: (A) any senator may move to take note of the explanation, and (B) any such motion may be debated for no longer than 60 minutes and shall have precedence over all other business until determined, and senators may speak to the motion for not more than 5 minutes each. It was circulated electronically. Parties may not yet have it, so I'll just speak to it briefly. Our amendment to the motion outlines that if the order for the production of documents hasn't been complied with by the end of this year, 31 December, question time will revert to the order and number of questions as was stipulated in the motion that the government is seeking to overturn—15 questions per day with questions 11 to 15 being for non-government senators only. There's an additional element to the motion which requires the Minister for the Public Service to attend the Senate at the start of proceedings each sitting day to provide an explanation of the failure to comply with the order and that any senator may move to take note of the explanation. Any such motion may be debated for no longer than 60 minutes. It will have precedence over all other business until determined, and senators may speak to the motion for no more than five minutes each. While we appreciate the government's attempt to comply with an order they should have complied with some time ago, we want to put in place this measure to ensure that this transparency which we are now being told we will be provided—there will be a briefing to the committee, and I accept that. But we want that document tabled. In order to ensure that it is provid…
date: 2025-11-05T09:03:00+00:00

Environment | Ministerial Statements | Senate debates
type: item
description: I move: That the Senate take note of the document. What this country does internationally is important, but what they do here domestically is more important when it comes to our environment. I...
encoded: I move: That the Senate take note of the document. What this country does internationally is important, but what they do here domestically is more important when it comes to our environment. I think there is a range of issues the minister might have glossed over in his annual report card. I always find it amusing when the government tables its own report card, marking its own work over the last three years, since 2022, telling us that everything is peachy and all is good. In fact, it is far from that. There is a range of issues I think we need to go through here to properly dissect that. I'll come to the EPBC Act reforms that the minister has alluded to a little later on. There are a few things I do agree with in the minister's statement. The environment and, of course, the laws related to regulating, managing, protecting and preserving our environment do go to the heart of our economy. We live, exist and work in the environment. It is not a separate organism; it is not something that is ethereal and totally disconnected from how we operate here in this country. It is important that we have laws and arrangements in this country to ensure that when we make decisions related to the functioning of our economy, they don't have an adverse impact that outweighs the benefits of any economic activity in the environment. It is connected to the health of the nation. It's also connected, as the minister said, to housing. Having said that, though, for the last three years—under this government, prior to the last election—EPBC laws have held up decisions relating to tens of thousands of housing units, dwellings, across this country. To suggest that things are on track and that this government has got matters under control and things are heading in the right direction when we're in a housing crisis—no HAFF or program run by this government would have addressed these issues in the same way as they are attempting to do now through reforms of the EPBC Act which are specifically targ…
date: 2025-11-04T19:05:00+00:00

Question Time | Motions | Senate debates
type: item
description: Thank you for your protection, President. It has been a delight to again highlight the willingness of this government to hide from accountability and to do what it can do with its numbers from...
encoded: Thank you for your protection, President. It has been a delight to again highlight the willingness of this government to hide from accountability and to do what it can do with its numbers from time to time. It's a real disappointment, especially when such promises were made before the last election and the one before that, which they so easily break.
date: 2025-11-03T15:20:00+00:00

Question Time | Motions | Senate debates
type: item
description: The suspension, of course, is about question time and altering the order of call. We believe it is urgent because this government, these ministers, refuse to be transparent. That is the thing....
encoded: The suspension, of course, is about question time and altering the order of call. We believe it is urgent because this government, these ministers, refuse to be transparent. That is the thing. The minister over there, Senator Watt, says, 'We've answered the questions.' He's provided whatever he thinks is an answer, but it doesn't go to the issues that are being asked about here, because, as discussed, record numbers—this is all interrelated. It's all interrelated. Transparency is not just something that occurs in one part of a government's business. We have orders for the production of documents that this government refused to respond to in any meaningful way. We have FOI requests on behalf of the people of Australia that this government refused to provide responses to in any meaningful way. We are here in question time—the one time of the day when we are able to ask ministers of the Crown, elected on behalf of the people of Australia to run the government. Of course, they seek to run their influence here as well, telling senators when they'll get a question and in what order. What is next from this government that refuses to stand by the promises they made? They won't do it. This is just another example of that. So I would ask the Greens to reconsider their position—and Senator Pocock as well—because I think it is important this government is held to account. If we can't get this motion passed here today, we will come back with another motion to deal with this very issue, because, as I said last week, it is an urgent matter now. But we've had enough of a government completely rejecting the democratic rights of the people of Australia, as represented here by the majority of senators outside of the Australian Labor Party. I look forward to working with a government that wants to actually be co-operative; I'm happy to do that. But a bit of transparency along the way never goes astray. It was what was promised—transparency. Part of that is question time. We have, as I'…
date: 2025-11-03T15:20:00+00:00

Question Time | Motions | Senate debates
type: item
description: At the heart of the urgency motion before the chamber is the matter of transparency. Question time is all about transparency. It's about non-government senators asking ministers questions and...
encoded: At the heart of the urgency motion before the chamber is the matter of transparency. Question time is all about transparency. It's about non-government senators asking ministers questions and answers being provided. I tell you, sadly, this government isn't in the habit of doing so. What this enabled, again, is for the world to see what this government is really like. The aerating of this motion in front of the media, in front of the gallery, again highlights the aversion to transparency this government has. Senator Pocock mentioned, of course, that the catalyst for this, which precipitated the question time last week—the longest question time since federation, 3½ hours—when the government lost control of the chamber, was that this government refuses to release a document. That's the catalyst. That's why we're having this debate now in response, instead of releasing the document which brought us to where we are today. This is because the government—the all-powerful government that must be obeyed and will tell this chamber what to do, when they'll do it and who'll get what question at what time—again sought to alter the order of question time. So, of course, all of this comes back to this attitude, which is completely opposite to what the government promised this country they would have, around transparency. Even the answers to the questions that were asked by senators in this place last Thursday and today were not befitting of transparent ministers—one-word answers, 10 seconds here, 10 seconds there. The EPBC Act—
date: 2025-11-03T15:20:00+00:00