Cory Bernardi (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I keep coming back to this because it is about reprehensible behaviour—involuntary and coercive behaviour. Those are two of the first words—'involuntary' and 'coerced'—in these responses from the government to the reports of the Senate.

What is worse is when there is contrived and confected outrage about Senate committees when they are being undermined from within. The fifth columnists are at work in the Senate. They are seeking to undermine the integrity of the committee system for base political reasons. If you want meaningful responses and respectful reports—understanding that we have political disagreements and understanding that we are always going to have different views on any number of matters—it will require cooperation. It required cooperation when I was in opposition. I tried to work well with members of the government to initiate inquiries and to get outcomes—say, for men's health. I remember the minister at the time, Minister Roxon, was very receptive to the committee's recommendations because they were bipartisan and they were genuinely an attempt to get some men's health outcomes. The government responded to them.

The government has responded in a positive manner to the report, a very important report, that we are discussing today. But how can we logically expect the government to positively respond to committee inquiries that have been hijacked and had raw numbers used against them, limiting the participation—and deliberately and wilfully so—of members of the Senate who have a genuine interest in the subject matter at hand. It does not matter whether they are on that side or on this side or on the third side or the fifth wheel or wherever they want to be. It is about the right and the responsibility of every senator to be able to participate fully.

There are circumstances where we have to accommodate people's absences and to rejig things, but that is generally done with consultation. I can say that consultation on some of these committees has been woeful. In fact, it has been worse than woeful. It seems to me that on some committees the majority—the ruling clique, if you will—will go out of their way to inconvenience other senators, whether it is in their quest for media exposure, their determination to have the limelight all to themselves or to just shut down a dissenting point of view. It is wrong, and it will undermine the reports and the responses from government such as we are discussing here.

Do any of us really want to undermine important inquiries like the involuntary or coerced sterilisation of people with disabilities in Australia? I know people are concerned about that. The government has been concerned about that, and that is why they have responded to this report. But how can we expect this Senate to operate to the best of its ability when there is no concern for the overwhelming good of the Senate and little or no concern for anything else other than base political survival? The institution is bigger than any one of us. If you think that is not the case, just look around at any one of your colleagues who has left. They are all pretty much forgotten as soon as they go—not you, Madam Acting Deputy President O'Neill. I am sure you will be remembered for a very long time.