Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I will. We all hear what is being said and there are people who are worried. This sham process has been signed up to by the Greens in completely the opposite way that they usually conduct their politics. For what? To hand the coalition, potentially, a majority in the Senate and, by doing so, be unable to progress the agenda that the Greens political party profess to hold so dearly—things like climate change, things like border control and immigration, things like fair funding for schools, things like hospital funding and things like preventative health. All of those things that we hear are so important to the Greens political party or the ability to prosecute those arguments are challenged by the deal that they themselves signed. They have wandered into a room, shut the door and shaken hands with the Prime Minister. It is absolutely beyond me why that approach would be taken.

But I can say, for senators in this place that get lectured by the Greens on process, accountability and transparency, those days are over. The deal that the Greens signed up to last week, they chose the path and that path was to hold hands with the coalition to single-handedly get rid of the representatives of 3.3 million Australians who did not vote for the Greens, who did not vote for Labor and who did not vote for the coalition. That path was chosen by the Greens and their leader leader—perhaps not by their whole team, particularly the ones that are going to be jeopardised by this change being put in place.

It is not just the Labor Party raising concerns about this deal. I think anyone who read the weekend papers would have seen concerns being raised by eminent commentators such as George Williams, who, while supportive of elements of the bill, still questioned the need to ram it through and not have a proper inquiry process. Richard Denniss, who perhaps is someone that the Greens occasionally listen to and who is occasionally supportive of some of the policies the Greens have, raised concerns and questions about why does it have to be pushed through? He wrote:

A full inquiry into the intended, and unintended, consequences of the Bill negotiated between the Greens and the government would help the media and public think through where we now look headed. In short the new system will help the Liberals and Nationals fend off the rising threat from the likes of Ricky Muir, Glenn Lazarus, David Leyonhjelm and Jacqui Lambie. In the medium term it also helps protect the Greens from the emergence of any "left wing micros".

There we have it pretty succinctly summed up about who benefits from it—in the medium term, certainly the Greens. They are prepared to have a few casualties of their own team in the short term if it all secures a greater long-term spot for the Greens. But that is the price that will be paid for this dirty deal.

I know there are other senators who would like to speak on this but I think this is the last time that I will be lectured by the Greens about process and accountability and transparency and electoral reform and donation reform and all of those—