Senate debates

Tuesday, 1 March 2016

Bills

Business Services Wage Assessment Tool Payment Scheme Amendment Bill 2016, Trade Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2016; First Reading

5:52 pm

Photo of Ian MacdonaldIan Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I always know I am making an accurate point that people listening to this would be interested in when the Labor Party keep taking points of order on me. That was confirmed just now. This debate is about the urgency of the message from the House of Representatives to deal with the Business Services Wage Assessment Tool Payment Scheme Amendment Bill 2016. It is a debate on why this is urgent. Why is this urgent? Because it deals with providing money to people with intellectual disabilities affected by the representative proceedings to claim and receive agreed payments increases.

I would assume that the Labor Party will agree with the bill, but it is important that it is dealt with now so that payments can start. That is why the bill is important. That is why it is a matter of urgency. For the previous speaker who took the point of order, that is why the bill is a matter of urgency. That is why we should deal with the message from the House of Representatives as a matter of urgency, so that we can get on to the Business Services Wage Assessment Tool Payment Scheme that will provide more money for people working in disability enterprises. Why would the Labor Party be filibustering so we cannot start the debate on that bill to provide more money for people with disability enterprises? Why would you want to delay this, Senator Conroy? This is for money for people with a disability.

The Labor Party are using filibuster tactics to prevent the Senate from moving on and dealing with this bill. They do it because they spat the dummy over some other bill that we heard Senator Conroy talk about for five minutes without a word of a point of order from those in the Labor Party, who always find reasons to take points of order on me. The Labor Party are defending the indefensible on the electoral matters bill. As Senator Conroy spoke for five minutes on that, I feel I should just answer that for 30 seconds or so. Senator Conroy, and I ask Labor senators generally: what is wrong with allowing the Australian public to actually determine the preferences that they choose when they go to the next ballot for a Senate? The Labor Party want the bovver boys—the factional heads of the Labor Party—to determine who they will vote for in their preferences. We want the people of Australia to determine their own preferences.

I come back to the reason for the urgency with which we should accept and deal with the message from the House of Representatives: so that we can deal with a bill which will provide money to people with intellectual disabilities working in disability enterprises. It is a wonderful idea. I am sure the bill will receive unanimous support when it comes before us. Why is the Labor Party delaying debate on that essential bill? We should be debating it now.

Comments

No comments