Linda Reynolds (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I too rise to speak on this issue. I think it is yet another sad demonstration of the parlous state of the competence of those opposite for a number of reasons. First of all, as we heard in this chamber this morning, the government has been highly transparent and, as Senator Wong confirmed, there were negotiations and discussions this morning to the opposition's satisfaction. The documents were tabled and the discussion was suspended until 12.30 today to give all parties time to have a look at the documents. But we had five senators opposite raise the same issue. Those five senators, or their tactics committee, should have taken the time this morning to actually read the documents that were tabled and then listen to the two ministers who answered all of those questions during question time and in their statements between 12.30 and 1.30 this afternoon.

This leaves me wondering whether their tactics committee was so incompetent that it did not bother listening to or reading any of the proceedings in this chamber today or whether they just did not bother to provide any of the five senators opposite with a plan B relating to this. And I cannot really see a third option. So they went ahead and asked the same questions on things that had already been canvassed—not only canvassed in this chamber to the satisfaction of their leader in this place; they also voted to refer this issue through to the High Court, where it now justly rests. The government has been very transparent about this. Extensive information was provided on the process and the information. Both the Special Minister of State and the Minister for Finance made extensive statements to the Senate earlier today surrounding the circumstances of the lease of former Senator Day's electorate office. So, while we found it fascinating to hear the exposition of the tram situation in Adelaide from Senator Farrell and to hear Senator Ketter expressing some concern that he could not move his office when he wanted to, the fact is that this matter is now before the High Court, and that is where it should be.

As those opposite may have missed, the government has moved a motion in the Senate, which has been passed by the Senate, to refer the election of former Senator Bob Day to the High Court due to a potential breach of section 44 of the Constitution—again, a matter which was canvassed extensively in this place this morning. There is only one body that now has the power to determine whether former Senator Day was in breach of section 44, and that is the High Court. I think it is critically important that neither house of this parliament, including those opposite, should now try to have this matter tried outside the court and prejudice any deliberations of the High Court sitting as the Court of Disputed Returns.

But what does it say about those opposite that they raise this when they and we had canvassed this so extensively this morning in this place? Again, it is another demonstration that those opposite are bereft of serious policy to discuss in this place. Where were the questions on national security? Where were the questions on defence? Where were the questions on health, education and any of the things that are really important to all Australians? I think this is another example of a tactical misfire by those opposite. Now we see them in the process of bringing down the best opportunity we have had for marriage equality, for legal equality in this country, simply because they have got an attack of the heebie-jeebies because it was not their process that got up but the government's offer of how to get this through. So they are about to stuff that up for the public. The Legal and Constitutional Affairs References committee is limping home to a report tomorrow—