Senate debates

Tuesday, 22 November 2016

Motions

Suspension of Standing Orders

3:47 pm

Photo of Richard Di NataleRichard Di Natale (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

Pursuant to contingent notice 2, I move:

That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent Senator Di Natale moving a motion relating to the conduct of the business of the Senate, namely a motion to give precedence to general business notice of motion No. 115 relating to the US alliance.

I move this motion very reluctantly. What has emerged here in this chamber is a consensus between the government and indeed the Labor Party that foreign policy motions can no longer be discussed in this chamber. It has not always been that way—we have consistently, during the time I have been here, been able to talk about issues relating to foreign policy. Let us remember, there are very few opportunities for us as a Senate to do this. We understand that some of these issues are difficult and complex, but so too are many of the other motions that are discussed in this chamber. Just think about it—we were denied leave only a few short weeks ago to condemn the extrajudicial killings that are going on in the Philippines right now under President Duterte. We were denied motions regarding the bombing of medical facilities in conflict zones. In the case of the US alliance, this denial is particularly egregious because this is one of the few opportunities we have to put forward a position and make statements about it. What we have now is this consensus between the Liberal Party and the Labor Party to shut down debate—the old duopoly is at it again.

We were here till nearly 3 am last night debating legislation that could have been debated during ordinary business, yet here we are making a very active decision that we cannot have an open, frank and mature debate about the status of a really critical piece of foreign policy, and that is the US alliance. Many Australians have had conversations about this. They are concerned about what lies ahead for Australia's future under President Trump and what his election means for our chance of handing a livable climate to our kids. They are concerned about whether we are at risk of war and what he will ask of us as an ally.

We want to put forward a simple proposition to the Senate to be able to debate and vote on, yet—despite the overwhelming interest of the Australian people in what a Trump victory means to Australia—we have been shut down. The motion that has been put forward—and it is a sensible one—has been shut down. Again, we have the two old parties teaming up to deny us the chance to talk about it. We do expect this from the coalition, but it is disappointing the ALP has fallen in right behind them. Let me say that from this point onwards when we are denied leave to put a motion to this Senate we will use every means available to us to be able to put our position on the record. If that means suspending standing orders because you are consistently denying us formality, then we will do so.

Let us remember that we are the only party in this place pushing for an exchange in ideas in the context of what has been a seismic shift in global politics. We are saying that if the coalition and the Labor Party do not allow us to have this debate, well, who knows where that might lead? Are we going to be enmeshed in another misguided conflict? Are we going to be forced to increase our defence spending in line with the demands of the president-elect? What does it mean for US bases here on Australian shores? Let us have that discussion. Let us put forward that motion. If people want to seek leave to make a statement and put their position on the record, they can do so. But to deny us the opportunity to even have a vote on one of the most critical areas of foreign policy, which should be entertaining the minds of all people in this chamber, just highlights that this place has become an opportunity for the coalition to railroad legislation through the parliament, as it did last night at nearly 3 am. We have a critical motion, a motion that allows us to at least put on the record our position on issues around the US alliance, and we are being denied that.

You have commentators suggesting that the US election could very well mark a fundamental shift in world order. The Brookings Institution has said:

No other election has had the capacity to completely overturn the international order …

Yet what is the response? Australians being dudded by their elected representatives. Foreign policy issues are critical and we should be able to put motions to this chamber relating to such issues.

Comments

No comments