Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care) | Hansard source

It's really quite interesting that we're in here having a debate about transparency or the lack of transparency. I want to put on the record that the Manager of Government Business in the Senate; I, as Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate; and the Manager of Greens Business often communicate about what needs to be done to try and assure the smooth transition of legislation through this place because we know the transition of that legislation is really important for the running of this country. At the beginning of this sitting period, I reached out to the managers of the respective parties and said, 'What is it that you want to have put through this week?' In response to that, I got a list of legislation from the manager of government business that the government was hoping to put through this place.

Constructively, I have worked to make sure we've passed a number of those bills, which have been brought forward over preceding days—last week and this week—most particularly the Aged Care Bill, which demonstrated the bipartisan support that we had offered to the government to make sure that the care of older Australians was embedded in the act. That got passed. We also had a series of bills in relation to higher education for which we sat through Monday night, I think it was, to make sure that those bills were passed. A number of the bills that were put on the list by Senator Gallagher have been passed by this place in good faith because they were the bills that the government told us it was essential to pass in this final sitting fortnight of the year.

At no time did the government ever indicate that it wanted to push through 37 bills. I draw the attention of this place and those listening to the kind of bill that they want to shove through here. One of the bills, the Crown References Amendment Bill, is to change references to 'His Majesty' or 'Her Majesty' in bills in which this has been the case to now 'the sovereign'. What we've seen today being shoved through this place is a bill that is so inconsequential in the middle of a cost-of-living crisis. All it does is turn terms in relation to the sovereign to a gender-neutral term. This is a solution looking for a problem. There was no problem. We didn't need this bill to go through this place today. It just demonstrates the lack of concern or consideration that this government has for the real issues that are facing the Australian public. They're more concerned about the gender neutrality of 'the sovereign' than solving issues that relate to the cost of living.

Obviously, the opposition are really concerned about the fact that the government are trying to stuff through these bills, most of which we have not seen before. And we commend the crossbench for standing firm on this, because, whilst we as the opposition have a level of resources to enable us to go through all of these bills and to try and work out what the consequences of them are, the crossbench, in the space of less than 24 hours—in fact, not much better than 12 hours—have been asked to consider all these bills, consider their positions and understand what the amendments are when amendments are flowing in in front of us, as we speak.

This is an absolute disgrace. It shows complete contempt and disrespect for this chamber, the Australian public and the crossbench.