Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Hansard source

Pursuant to contingent notion of motion standing in my name, I move:

That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent me from moving a motion to provide for the consideration of a matter, namely a motion to give precedence to a motion related to the reinstatement of cross-portfolio Indigenous matters.

Here we go again. This is a government that will do everything, particularly in partnership with the Australian Greens, to shut down questions. This is not leadership. This is arrogance—nothing more and nothing less—contempt for the parliament and contempt for the Australian people. When a prime minister deliberately shuts down scrutiny, he is not just silencing senators. We are actually here representing our states. We are here representing the Australian people. We are here on their behalf asking questions in relation to one of the biggest portfolio expenditure items on the government's agenda.

I have to say that I'm very disappointed with Labor, and, in particular, with the hypocrisy of the Leader of the Government in the Senate, Senator Wong. Senator Wong is always ready to lecture the coalition and even Senator Jacinta Nampijinpa-Price on what she should think and say on Indigenous issues. Yet, when the government are pushed to vote on a matter, in relation to whether or not we should proceed with Indigenous affairs cross-portfolio matters, they shut it down as fast as they can.

Senator Wong, as the Leader of the Government in the Senate, is happy and quick with the pontification, quick with the sanctimony and quick to tell others about how their views are legitimate or illegitimate. But when it comes to real accountability—that is what Senate estimates is; it's the one opportunity that we on the opposition benches get to actually question the government about their programs—and when it comes to facing hard questions about the failures of Indigenous service delivery and the outcomes on the ground for children, families and communities, suddenly Senator Wong and her counterparts fall silent. They go further than that. They're not silent; they actually vote to remove the ability of the Australian Senate and the opposition to ask questions in relation to this portfolio. Labor are happy to talk down any of those who dare to disagree.

With what they did last week, they have now shown the Australian people they will not front up to scrutiny on the facts. That is the real display that is on show here. Every family in Australia pays their taxes. Every community that depends on outcomes, in this important portfolio in particular, and every citizen who expects honesty from their government expects the opposition and those on the crossbench to hold the government to account in relation to these portfolio issues. Mr Albanese and the government, teaming up with the Greens—don't even start me on the Australian Greens and their hypocrisy. If they ever speak on Indigenous matters again, Senator Liddle, they deserved to be closed down immediately. Quite frankly, they're happy to leave this place, run out to the press and do a press conference, but when they come in here, they're happy to ensure that no questions are asked in relation to what is actually going on in Indigenous communities.

This is the attitude of Mr Albanese. This is it in 2025, everybody. You got a majority; yes, you did, but guess what? Answers still matter. Accountability still matters. Your ministers still need to front up and open the books and let us ask questions. But, for Mr Albanese, this is the way the Australian parliament now runs. He has told the Australian people that their right to answers does not matter. That is a sign of contempt, pure and simple—nothing more and nothing less There is the opportunity now for the government to say: 'Guess what? We know that accountability is not a slogan. We know that it's the lifeblood of democracy.' Estimates is the cornerstone of that accountability. When governments fear questions, they fear the people who ask them. When the Senate demands scrutiny, it serves the people who sent us here. So let's all vote for scrutiny.