Sarah Hanson-Young (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

On this motion put forward by the government today, I actually think this is a very good discussion that we're having here this morning, because it really is focusing the Senate's mind on how we use the powers of this place, which are incredibly important to ensure transparency and accountability of government.

We're in this position because we have asked numerous times for this document. We've also asked numerous times for other documents, and there is a growing view—not just across this chamber but outside this chamber in the community—that this government is not being upfront nor as transparent as they promised to be. I think that's a problem for the government, and I urge ministers, whether they're in this place or the other, to think hard about how they want to reflect the values that they promised the Australian people at the election.

Our job in the Senate is to hold the government to account, to scrutinise legislation, to scrutinise regulation and to ask the tough and difficult questions so that the public can have certainty that the government is doing what it promised to do. It's also part of our job in this scrutiny role to try and improve the processes not just in the parliament but within the government. Is there legislation that needs to be amended to be made better? Are there government processes that need to be fixed because they're failing to deliver for the community? Is there more need for transparency in areas because the government isn't responding the way they should?

Of course, this isn't just about being on the other side of the government; this is actually about trying to deliver better outcomes for the community and for people. That's actually why these powers that we have in the Senate, which are extremely important, exist. It is up to us, and it is our responsibility to make sure that we can get better outcomes for people, get better outcomes from government decisions and ensure that communities are getting not just the information but the services that they deserve.

We know that the community has been increasingly worried. They were worried under the previous Morrison government, and 'jobs for mates' was an issue. There's a reason why this report was commissioned in the first place. It's because there has been a problem. There is a view that 'jobs for mates' is an issue within successive governments. That's the whole point of this report. I commend Minister Gallagher for commissioning the report in the first place. It's an important piece of work, but that is why we have insisted that it be released.

I want to acknowledge that this is a step forward. We've had quite a bit of argy-bargy in this place—some serious, some not so serious, sadly—over the last week as to how we can force the government to comply with orders of the Senate. I want to acknowledge that this is an important step forward and a way of acknowledging the powers that the Senate has—the importance of our role as a chamber that scrutinises and that can hold government to account. I also acknowledge that we referred the matter of OPDs and transparency to the Senate Standing Committee on Procedure last week. We've had one meeting so far, and I think, so far, it's good. I think there is a general sense across the parties that how we manage OPDs—orders for production of documents—and how we manage and use transparency levers in this place more effectively are good. But that work is not complete.

I put it to both sides—the opposition and the government. I understand that this motion will pass today because the two of you have agreed. The parties of government have agreed—reverted back to the parties of government. But I put it to you that this broader issue of transparency is not going to go away unless we reset how the government responds to orders for production of documents, how this chamber manages that serious power and how we go through the steps of requiring transparency at various stages. I urge the government to do more to ensure that, when we ask for information on behalf of our constituents, the government give it and are willing to be transparent with their own constituents and with their own communities and work with us across all sides to do that.

I understand that the Labor Party and the coalition have agreed that this is a reasonable step forward. We think it's too weak. We would prefer the document to be released as requested, but, of course, it's going to go through because the parties of government, the two big parties, have decided to sort it out. After a spat over the last week, they've decided to work it out. They're hugging it out. Look over there; they're hugging it out over there! I think, however, that the role of the crossbench in this debate over the last week has been a good one, because, for too long and so often, the major parties think that they only have to share information amongst themselves and that if the Liberal and National parties—or do I just say the Liberal Party these days? If the coalition and the Labor Party come to an agreement, it doesn't really matter what the crossbench thinks. Well, we are showing you more and more and more that we will insert ourselves in these discussions, because our constituents deserve it. They expect it, and we will use the powers we have.