Fatima Payman (WA, Australia's Voice) Share this | Hansard source

What do we have here? We have the government coming into this place and discharging the same very bill that they claimed would make things easier, or, as we heard from Senator Gallagher 'nothing to see here, people'. Can I remind the chamber that this is the second bill the government has discharged of their own accord. After the misinformation and disinformation bill that failed miserably, this is the second bill now that they have come in here and have had to discharge because they have seen that the Senate is not willing to support them. I thank my colleagues in the Liberal Party, the Nationals, the Greens and the crossbench for coming together and saying, 'We will make sure we listen to the Australian public.' Journalists and whistleblowers have also raised concerns about this bill. It has been on the Notice Paper for a while and the government has refused to listen to the Australian public. We value democracy, we value transparency but while those opposite, the government, claim to have received a mandate from the Australian people to be more transparent, we are seeing the exact opposite. I am curious to understand how many hours of precious time did public servants spend on this bill, on having to curate it together? And it was all for nothing—all for the government to come, tail between its legs, and say, 'We're going to discharge it because there's no support.' Newsflash: if you rush something through, don't consult, don't talk to the Australian public—yes, we have to modernise it, but the way to modernise an FOI system isn't to charge the Australian public even more. They pay enough taxes already, but, clearly, the government doesn't see that.

You're so adamant on making it harder for people to gain access to information from your government. What do you have to hide? What was the whole point of establishing the National Anti-Corruption Commission, which, as a former Labor candidate, I campaigned heavily on? What's the whole point of claiming to be transparent, something that your own Labor members have been asking for, yet you come into this place and you say, 'No, we're just going to make it harder because of some frivolous and vexatious claims.' If you don't want to do your job properly, then just admit it, but we're not going to stop making sure we keep you accountable and making sure that transparency is paramount and that it's always prioritised in this place.

I also just want to give a shout-out to Rex Patrick, the transparency warrior, for walking the halls and making sure that this bill is taken off the Notice Paper. As we've seen, it's not fit for purpose. We are willing to come to the table and actually help with curating a proper bill that's fit for purpose, but, as it stands, nobody's backed it, and I'm glad that the government's finally realised that this bill that they'd introduced is a failure of a policy. It beggars belief. Is Minister Rowland fit for the cabinet? This is the second bill that has had to be discharged.

We get accused of being time-wasters here in the Senate—especially the cross bench when we're putting up OPDs or we're pushing for motions. I was hoping to have this debated next week and have the question put then. I'm glad that the government's finally realised no-one's going to support this shambolic bill. The Australian public deserve better. They deserve transparency. They deserve honesty. If the government's not going to do it, you've got the cross bench and the other parties here in the Senate fighting for the Australian people.