Senate debates

Tuesday, 15 March 2016

Business

Consideration of Legislation

4:45 pm

Photo of Mitch FifieldMitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | | Hansard source

I move:

That the following general business orders of the day be considered on Thursday, 17 March 2016 under consideration of private senators' bills:

No. 84 Social Security Amendment (Diabetes Support) Bill 2016

No. 68 Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security Amendment Bill 2015.

4:46 pm

Photo of Robert SimmsRobert Simms (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | | Hansard source

I move the amendment circulated in my name:

Omit "No. 68 Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security Amendment Bill 2015", substitute "No. 16 Marriage Equality Amendment Bill 2013."

The motion that I am moving today on behalf of the Greens seeks to make private senators' time available on Thursday to deal with the issue of marriage equality.

Photo of Doug CameronDoug Cameron (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Human Services) Share this | | Hansard source

What a joke! What an absolute joke!

Photo of Robert SimmsRobert Simms (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | | Hansard source

We have heard a lot of bluster from the Labor Party on this issue today, and I am hearing it now from Senator Cameron, from his interjection. But the Greens are serious about this issue. We have been campaigning on it for decades and we want to see action in this parliament on the issue. If the Labor Party are serious about this issue, they will support the Greens in making their private senators' time available so that we can deal with this this week.

I have seen some interesting material circulated online on behalf of the Australian Labor Party referring to the Greens voting against our bill on marriage equality. That is a complete lie. That is completely untrue. However, the Australian Labor Party have voted against the Greens bill on marriage equality. They voted against it back in 2008, when the Greens first put this matter to vote. Labor voted against the Greens bill and they sat over there with the coalition, cosying up to their mates over in the Liberal Party, to try and kill off that reform. The great love affair at the centre of Australian politics, between the Labor and Liberal parties, was alive and well back in 2008.

That great love affair was also alive and well back in 2004, when the Australian Labor Party voted with the coalition to amend the Marriage Act to say that marriage was only between a man and a woman. Who stood up and said that that was the wrong thing to do? Who came out in the parliament and opposed that draconian measure? It was not the Labor Party. They were saddling up to the Liberals. It was the Greens senators—and the Democrat senators at that time as well—who stood up and who spoke out against that blatant homophobia. That is the track record of our party, and I will happily have that matched against the record of the Labor Party any day of the week.

Any Australian who follows this debate knows full well that the Greens have the track record when it comes to marriage equality. After all, it is our bill that Senator Leyonhjelm sought to have dealt with this week, earlier today, and it is our bill that we are seeking to have dealt with on Thursday in private senators' time. It is time that we saw more than just a debate on this issue and that we also saw a vote on the issue of marriage equality, here in the Senate and in the lower house as well. I saw some comments from Bill Shorten to that effect recently, saying that we should deal with this issue this week. Absolutely. Let us bring it on.

We have seen in the last few days the costs associated with a plebiscite—the enormous cost to our economy and the huge social cost to our community. The parliament does have the authority and the power to resolve this matter, and we should do so. We can start by having a vote in the parliament sometime this week. But we can also have this issue debated on Thursday. Labor have said they want to see this issue dealt with this week. We do too, so our challenge to the ALP is to make their private senators' time available so that we can deal with this matter. It is a private senator's bill and it should be dealt with in private senators' time. If the Labor Party want to have a debate about equality and who has the strongest record of standing up for LGBTI people, bring it on. Bring it on, because the Greens will win that debate, because we have got the proven track record and it is the Labor Party that are always missing in action—flip-flopping, backflipping and saddling up to the Liberals. No more hypocrisy—support this motion and let us get this done.

4:50 pm

Photo of Claire MooreClaire Moore (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Women) Share this | | Hansard source

We will be supporting this amendment, though we find it extremely strange that Senator Simms could be claiming total ownership of marriage equality. I have spoken many times in this place about these significant issues. Many senators feels very strongly on them, and we all have a record of speaking in this place. Check the Hansard about what people have said in this place. I think that would be useful.

We are also particularly interested—and Senator Wong will be taking on this issue—that we now have the Greens telling Labor what our private senators' business should be. That has never happened in this place before. There is negotiation, discussion. I do not believe that was discussed openly in the yelling across the chamber that occurred in this morning's debate. Greens, if you are wanting to take our private senators' business, perhaps a simple contact would have been useful. We have never done that to you, ever, in terms of the process of private senators' business. I know that Senator Wong will be taking further discussion of this process, but it is a sorry day that people actually lay claim to being the owners of any form of social policy.

4:52 pm

Photo of Penny WongPenny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | | Hansard source

I am indebted to my colleague for making a contribution on this matter. Let us understand what is occurring here. Although I think he might have said some unwise things—because very few people get Senator Moore angry, and you got Senator Moore angry, because she cares about this issue—I do have some regard for Senator Simms and his position on this issue and his advocacy for the community. But what he is doing today is attempting by this motion to recover some moral authority from the position he and his party took this morning.

Let us understand what happened this morning. The Greens have agreed to an hour's motion, which has a list of bills which have to be resolved prior to the Senate going home. Of course, the most important amongst those from the government's and the Greens' perspective is the changes to Senate voting—the largest changes in 30 years that they want to push through the Senate without a proper inquiry; leaving that aside.

Government Senators:

Government senators interjecting

Photo of Penny WongPenny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | | Hansard source

What Senator Leyonhjelm sought to do was to add to that list, the list of bills that had to be brought to a vote before the Senate rose. He sought to add to that list, Senator Hanson-Young's bill on marriage equality, which I think Senator Simms is taking on. That would have meant that the hour's motion, which required us all to stay until we finish the bill on changes to the Electoral Act—that motion would have required the whole Senate to stay to vote on marriage equality on your own legislation, and you voted against it. The reality is the Greens had an opportunity earlier today—

Senator Di Natale interjecting

Thank you, Senator Di Natale. I am happy if you keep interjecting. It is interesting.

Senator Di Natale interjecting

Senator Di Natale, I have not gagged you, mate. You are the one that gagged me on marriage equality, and I will never let you forget it. I have never gagged you, and you gagged me today on marriage equality. Do not worry. I am not ever going to forget that.

Photo of Stephen ParryStephen Parry (President) Share this | | Hansard source

Speak through the chair, Senator Wong.

Photo of Penny WongPenny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | | Hansard source

But the Greens today had an opportunity to back a motion on marriage equality that would have delivered a vote. Now what they are doing is demanding one hour of private senators' business that they know is unlikely to come to a vote, because when has a bill like this—

Senator Di Natale interjecting

Is he going to keep interjecting the entire speech, or just occasionally?

Photo of Stephen ParryStephen Parry (President) Share this | | Hansard source

I remind all senators not to interject.

Senator Di Natale interjecting

Photo of Penny WongPenny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | | Hansard source

'Pot, kettle, black'—is that what you said? Okay. You know what? The lack of courage in your leadership is extraordinary.

Photo of Stephen ParryStephen Parry (President) Share this | | Hansard source

Speak through the chair, Senator Wong.

Photo of Penny WongPenny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | | Hansard source

You had an opportunity today. The Greens had an opportunity. I will just turn my back and I will talk to you, Mr President. You see such a lovely face.

Photo of Stephen ParryStephen Parry (President) Share this | | Hansard source

That is the correct way of doing it, Senator Wong.

Photo of Penny WongPenny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | | Hansard source

I am happier to talk in this direction than that direction.

Senator Di Natale interjecting

Oh, dear me. I will take that interjection. Senator Di Natale, who is almost hysterical today, claims that we are looking rattled. We are not the ones that have sold out mate. We are not the ones doing deals with the Libs in Victorian seats and targeting Mr Albanese and Ms Plibersek. We are not the ones voting against the marriage equality vote. We are not the ones voting with Cory Bernardi. You are the ones voting with Cory Bernardi, Senator Di Natale and his friends. But I will come back to this point.

The reality is that today the Greens have refused to support a motion that would have caused a vote on a bill on marriage equality in this Senate before everyone went home. We would have had to continue debating it until that happened. Instead, what they are proposing is a one-hour debate on Thursday, with no guarantee of a vote or an outcome. Anybody listening, please understand this: the reason they are yelling at me is because I am saying it as it is. They had an opportunity today, which they squibbed, to deliver a vote on marriage equality in this Senate. No-one could have gone home until it had happened, but they squibbed it, because what was more important was their deal with the government on Senate voting. It is pretty extraordinary, isn’t it?

Now they want us to agree to their private senators' business motion. They want to change what is to be debated. We are prepared to support that, but they know it will be an hour-long debate. They know it will not come to a vote. We understand in this chamber, and I think anybody who has been following this today understands, what this is. This is an attempt to try and make themselves look better. This is an attempt to cover up the fact that you voted with senators Abetz and Bernardi to prevent debate on a marriage equality bill. This is the Greens trying to justify the position they took this morning—'every green, every vote, every time', except for today.

It will be an hour-long debate. The bill that is being debated is my bill, and I will say: 'Yes, fine. You want a debate on marriage equality? We will put it on too. We will have the debate.' We know and you know that it will not be brought to a vote, and that is what angers us the most. What angers us the most is the pious lecturing from the Greens, over and over again, about how principled they are on marriage equality. That piousness evaporated today as Senator Di Natale led them over the other side to sit with people like Senator Abetz and Senator Bernardi, who are vehemently opposed to marriage equality, to ensure we did not get a full debate and a vote.

Instead, what they offer is some attempt to make themselves look better and an attempt to recover some moral authority. They offer up an hour and say: 'See. We're really serious. We weren’t this morning. Oops, we weren’t this morning.' That is the reality about the position of the Australian Greens. It is a sort of combination of spinelessness and incompetency, if I may say, because they had the opportunity this morning and they squibbed it, and now they want to make Australians believe that an hour-long debate is somehow the same. This is cynical politics at its best, and the Australian Greens know that. You have to wonder what it takes for Senator Di Natale and his colleagues to sit on the same side, when it comes to marriage equality, as Senator Bernardi and Senator Abetz.

Senator Di Natale is going to get on his feet now. I look forward to this, and I might seek leave to make a statement afterwards to make up for the time he tried to gag me. How about that? I will let him speak.

5:00 pm

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

Thank you, Senator Wong, for letting me speak. I appreciate that. Just a couple of things about the contribution we have just heard from Senator Wong: no-one for a moment could suggest that the issue of marriage equality has not received due consideration in this parliament and more broadly. It is an issue that has dominated the national debate for many, many months. It is an issue where I think the opinions of all sides of politics are well known, and we have an opportunity to bring this on for a vote on Thursday. This will be simply a question for the Labor Party. The question is a simple one: does the Labor Party have enough support for marriage equality within its own ranks to carry that vote, or has this whole exercise been simply a cynical tactic on an issue that is far more important and deserves a much more thorough debate?

We now have a debate on marriage equality this week, and I have to say I acknowledge and thank the Australian Labor Party for supporting our motion to bring that on. It is terrific when we get cooperative politics in this place. So we now have an opportunity to debate a longstanding Greens position through a bill in the name of Senator Hanson-Young that would effectively ensure that discrimination in marriage is ended once and for all. Whether that comes on for a vote is simply a question for the Australian Labor Party. We will be doing our best to ensure that that legislation comes on for a vote. To hide behind the idea that it simply is an issue that has not received the sort of debate that it requires before it is voted on is again an example of the Labor Party not treating this issue with, I think, the seriousness that it deserves.

I just have a few points about the voting record of the Greens on important pieces of legislation. When it comes to locking up young children in detention centres, it is, indeed, the Labor Party that sits with Cory Bernardi and Eric Abetz.

Photo of Stephen ParryStephen Parry (President) Share this | | Hansard source

Senators Abetz and Bernardi.

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

When it is about implementing gag orders that would prevent doctors from speaking out against abuses—a change that the Labor Party originally opposed and that would ensure that doctors would be treated as criminals for speaking out about abuse in detention centres—it was the Labor Party that sat with Cory Bernardi and Eric Abetz.

Photo of Stephen ParryStephen Parry (President) Share this | | Hansard source

Senator Di Natale, Senator Bernardi and Senator Abetz, thank you.

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

Senator Bernardi and Senator Abetz, Mr President. When it came to slashing the Renewable Energy Target, where were the Labor Party? They were sitting right next to the coalition—sitting right next to Senator Bernardi and Senator Abetz. When it came to the mandatory retention of private information—data retention—it was the Australian Labor Party who sat with Senator Abetz and Senator Bernardi. When it comes to dropping bombs on the nation of Syria, it is, indeed, the Australian Labor Party that sits with Senator Bernardi and Senator Abetz. When it came to having a debate about whether the Australian parliament should have some say over our engagement in a foreign conflict, it was again the Australian Labor Party who sat with Senator Abetz and Senator Bernardi, preventing the parliament from having any sort of debate across those issues. So, if you would like to have a comparison of our voting record on progressive issues, bring it on.

We have the union movement engaged currently in a campaign to support the Labor Party in its campaign against electoral reforms. It is remarkable that the trade union movement did not support the campaign run by the Greens to not sign onto the free trade agreement. Indeed, with the free trade agreement we had the Australian Labor Party sitting next to Senator Bernardi and Senator Abetz. The list is long. I could go on and on and on.

If you want to compare our voting record in this parliament on a whole range of progressive issues, Senator Wong, bring it on, because there has been no party that has stood in resolute opposition to this government's agenda more than the Australian Greens. One-third of the time, we see the Australian Labor Party join with the coalition, compared to the Greens' six per cent. Senator Wong, you want to compare our voting record with yours? Well, bring it on. We stand proudly behind the reforms that we have supported in this parliament, and we stand even more proudly behind our opposition to a government that we do not support. But on so many things—like the issue of children in detention, the issue of slashing the Renewable Energy Target, mandatory data retention and the war in Syria—you and the government have voted together.

5:06 pm

Photo of Penny WongPenny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | | Hansard source

I seek leave to speak for five minutes. I did flag that earlier.

Leave granted.

I thank the Senate, and I appreciate the courtesy that has been offered to me. I will just make a few points. The first is that Senator Di Natale claims that they are the ones that have been strongest against the 2014 budget. No, I reckon the federal opposition might have had a bit to do with the campaign against the 2014 budget. I reckon I might have seen members and senators from the Labor Party going out and arguing for Medicare, for fairness and against $100,000 degrees. So let's not try to pretend that did not occur. That is the first point.

The second point I would make—and I will be very brief—is that Senator Di Natale and the Greens want supporters of marriage equality to believe that an hour-long debate and a gag that they want to move is somehow better than Senator Leyonhjelm's motion today, which would have ensured, without a gag, a full debate and this issue being voted on before the Senate rose.

So we got an hour-long debate with, possibly, a gag, against a full debate where the Senate would have to resolve the issue of marriage equality before we went home. This is a cynical political ploy from the Greens, who are seeking to cover up the fact that today they voted with the government to prevent bringing on a vote and ensuring a vote for marriage equality. Everybody should understand that—an hour-long debate plus a gag.

I know that Senator Di Natale has become addicted to gags. He has voted with the government 100 per cent of the time on gags this week and at the end of the last sitting fortnight. He appears to think that is the best way to try to deal with the marriage equality issue too, because he did not have the courage today to do the right thing, which is to bring his Greens bill on and debate it. I thank the Senate.

Question agreed to.

Photo of Stephen ParryStephen Parry (President) Share this | | Hansard source

The question now is that the substantive motion be agreed to, with that amendment.

Question agreed to.