Jacqui Lambie (Tasmania, Jacqui Lambie Network) | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek leave to move a motion relating to the government's routine of business variation.

Leave not granted.

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

That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent me moving a motion to provide the consideration of a matter, namely a motion to give precedence to a motion relating to the Government's legislative program.

I gave a speech in this place just a few days ago on guillotines. I wanted to explain to Australians how this government likes to pack a lot of legislation together to avoid scrutiny and debate in this place—to avoid what the Senate is here to do. This government has had more guillotines in its first three years than what the coalition did in nine. Absolutely shameful! Last night at 8.30 pm, Labor sent all of us senators the mother of all guillotines. That's right—around 40 bills! So much for the right to switch off for our employees! You say, 'Don't answer your phone.' Ask them how they're going this morning because they haven't slept. Ask them how their health and safety are going!

You know it's a problem when the guillotine is four pages long. These aren't small bills. They aren't tweaks to legislation that we can call non-controversial. They are massive, and they include bills that are so undercooked and, putting it politely, raw to the bone. There's a bill that bans those under 16 years of age from social media. I thought this was a good idea. I think a lot of people out there thought it was a good idea until we looked at the detail, and, let's be honest, there's no detail. There are bills on privacy, migration, money laundering, and surveillance. There's the Veterans' Entitlements, Treatment and Support (Simplification and Harmonisation) Bill 2024 for veterans out there, and, of course, there is the Electoral Legislation Amendment (Electoral Reform) Bill 2024. That's the one where the major parties want to spend more taxpayers' money on their own political slush fund, and they've got their snouts in the trough.

To say that I am disappointed in this government is an understatement. It doesn't even cut it. The Albanese government came to this office promising transparency, promising a gentler parliament and promising that the Australian people would respect what we do in here. But, instead of that, they have refused a record number of requests for documents. The Attorney-General has spent $400,000 of taxpayers' money fighting for the right to shred documents. That's right—to shred documents.

When it comes to transparency and integrity in this government, it has been an epic failure. They have asked stakeholders to sign non-disclosure agreements before they discuss and show them the legislation. They refuse to tell Australians who the Prime Minister is meeting, even when the US President releases his own diary. That is shameful. They won't release the flight manifests to tell Australians when ministers are flying around on private jets on taxpayers' money. They promised lobbying and political donation reforms but then delivered a bill that asks Australians to fund their political slush funds.

They promised veterans that they would harmonise the legislation on compensation for their injuries, but they don't want to consult. They don't want to do amendments, and they want to give us 15 minutes to speak about you. That's after you've come out of a royal commission, which you are still hurting from. They want to ram this down your throat. They want to ram this harmonisation bill down your throat and amend three pieces of legislation without putting the national commissioner back in charge before it moves anything, which was a recommendation from the royal commission. Instead of delivering whistleblower reforms, they keep using hundreds of thousands of taxpayers' dollars to prosecute whistleblowers and lock them up.

Now we have this mother of all guillotines. Last night Minister Wong said all people in this place deserve a safe workplace, and, just an hour later, they sent a guillotine through like that. How is it safe for the employees in my office to go through 41 bills in a matter of about 12 hours? How is that safe? How bloody hypocritical. What about the right to disconnect? Do you hear that—through the chair—Senator Cash? Do you hear those in the ACTU, Sally McManus and Michele O'Neil, standing up for our staff? Absolutely not. They're not up there. They've got gaffer tape all over them this morning.

It's not what the Australian people voted for. We were voted in to make legislation better. We have the right to put amendments up. We have the right to debate this, and you are shutting us up. The Australian people want you to get this right. This is not safe; it is dangerous. It is dangerous to shove bills down our throats. It is dangerous to shove bills down Australians' throats without us properly going through and actually having a good look at them and putting them under the microscope.

I was not voted into this place to give you a free pass to put through 40 bills in one day, and I sure as hell know that the Tasmanian people do not want me to do that. I'll remind you of something, and I'll table the document. In 2013, Rudd tried to put through nearly 50 bills on 26 June. Guess what happened in September? Guess who became the Prime Minister? It was not Rudd; it was Tony Abbott. So why don't you keep playing your games in here?

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs) | Link to this | Hansard source

Well, I could summarise my remarks simply as 'what Jacqui said'.

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) | Link to this | Hansard source

Let's now elaborate on it!

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs) | Link to this | Hansard source

Honestly, let's just understand the point that Senator Lambie made.

Sue Lines (President) | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Birmingham, please resume your seat. Senator Cash, you are out-yelling your leader. I'm asking you to either—

No, Senator Cash, you will listen in silence, or you can leave the chamber. That is the choice you have.

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs) | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Lambie has made the point that the Albanese Labor government has guillotined more bills through this Senate in three years than the previous coalition government did in the previous nine years. This was the government of transparency. This was the government of accountability. This was the government of proper process. 'To hell with it,' they say. As soon as they got their hands on the keys to the Lodge and as soon as they moved into the blue carpet, away went all the promises about transparency, accountability or proper process. Instead, it's just whatever it takes, whenever it takes, however they can. That's the approach this government has taken.

In nearly 18 years in this Senate, I've never seen an ambit claim like this. I've never seen a motion that seeks to ram 41 bills through the Senate in a single day in this manner. It is unprecedented, it is extraordinary and it is shameful. The government should just withdraw this motion. They should have the good courtesy and common sense to withdraw it. The tactics behind it are clear. They're trying to wedge the Greens a little bit over here, wedge the opposition a little bit over there, wedge the crossbenchers a little bit elsewhere and see what they can kind of do from it all. We'll oppose the motion in its entirety. The opposition will not support this tactic. This tactic is something the government should be ashamed of. The government should withdraw it.

I want to be clear that we will be constructive with the government today, as we actually have been through this fortnight. The government has twice asked for extra hours and time to pass bills this fortnight. They asked in relation to the Aged Care Bill 2024 on Thursday last week. We agreed and we cooperated. They asked in relation to the education bills on Tuesday night this week. We agreed. We cooperated. We even indicated they could add an extra motion in relation to land rights onto that time management bill. Have they asked for extra hours any other day this fortnight? No. They've had all the time in the world where they could have said, 'These things are important. The Senate could sit longer,' but they haven't even come to us and asked. Instead, we're just given this motion, which is so counterproductive to the effective operation of the Senate.

We are still wanting to be constructive. Whilst we will oppose this motion, I draw the Senate's attention—particular the government's attention—to the government business orders of the day. Up first is the Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill 2024. The coalition will work with the government to pass that bill today. You can ditch your motion. It'll be the first item of business, and we will work with you consistent with Mr Peter Dutton's promise to pass that bill. We will actually work with you constructively through the other bills that are listed in the Order of Business today. We understand the urgency and sensitivity of the aged care ones in relation to continuing our cooperation with the government on that and the sensitivity in relation to payment surcharges, and we would be willing to work in relation to the migration bills too. We're willing to work with the government—and we'll be cooperative—but we're not going to be taken on a ride. We're not going to be taken on a ride with this motion.

I can only assume it's the former trade union types on the bench opposite who've thought: 'What's worked for us in negotiations previously? I know, the old ambit claim. Let's go in and ask for the world, and then we'll work back from there.' We're not falling for it. We're not buying into it. I urge the crossbench to listen to Senator Lambie and hear those words. Yes, I know the crossbench won't agree with everything that the coalition is proposing to do with the government today either, but we're trying to strike the responsible balance. We're trying to be true to our word in working on the issues that we've said we will progress. Peter Dutton is being true to his word on working through the issues he said he would progress with the government. Senator Gallagher, reconsider the madness. Ditch your motion, and let's get on with the business of the day that we actually can do constructively together, as the opposition has offered to you.

Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) | Link to this | Hansard source

We won't be supporting this suspension of standing orders this morning. It is good to see that the opposition in particular have come and confirmed that they will be constructive today, because that is not our experience in this chamber. It is not. When you raise concerns about the number of guillotines in this parliament, the number of guillotines directly relates to the lack of constructivity from those opposite.

Opposition Senators:

Opposition senators interjecting—

Sue Lines (President) | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister Gallagher, please resume your seat. I remind those on my left that your leader was heard in silence, and, equally, the minister will be heard in silence. If you can't be silent, I invite you leave the chamber. Minister Gallagher.

Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) | Link to this | Hansard source

The difference in approach that we took in opposition was to fight where we needed to but to work constructively as a major party in this place to keep the routine of business flowing. We have had some weeks in this parliament where not one bill passes—not one bill!

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

It's your job. You're the government!

Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) | Link to this | Hansard source

No, it is not our fault. It is not our fault.

Sue Lines (President) | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister, please resume your seat. I have just asked that the minister be heard in silence. Within two seconds, Senator Ruston, you were interjecting; Senator O'Sullivan, you were interjecting. Which bit of my order did you not understand? Seriously! The minister has the right to be heard in silence, just like your leader was respected. Respect is missing in this place. Let's see some of it in this debate. Minister Gallagher, please continue.

Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) | Link to this | Hansard source

It is because of that approach—the obstructionist nature and the blockers of those opposite—under the leadership of Mr Dutton and, presumably, the instruction of Mr Dutton not to allow business to flow smoothly through the Senate, particularly on non-controversial bills, that we have a range of bills as we reach the end of this sitting year that we would like to pass. I don't think it is any surprise that, because of the way you approach the legislation program in this chamber, we do have a range of bills.

The way we have tried to set this up is that we order for the day a list of bills that are the government's priority and then people are able to talk on them and we progress through that motion. We think that is a sensible way—vote as you may on each bill, but don't just block. Say yes or no. Many of these bills have been on the Notice Paper for over a year. They have not been last-minute bills that have been dropped in to everybody's surprise. We won't be proceeding with electoral reform today, but some of the other bills have 2023 in the name of the bill.

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs) | Link to this | Hansard source

You probably haven't even listed them for debate.

Sue Lines (President) | Link to this | Hansard source

Order!

Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) | Link to this | Hansard source

They have been listed, Senator Birmingham, and you have blocked. You don't want to see the government progress with its agenda. That's fine; that's politics, but we also have a right to put a list of our priorities before the chamber and say, 'We would like to get these done. Vote yes or no, but vote. Don't block; don't be a barrier to our agenda.' That is what we are asking the Senate to do. We will sit as late as the Senate likes. We will work across the chamber to make sure people have enough time.

I have sat in this place on long marathon sittings of the Senate under arrangements you brought in. They are not ideal, but sometimes they are necessary in order to progress important legislation, whether it be Future Made in Australia, the migration bills or some of the important Treasury bills that have been blocked and stuck in this chamber for more than a year, and many of them have. So we have put before the chamber—

Sue Lines (President) | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister, please resume your seat. Senator McKenzie, I've called you more than any other senators this morning. It is 9.20. If you can't be quiet, I've asked you to leave the chamber or stand and seek the call. You are incredibly rude and disruptive. I'm asking you to sit in silence for one minute and 16 seconds. Minister Gallagher, please continue.

Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) | Link to this | Hansard source

I don't agree with the motion moved by Senator Lambie. We are not fast-tracking legislation. This legislation has been in this chamber, and it has been blocked in this chamber, for months and months. There have been Senate inquiry reports on most of them. There have been lots of negotiations with people. I don't accept that we are trying to circumvent scrutiny or accountability. These bills have been dealt with in this chamber for months, if not years. We have argued the case. We have argued the case. We just want to deal with them—yes or no. That is the position that we are bringing. These are important bills. They're important bills from an economic point of view and from a social point of view. They're important bills for the Australian community.

At the end of the year it is not abnormal for the Senate to have to deal with a large number of bills. That is not unusual. I have been in this place for a number of years where that has been the case. So we are putting them forward. We're putting them forward in a way that people can speak about them. They can vote separately on them. But we wanted to indicate to the chamber that these are our priorities, and we want to work with the chamber to get it done.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the question be now put.

Sue Lines (President) | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the question be now put on Senator Lambie's motion, as moved by Senator Wong.

Malcolm Roberts (Queensland, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

Records are tumbling on the number of guillotines—Robespierre's guillotine would've needed sharpening by now—and the number of bills in the guillotine, except for, as Senator Lambie pointed out, Kevin Rudd's fiasco. There's the deceit with which this has been done. Records on costs of living, high; standards of living, down; and energy prices, high. There is record immigration, and increasing housing prices and rental prices. Confusion, deceit—what a mess.

This crisis that the government now portrays has been manufactured. When they first proposed the sitting schedule, we told them: 'It's not enough. Add some more.' They said, 'No, no, we'll be fine.' Labor ignored us, and we said, 'Don't come to us.' Now they're coming to us. The government hasn't come to the Senate on this issue. Plus, the government has been bill hopping—starting one day with one bill, not finishing it, and then starting the next day with another bill. This has been a manufactured crisis, a deliberate crisis, to purposely run down the clock so that they could come up with this guillotine yet again, all to hide poor legislation—to whistle through as many as you can without any scrutiny. This is to avoid scrutiny.

This is a disgrace for the people of Australia. We are supposed to represent the people of Australia. How can we represent them without doing proper scrutiny of the bills? We can't. It's been deliberate. They've been purposely running down the clock. And it's devious. It is to hide their incompetence. So we say: ditch your motion, Senator Gallagher.

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care) | Link to this | 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.

Sue Lines (President) | Link to this | Hansard source

The time for this debate has expired. The question is that the suspension motion moved by Senator Lambie be agreed to.