Murray Watt (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Environment and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That private senators' bills do not proceed today.

A division having been called and the bells being rung—

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A division is not required.

Slade Brockman (WA, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is leave granted to cancel the division?

Leave granted.

Question agreed to.

Jonathon Duniam (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek leave to move a motion relating to the Criminal Code Amendment (Keeping Australia Safe) Bill 2026.

Leave not granted.

Pursuant to contingent notice of motion standing in the name of the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate, I move:

That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent me moving a motion to provide for the consideration of a matter, namely a motion to give precedence to a motion relating to the consideration of the Criminal Code Amendment (Keeping Australia Safe) Bill 2026.

It is remarkable that we have a government that, firstly, as we've just seen, seeks to remove opposition senators' time to debate bills that they bring forward into this place for debate. It's something that is in the calendar for every week of the sittings schedule. It is an opportunity for non-government senators to actually give air to an issue of concern to the community, a group that we represent; they've gone and taken that away. Yet here we are trying to establish the capacity to debate an important piece of legislation, the Criminal Code Amendment (Keeping Australia Safe) Bill 2026, and the government have determined, 'No, we're not going to allow that to happen.' Indeed, I'm pretty sure I heard voices down the end of the chamber indicating the government is supported by crossbench senators in this pursuit of blocking scrutiny of this important legislation.

As I say, this is private senators' time, and we should be allowed to debate bills of our choice in it. Allowing this to occur is not an indication that government or crossbench senators want to support the legislation we're debating, but it is just allowing us to have this debate.

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

We killed this yesterday.

Jonathon Duniam (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The bills were introduced into this place on Tuesday, as a matter of fact, not yesterday—whoever made that ridiculous comment down the end of the chamber there.

The point is this was put on the books. It's been there for colleagues to consider, to consume, for a number of days, and this is not a new issue. It's an issue that's been around for weeks. Australians are asking for answers to these questions. Australians are seeking assurances from the government around the protection of our borders and our national security, but the government are not going to play ball. They're not going to be transparent, not going to provide information and not going to allow us to debate this legislation today, which is why we're moving this motion to suspend standing orders to allow us to debate this legislation.

This legislation, of course, is important. For three days now we've had the government doing the Sergeant Schultz on the issue of ISIS brides—not knowing a thing. They haven't able to give us a single answer to a single question we've been asking in the interest of national security and in the interest of protecting our way of life. We've been asking, 'Who issued the passports?' They said, 'We don't know.' We asked them, 'Who carried the passports to Syria to these people?' 'We don't know.' We asked them who these people were, and they didn't know. We asked them, 'When are they coming back?' They don't know. They know nothing! Instead of allowing us to have an hour and 10 minutes of the day to interrogate these issues and actually get to the heart of the problems this country is facing when it comes to who comes in and under what circumstances they come in, the government refuse to allow us to debate this.

As I said, every day in question time we've given the government an opportunity to clear things up, provide some clarity, provide assurances, provide some certainty to the people of Australia, who are wondering who is coming into this country, but this hands-off approach applies not only to providing information and not only to clarifying these issues but to border security. We used to have a government that managed border security and determined who would come in, but now we've outsourced all of that to groups like Save the Children, who are out there on their own providing repatriation services on behalf of the people of Australia and the Australian government with no security, no intelligence services and no vetting of individuals. They've been left to do it because the government won't.

The other interesting part about all of this is you've got the government talking out of both sides of its mouth on this issue. You've got the minister who said, as he said on Insiders a couple of weeks ago, 'We don't want them back,' when talking about this so-called ISIS brides cohort. He said that—'We don't want them back.' Then do something about it, Minister. You are the Minister for Home Affairs. You are able to do something. You can determine who comes in and who does not. The application of temporary exclusions orders is something very much in the domain of the home affairs minister and something he refuses to do. He's done it for one of the 11 adults in the cohort, not for the rest—that baffles me.

But they have an opportunity today to support this legislation to end this loophole, which is allowing third parties to determine who comes back here. Those third parties are providing support services for these individuals to come into Australia. These are people who've turned their back on this country and gone to a declared terrorist hotspot to support a death cult. These are the so-called ISIS brides. They're not friends of Australia. If the government are serious about national security, they'll support the suspension, and they'll support the bill. (Time expired)

Murray Watt (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Environment and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's usually the process that private senators' bills are not introduced and debated in the same sitting week, which is what the opposition are trying to do here. This was also the case for Senator Payman's bill yesterday. But, unlike Senator Payman, the opposition have other bills on the Notice Paper they could have debated, rather than trying to go against the usual process and introduce and debate this bill in the same sitting week. It's clear that this is just another stunt that the opposition is undertaking for political gain, rather than genuine debate.

As has been stated many times, our government is not providing assistance and is not repatriating individuals in Syrian IDP camps. Any Australian returning to Australia who has allegedly breached Australian law will be investigated and subject to the full force of the law. If any of those people find their own way to return, our agencies are satisfied that they are prepared and will be able to act in the interests of community safety. Our law enforcement and national security agencies are following the same approach they have for over a decade, the same approach the former government endorsed when a number of male foreign fighters came back to Australia.

On that basis, I move:

That the question be put.

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

The question is that the motion as moved by Minister Watt to close debate be agreed to.

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

The question is that the suspension motion be agreed to.

Murray Watt (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Environment and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—I move:

That non-controversial government business commence at 12.15 pm or one hour following the resumption of the sitting of the Senate, whichever is later.

Question agreed to.

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek leave to make a statement of no more than five minutes.

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

Leave is granted for two minutes.

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That's fine—two minutes. It's a further silencing of democracy, and it's the further silencing of the right of those in the non-government side of the chamber to actually have a bill brought forward in their private senators time—it is the opposition's private senators time today—and debated. This morning, colleagues saw this government come to the chamber and discharge a bill that would have given Australians the right to access information from them. What are we now looking at? This government has just silenced the opposition from bringing forward a bill that is fundamentally important to the national security of Australians.

We all know why. It is because this government fundamentally lacks transparency—in particular, when it comes to the return of the ISIS brides. Let's not forget who these women are. They are women who fundamentally turned their backs on Australia. They turned their backs on Australian values, and they made a choice to go overseas and join an Islamic caliphate—a caliphate that slaughters people, a caliphate that tortures people. And this government throws its hands up and says, 'There's nothing we can do.' Well, guess what: we're calling you out on that. There is something you can do. You can actually support the bill that Senator Jonathon Duniam has brought before the chamber, a bill that would ensure that, with Mr Tony Burke's mate Dr Jamal Rifi currently over there facilitating the return of the ISIS brides, that is made a criminal offence. What a complete joke.

This is a government that says there's nothing they can do. Well, I say you need to think a little bit more creatively and perhaps get the opposition to help you. I tell you, this is an opposition, with this portfolio led by Senator Duniam, who will always put the Australian people first. We will shut the door on ISIS brides who sought to leave this country, turn their back on the great Australian values and join a terrorist cult. Shut the door. And shame on you for denying us that time. (Time expired)

Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek leave to make a short statement.

Leave not granted.

I move:

That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent me from making a statement here today in the Australian Senate.

What we are seeing from the government benches, from their partners in crime when it suits them—the Greens—is the shutting down of the Australian people's voice. We actually have a chamber that represents the diversity of Australian views. The Australian Greens have a great swagger, those senators, and there are One Nation, Independents, the National Party and the Liberal Party. What we've seen this week is a government so out of control of this chamber that they have shut down and silenced senators from right across the country, right across the political spectrum. And what we've seen this morning is a refusal by the government to allow His Majesty's opposition to bring our bill to this chamber to be debated—something that, in my 15 years here, has been a matter of course. We are respectful—

Marielle Smith (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Sorry, Senator McKenzie: I have Senator Sheldon on a point of order.

Tony Sheldon (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A point of order: this matter is supposed to be about the suspension itself. She's not addressing the actual issue—about the suspension. She should be going to that.

Marielle Smith (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Sheldon. Senator Duniam, on the same point of order?

Jonathon Duniam (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, on the same point of order: as was ruled by Acting Deputy President Sharma yesterday, there is latitude to provide context for the suspension. It is something that was brought to the attention of the chamber a number of times in the debate yesterday. So I'd argue that there's no point of order.

Marielle Smith (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Sheldon, on the same point of order?

Tony Sheldon (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes. Senator McKenzie was denied leave to make a statement. That's what the issue is that we're debating now, not the matters she's raising.

Marielle Smith (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thanks, Senator Sheldon. How about I just rule, and politely encourage you to stick to the suspension, Senator McKenzie.

Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Chair—excellent ruling, in line with the long traditions held in this chamber. I was denied leave to make a statement, and in the denying of leave we have seen this chamber, particularly the Greens and their partners in crime, the Labor Party, shutting down the voice of Australian senators. The statement I wanted to make, had I not been—

Marielle Smith (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator McKenzie, I have Senator Hanson-Young on her feet. Is this a point of order?

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

A point of order: I haven't heard why Senator McKenzie is seeking to suspend, when the chamber has just voted against suspending on this exact vote. She is denying the will of the chamber and should be brought back to the purpose of the speech.

Marielle Smith (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Hanson-Young, resume your seat. Senator McKenzie has been on her feet for seconds. I heard her reference to suspension. You're in order; continue, please, Senator McKenzie.

Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you very much. The collective Greens don't appreciate that we are all elected here as individual senators, and the contingency motion I am speaking to recognises that. Despite the chamber voting previously on another senator's denial of the ability to speak, that does not deny me my right to get up here as the Leader of the National Party in the Senate and call out the Labor Party—the government—and the Greens for shutting down debate again and not allowing me to make a statement in the interests of my constituents, my political party and non-Labor government senators on this side.

What we have seen from this government on the ISIS bride returns is appalling. An urgent debate needs to occur. The opposition has done the right thing and developed a private senator's bill to address the concerns of everyday Australians about ISIS brides and their nearly adult children returning to our shores. This is actually an issue of concern. What we have seen from the government, in their impotent, flaccid, pathetic response to this issue is of concern. We have had Australia's foreign and minister in this chamber this week, with hands up, saying, 'There was nothing I could do.' The Prime Minister said, 'If you're an Australian, you have a right to a passport.' No, you do not. Under the Australian Passport Act 2005, the government and the minister have the right to suspend the application of a passport, refuse to issue a passport under certain grounds and, indeed, cancel an issued passport under certain grounds.

Having been a minister who's had to make tough decisions and has gone against departmental advice at times because it's not in the national interest, ministerial discretion is there for a reason. Governments are not instruments of the department. We've been elected. You have a duty that you swore to do, whether you made the affirmation or swore on your holy book with the Governor-General, to uphold our constitution and to act in the national interest. You do not take—

Marielle Smith (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator McKenzie, resume your seat. Senator Hanson-Young, on a point of order?

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

Again, Senator McKenzie is seeking to debate the issue that this chamber has rejected the debate today. I would ask Senator McKenzie, what does she say about the 14-year-old girl who is trafficked and coerced against her will—

Marielle Smith (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Hanson-Young, that is not a point of order. Resume your seat. That is also a debating point. Senator McKenzie, I do think you are staying, though, so I again remind you to please stick to the motion before us.

Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I do seek to suspend standing orders because, again, this government has refused to answer simple questions. On the children that are over the age of 14 that should be subjected to temporary exclusion orders, the foreign minister refused to answer the question. How many passports have been issued to this cohort? Australians are concerned. Australians are compassionate people, but a government's responsibility is not to wait to be told what to do in a crisis by officials; it is to lead and act and to use their constitutional powers and responsibilities to always act in the national interests. That's what the opposition has sought to do, and that's what we'll continue to do.

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to support the right of Senator Bridget McKenzie, a member of the opposition and the leader of the National Party in the Senate, to actually speak in the chamber. The last time I checked, colleagues, is that not what we are here for—to speak on behalf of the Australian people? But those on the other side seem to have a problem with that. If you are reading directly from the talking points given to you by the government, regardless of the topic, regardless of whether you've actually read them—I often come here and have to say, 'I'm pretty sure there was a full stop there; I'm pretty sure there was meant to be a comma, but that's fine,'—you're reading talking points. Guess what? Senator McKenzie has the right to come into this chamber—

Marielle Smith (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Cash, I have the minister on her feet. Minister McAllister?

Jenny McAllister (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm seeking your clarification, Acting Deputy President, about the matter that is before the chamber. I had understood it was a motion to allow Senator McKenzie to make a speech. She has just given a speech. I'm unclear how Senator Cash's contribution advances Senator McKenzie's motion at all.

Marielle Smith (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We were debating the suspension motion, so that's where we are. Senator Cash is speaking to that. Senator Cash, if you could stick to the motion, that would be handy.

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am sticking to the motion, with all due respect, because I am speaking directly to why (a) I am supporting Senator Bridget McKenzie's right to actually speak in this chamber and (b) I am supporting the right of any elected member of this chamber to come in and exercise a right that they have under the standing orders of the Senate and, more than that, a right that we are here to exercise on behalf of the Australian public. What is wrong with this government? Why do you hate it when senators in this place who are not elected as part of your political party stand up and give an opposing view? What problem do you have with senators in this chamber coming in and representing—

Marielle Smith (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have Senator Hanson-Young on her feet with a point of order.

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

The point of order is about the issue of suspension—

Marielle Smith (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Relevance?

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

Senator Cash is debating an issue that the Senate has already ruled on. I'm asking you to bring her back to the point.

Marielle Smith (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Duniam, on the same point of order?

Jonathon Duniam (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On that point of order, Senator Cash is being entirely relevant to this matter—

Marielle Smith (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Duniam, I don't need your contribution on that. I haven't ruled, so you could just let me rule or—

Sure. Senator Duniam?

Jonathon Duniam (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Cash is being entirely relevant to the suspension. Senator McKenzie asked for two minutes to speak and was denied leave. We've now spent 10 minutes debating this, and she's being entirely relevant.

Marielle Smith (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I have done previously, I am politely reminding people to stick to the suspension.

Senators, this is not a moment where we just yell at each other. If you would like the call, Senator Cash, you have it.

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yet again, those on the opposite side are showing that they are prepared to support that a senator not have the right to be allowed to speak in this chamber. For those who need to be caught up with the process, this is what happened. In the first instance, this morning, it's the opposition's private senators' time. We sought to bring on a bill to debate. The government denied the opposition the right to bring that bill on. Worse than that, the government moved to not have opposition private senators' time today. Let's wait to see when they try that on any other person who's not part of the government.

Secondly, Senator McKenzie sought leave to make a statement—ironically, for about two minutes. That was denied. Senator McKenzie then sought, as she is entitled to, to exercise her right pursuant to a contingent motion standing in her name. For those of you who've been here a long time but still don't know what a contingent motion is, I suggest you read the Notice Paper. It's been there for time immemorial. She is the Leader of the National Party in the Senate; she therefore has contingent motions standing in her name. She stood and sought to exercise her right, pursuant to the contingent motion, to explain why, as a senator elected in this place to represent the Australian people, she should not be denied leave by the Albanese Labor government and why she should not be denied leave by the Greens, the great friends of the Albanese Labor government, to make a statement. I am entitled to jump, as part of the suspension process, to support Senator McKenzie's right in this chamber to come in here and make a statement.

Ironically, we're already at four minutes past 10. How's that working out for the government? We actually would have hit a hard marker at 10 past 10 had you allowed Senator Duniam to just move his motion to bring on, as we are entitled to, a bill that we want to debate in the chamber in the first place. You may not like the topic—the fact that we want to put in place laws to ensure that people can't go overseas and help people who've gone to a declared area come back to Australia, to criminalise that—a national security piece of legislation. Wouldn't it have just been simpler to allow it, instead of trying to silence democracy, instead of trying to silence the ability of senators on the non-government side of the chamber to just stand up on Thursday morning, when it says clearly on the Notice Paper that it's their slot for private senators' bills?

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

I raise a point of order on relevance. Senator Cash is now debating the same issue that the Senate has just voted on and been very clear about. Could you please bring Senator Cash back to why this suspension is more important than the last suspension that they lost—

Marielle Smith (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Hanson-Young, you can be seated; I've heard your point of order. On point the of order, Senator Ruston?

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

On the point of order, I think that we are now having a debate that is completely and utterly outside of the scope of what is actually happening here at the moment. Our first suspension motion was denied by the Greens. In fact, the person who denied the suspension is now the one who is making a submission about something that she actually caused. So I draw to your attention, Acting Deputy President, that the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate is being directly relevant to the suspension motion.

Marielle Smith (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you. We are debating the debate of the debate. I'll give the call back to Senator Cash and remind her of the subject of the motion that is before us.

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you. Again, with all due respect, I am going to review this and work out how I am not being directly relevant to the question before the chair. Senator McKenzie moved a contingent notice standing in her name to suspend standing orders. I am now supporting her right to suspend. You couldn't be more relevant if you tried, quite frankly, in my humble opinion. Shame on those on the other side for trying to silence a senator in this place.

Jenny McAllister (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I simply wish to advise that the government will not be supporting this suspension. The government did accede to the request from Senator McKenzie to make a two-minute statement. Another senator denied her leave to do so at that moment, but, as it has transpired, Senator McKenzie has indeed already given a five-minute speech. Senator Cash has given a five-minute speech. The government does not intend to support a suspension of standing orders that would enable further speeches about matters which have indeed already been litigated over the course of this morning.

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

I think the really important issue here, which everybody seems to be missing on the other side of the chamber, is the importance of the freedom of senators to be able to make a contribution in this place. There are many times that we have debates in this place where I don't agree or I don't like the debate or the particular position that is being put forward by the government or another member, but I think the most important thing that we need to realise is that public debate and the exchange of ideas, whether we like them or not, are the fundamental reason that we are elected to the Senate. We are elected to the Senate to represent the views of the people that we represent. We're not here to have some sort of cancel culture, 'Close down the debate if you don't like it,' activity.

That's why I think this is so important that we are debating this suspension motion. Quite frankly, it is not necessarily about the issue that we have sought the suspension on. That actually doesn't matter here. It's the fact that this chamber is trying to silence elected members of this parliament and prevent them having a discussion about a matter that they think is particularly important. It actually doesn't matter what that issue is. Unless you can have transparency in this place and you can share all your views, you cannot possibly have a debate that reflects the views of every Australian. If we are only allowed to debate the views of those that sit on the other side of the chamber, we'll have a very left-leaning view of the public debate. We seek, on this side, to put forward the views of the people that we represent.

In this chamber we have now moved into the realm where apparently transparency doesn't matter anymore. We saw this morning, only because the government knew that it could not pass its bill in relation to its draconian measures to try and shut down access to freedom of information, that that particular bill was gotten rid of. We have a pattern of behaviour in this place of shutting down debate, of denying transparency and of refusing to allow this Senate to do its job, which is to investigate the details of what the government is proposing. The government still is accountable to this chamber and the other chamber, and it's accountable to the people of Australia. You have got to stop trying to shut that down.

Matt O'Sullivan (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Choice in Childcare and Early Learning) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Pursuant to order, the sitting of the Senate will be suspended until the ringing of the bells to enable senators to attend the address from the Prime Minister of Canada.

Sitting suspended from 10:10 to 11:45

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

I remind senators that the hard marker at 12.15 has been moved to 12.45.