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

I move:

That on the following days, following motions to take note of answers, motions proposing the disallowance of instruments be called on and considered for not longer than 30 minutes, after which the question be put:

a. Tuesday, 10 March 2026-Australian Naval Nuclear Power Safety Regulations 2025;

b. Monday, 23 March 2026-Treasury Laws Amendment (Help to Buy Exemptions) Regulations 2025;

c. Tuesday, 24 March 2026-Digital ID Amendment (Redress Framework and Other Measures) Rules 2025; and

d. Tuesday, 31 March 2026-Competition and Consumer (Industry Codes—Cash Acceptance) Regulations 2025.

And I further move:

That the question be now put.

Question agreed to.

Nick McKim (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Can I ask that the question be put separately on part (a)?

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

Sure. The question is that part (a) of the motion as moved by the minister be agreed to.

A division having been called and the bells being rung—

Nick McKim (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Australian Greens seek leave to withdraw our request for a division and simply ask that our opposition to this part be recorded.

Leave granted.

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

The question now is that the remainder of the motion as moved by Senator Wong be agreed to.

Question agreed to.

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

I seek leave to move a motion relating to the consideration of legislation.

Leave not granted.

Pursuant to the 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 for the consideration of a matter, namely a motion to allow a motion relating to the consideration of legislation to be moved and determined immediately.

And I move:

That the question be now put.

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

The question is that the question be put.

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

The question now is that the motion to suspend standing orders be agreed to.

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

I move:

That a motion relating to the consideration of legislation may be moved immediately and determined without amendment or debate.

And I move:

That the question be now put.

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

The question is the question be now put.

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

The question is that the procedural motion moved by the minister be agreed to.

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

I move:

That—

(a) the Treasury Laws Amendment (Building a Stronger and Fairer Super System) Bill 2026 and the Superannuation (Building a Stronger and Fairer Super System) Imposition Bill 2026 be called on today at the following times:

(i) not later than 1 pm, and

(ii) following proposals under standing order 75;

(b) the questions on all remaining stages of the bills be put at 7.30 pm;

(c) the question for the adjournment be proposed following the conclusion of consideration of the bills;

(d) paragraph (b) operate as a limitation of debate under standing order 142; and

(e) divisions may take place after 6.30 pm for the purposes of the bills.

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

The procedure motion just agreed to requires that the substantive motion be put without amendment or debate, so I'll put the question. The question is that the motion be 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 short statement of no more than two minutes.

Leave granted.

To be clear, we have just seen yet again that this is a government that went to two elections saying would be the most transparent government in history. But—for those in the gallery—they have completely shut down debate on two bills that are incredibly important to the Australian people. The bills are in relation to your superannuation.

We had a number of issues we wanted to raise in relation to these bills on behalf of the people of Australia. But guess what? This government are not the most transparent government in history. In fact, it is the exact opposite. They have sided with their partners in crime, the Australian Greens, and they have yet again shut down debate in the Australian Senate. The last time I checked, colleagues, we were elected by the Australian people to come into this place and discharge our duties as, and I quote, a 'House of review'. What has just gone through, though—shame on the government, shame on the Greens—is a motion that will shut down important debate on this incredibly important topic.

There is actually another way forward, and it's a way forward that we could have supported on this side of the chamber. Instead of shutting debate down, why did you not just say, 'And the Senate sits until debate on these two important deals actually concludes'? It's because you didn't want to sit past 7.30 pm tonight. I can tell you, we would have happily sat until tomorrow morning if that's what it took to represent the Australian people properly. We take our roles as senators reviewing your legislation as an incredibly important one. We believe in transparency, and transparency means you come into this place and actually allow people to have a look at what you're proposing—to ask questions on it on behalf of the Australian people and then to cast a vote. But, yet again, you have just sided with the Australian Greens, and you have worked against the Australian people, and you have silenced debate on their behalf.

David Pocock (ACT, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

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

Leave granted.

I find this really bizarre. We have a bill that has the support of the Senate. This is something that I think is an important piece of work, and I thank the Treasurer and the finance minister for their work on this. We haven't even started debating this bill. It is so bizarre to have a Greens party with the balance of power in this place feel the need to guillotine a bill before it even starts debate. It's not like the government has a huge agenda to bring through this place over the next three weeks. It's very bare in terms of legislation, so let's take a few days actually look at this.

I think there are some very important elements of this bill that warrant scrutiny. There are questions that need to be answered, and I say this from a position of actually supporting this bill. I do think these are important changes to our superannuation system. I do think we've seen a misuse of superannuation by people with extraordinary balances that the average Australian could only ever dream of amassing. But we have a government that throws sand in the gears Senate, amends every motion to slow things down and really doesn't have a legislative agenda the moment guillotining a bill in a day.

I think the Greens have some serious questions to answer here. Why do you feel the need to guillotine a bill without debate, given that we know it has support and it will pass? And that is after saying no to a Senate inquiry on this bill. It's farcical. This is the house of review. We should be able to actually look at legislation, look at it through a Senate inquiry, debate it in this place and then vote on behalf of our state or territory and whether we think it aligns with the people we were sent here to represent.

Lidia Thorpe (Victoria, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—I'd like to have my vote recorded the other way, because I don't believe that this is in the best interests of transparency. I didn't realise, because the Dynamic Red is never up to date.