Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Hansard source

Contrary to what the Manager of Opposition Business told the parliament, the minutes of the meeting of the Selection Committee, signed by the chair, Harry Jenkins, and dated 17 November 2010, say in writing:

The committee recommended that the following items of private member’s business orders of the day be voted on:

• Mental Health (resumption of debate from 25 October 2010 on motion of Mr Dutton);
• Joint Select Committee on Broadband (resumption of debate from 25 October 2010 on motion of Mr Turnbull);
• Overseas Trained Doctors (resumption of debate from 18 October 2010 on motion of Mr Scott);
• Special Disability Trusts (resumption of debate from 18 October 2010 on motion of Ms Moylan); and
• Climate change notice of motion given by Mr Murphy on 15 November 2010.

What does that tell you? It tells you that there are five items of business to be voted upon next week and that four of those five are from the opposition, none are from the crossbenchers and only one is from the government. How is that for fair—we give them four out of the five to be voted upon and determined next week? If they were at all fair dinkum, they would move all five here to be voted upon today. Why don’t they do that?

Let us take the introduction of bills as an example of the way we conduct business in this parliament. Bills are introduced on Wednesday or Thursday, they have their first reading, they then stand, and the debate begins after the caucus meetings are held on the next Tuesday. Because of the way we have changed the status of private members’ business we now determine this week what will be voted upon next week. That is what we have done with those five items, of which he has picked out two to be voted upon today with no notice being given.

I have operated properly. We give proper notice so that it appears on the blue in order that everyone in this parliament knows what is occurring. What is more, this was a unanimous decision of the Selection Committee on Tuesday. The fact is that we have a whole range of bills before this parliament. We are not voting on all of them today. We do not get to move legislation one day and vote on it the next day. It is not the way that the parliament works. If we are going to have proper scrutiny and proper processes, we must agree with the decisions of the Selection Committee.

This government has not refrained from debate or discussion about any of the things that need to be voted upon. Indeed, we have expanded the Selection Committee to accommodate the additional requests of the crossbenchers. We have had votes on private members’ bills, we have had votes on private members’ motions and we have had agreements. If people want to have a debate on mental health then—

See this speech in context