Adam Bandt (Melbourne, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

There are calls that the opposition has not agreed to it. Well, the opposition could have objected to the third reading being moved today, but they did not. The opposition could have had all those who lined up to speak come up and speak, but they did not. Everyone knows what is going on. You are running dead on this so it can get through this place today. That is what the opposition are doing and they know it. Despite the valiant attempts of the Leader of the House to defend the opposition, that is exactly what is happening. So I do not grant leave and I oppose the suspension of standing orders, because ordinary process—a thing called democracy—should apply in this place.

The government did not even have the courtesy to make a case as to why standing orders should be suspended. The government has not even bothered to explain to this parliament why this bill is so urgent that we cannot go through the usual process of coming back here next week and debating it. The Leader of the House thinks, 'I don't even have to explain to the members of parliament who haven't had a chance to read this why this is so important, because I've got the numbers.' Labor and Liberal have got together and they have the numbers. Well, that is contemptuous of members of this parliament. For the Leader of the House to not even put an argument about this being so urgent but to just say, 'I'm going to move a suspension and you can lump it,' suggests that democracy is now hanging by a very thin thread in this place. Democracy is hanging by a very thin thread if legislation can pass because the opposition pulls speakers and because the government wants it to happen very quickly.

If it can all happen within a day, then what is the point of having members of parliament? We might as well just hand over all power to the government if this place is not going to do its job and allow every one of its 150 members to go back to their diverse constituencies, ask their constituents what they think about the bill and then come back here and debate it. There is a reason that standing orders contain a provision for a gap of time between a bill being introduced and when you can debate it. It is a very good reason. It is called democracy. It is called finding out what your constituents think, having a think about the bill and then coming back and putting your view.

When the government and the opposition together say, 'It doesn't matter—we're not going to allow that normal process to operate,' then that is a very dark day indeed, and it will have repercussions for the future, because the crossbench in this place is growing. There are 25 per cent of people around this country who did not vote for either of the old parties or their coalition partners. That is because they are sick of this place being treated as a rubber stamp. They are sick of this place being one where the government just comes in and says, 'We've got our riding instructions from someone else, so we're going to push it through.' Every member of this place deserves a chance to sit and read a bill and talk to their constituents about it.

The fact that no case has even been made as to why standing orders should be suspended suggests that the Leader of the House agrees. The government know that what they are doing is wrong, which is why they cannot even come in here and mount an argument for it. They cannot even put one single argument as to why standing orders should be suspended, because they know that they are silencing and short-circuiting the right of every member of this place to go and find out what their constituents think and come back here and put a reasoned argument.

I would hope that everyone who is watching and scrutinising what is going on now knows this for what it is: this bill is being rushed through, despite all the sound and fury. All the sound and fury this morning was sound and fury signifying nothing, because this bill is going to get through, presumably. The opposition did not object to the third reading been moved immediately. Maybe they will object to the suspension of standing orders to cover themselves a bit, but they could have objected to this bill being rushed through. They could have had all their speakers come up— (Time expired)

See this speech in context