Tony Abbott (Warringah, Liberal Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended to enable the following to occur during the periods set aside in standing order 34 for government business on Wednesday 14 June and Thursday 15 June 2006:

(1)

in relation to proceedings on the Fuel Tax Bill 2006 at the conclusion of the second reading debate or at 10.30 a.m. on Wednesday 14 June 2006, whichever is the earlier, a Minister to be called to sum up (for a period not exceeding 5 minutes) the second reading debate and thereafter, without delay, the immediate question before the House to be put, then any question or questions necessary to complete the remaining stages of the bill to be put without amendment or debate and any Government amendment that has been circulated for at least two hours shall be treated as if it has been moved; and

(2)

immediately after proceedings on the Fuel Tax Bill 2006 have been concluded; the Fuel Tax (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2006 to be called on and the immediate question then before the House to be put, then any question or questions necessary to complete the remaining stages of the bill to be put without amendment or debate and any Government amendments that have been circulated for at least two hours shall be treated as if they have been moved together; and

(3)

in relation to proceedings on the Tax Laws Amendment (Medicare Levy and Medicare Levy Surcharge) Bill 2006 at the conclusion of the second reading debate or at 12 noon on Wednesday 14 June 2006, whichever is the earlier, a Minister to be called to sum up (for a period not exceeding 5 minutes) the second reading debate and thereafter, without delay, the immediate question before the House to be put, then any question or questions necessary to complete the remaining stages of the bill to be put without amendment or debate; and

(4)

in relation to proceedings on the Tax Laws Amendment (2006 Measures No. 3) Bill 2006 at the conclusion of the second reading debate or at 1.30 p.m. on Wednesday 14 June 2006, whichever is the earlier, a Minister to be called to sum up (for a period not exceeding 5 minutes) the second reading debate and thereafter, without delay, the immediate question before the House to be put, then any question or questions necessary to complete the remaining stages of the bill to be put without amendment or debate and any Government amendments that have been circulated for at least two hours shall be treated as if they have been moved together; and

(5)

immediately after proceedings on the Tax Laws Amendment (2006 Measures No. 3) Bill 2006 have been concluded; the New Business Tax System (Untainting Tax) Bill 2006 to be called on and the immediate question then before the House to be put, then any question or questions necessary to complete the remaining stages of the bill to be put without amendment or debate; and

(6)

in relation to proceedings on the Petroleum Resource Rent Tax Assessment Amendment Bill 2006 at the conclusion of the second reading debate or at 5.30 p.m. on Wednesday 14 June 2006, whichever is the earlier, a Minister to be called to sum up (for a period not exceeding 5 minutes) the second reading debate and thereafter, without delay, the immediate question before the House to be put, then any question or questions necessary to complete the remaining stages of the bill to be put without amendment or debate; and

(7)

immediately after proceedings on the Petroleum Resource Rent Tax Assessment Amendment Bill 2006 have been concluded; the Petroleum Resource Rent Tax (Instalment Transfer Interest Charge Imposition) Bill 2006 to be called on and the immediate question then before the House to be put, then any question or questions necessary to complete the remaining stages of the bill to be put without amendment or debate; and

(8)

in relation to proceedings on the Australian Research Council Amendment Bill 2006 at the conclusion of the second reading debate or at 7.00 p.m. on Wednesday 14 June 2006, whichever is the earlier, a Minister to be called to sum up (for a period not exceeding 5 minutes) the second reading debate and thereafter, without delay, the immediate question before the House to be put, then any question or questions necessary to complete the remaining stages of the bill to be put without amendment or debate; and

(9)

in relation to proceedings on the Migration Amendment (Designated Unauthorised Arrivals) Bill 2006 at the conclusion of the second reading debate or at 1.20 p.m. on Thursday 15 June 2006, whichever is the earlier, a Minister to be called to sum up (for a period not exceeding 5 minutes) the second reading debate and thereafter, without delay, the immediate question before the House to be put, then any question or questions necessary to complete the remaining stages of the bill to be put without amendment or debate; and

(10)

on Wednesday 14 June 2006 any division called for between 12 noon and 2.30 pm shall be deferred until the resumption of government business after the discussion of the Matter of Public Importance has concluded that day; and

(11)

any variation to this arrangement to be made only by a Minister moving a motion without notice.

I do not propose to spend an enormous amount of time debating this, simply to say that the government regrets the need to somewhat curtail debate on these bills but believes that the amount of time allocated is sufficient to do reasonable justice to the bills in question. The bills in question are reasonably straightforward. Except for the Migration Amendment (Designated Unauthorised Arrivals) Bill 2006, the bills are unlikely to excite great passion. The government did propose to the opposition that we could somewhat extend sitting times and accommodate the very large number of people that the opposition had placed on the speakers list if there had been a preparedness on the part of the opposition to limit contributions to 10 minutes, but the opposition was unwilling to accept that. Therefore, we are proposing to go down this path. As I said, the government regrets any limitation on debate; nevertheless we do believe this proposal allows matters to be adequately debated given the issues in question. I commend the motion to the House.

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That all words after “That” be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:

(1)

the House reaffirms the right of all members to assert their views on each and every bill that comes before the House;

(2)

paragraph 9 of the motion be omitted so as to prevent a gag on the debate of the Migration Amendment (Designated Unauthorised Arrivals) Bill 2006, which the government is imposing so as to hide the division in its own party on that bill.

Today the opposition is not protecting its rights; it is protecting the rights of every member in this House. Something that government members should understand very clearly when they vote on the motion moved by the Leader of the House is that it is about preventing full debate on bills about which the government is divided, most particularly the Migration Amendment (Designated Unauthorised Arrivals) Bill 2006, which is excising all of Australia from the migration zone and ensuring that everybody is taken to either Manus or Nauru for processing.

Anybody who reads the newspapers or listens to the radio knows that the government is divided about this bill and that, if there were full debate, a number of government members would express a variety of views on the topic. That is as it should be: members in this House should be entitled to come into the House and to put whatever view they like on behalf of their constituents. Every member of this chamber should have the right to come into the House and put whatever view it is that they believe best represents their constituents and best meets their needs. In moving this motion, the Leader of the House is ensuring that not only opposition members will lose that right but government members will lose that right.

I ask the government members who are sitting there now thinking, ‘What I do at this time in the morning if I see the Leader of the House moving a motion is automatically vote for the motion because it is something to do with the government,’ to be a little more analytical this morning and think a little more clearly about these issues on their own behalf and on behalf of their constituents. If you have a view on any of these bills—and it might not be the migration bill; it might actually be one of the other bills—you are voting to prevent yourself from putting forward that view in this House.

We know what will happen with these time limits, this gag. Basically, what will happen is that the government minister and perhaps some of the most senior government members will get an opportunity to speak but government backbenchers sitting there now—whether it is the member for Greenway, the member for Ryan, the member for Pearce or the member for Kooyong—will not get an opportunity to speak. This motion is guaranteed to ensure you do not get an opportunity to speak. I honestly do not know how you would face your constituents and say: ‘My job is to go into the parliament and vote to make sure I have no role in government decision making. My job is to go into the parliament and be an automatic number for the government and to act like a robot, to act like I am a person without views and deny myself the opportunity to speak.’ That is what you are doing if you support this motion.

David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! I ask the member to address her remarks through the chair.

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I apologise for that and I will endeavour to do so. Whilst the migration bill is the bill that has attracted the most public notice because of its highly controversial provisions, it is not the only bill that is being guillotined in this motion about which there is concern. I am advised by the member for Hunter, Mr Fitzgibbon, that the opposition had an amendment, to be moved at the consideration in detail stage, to the Fuel Tax Bill 2006 concerning the way in which fuel tax is calculated and moneys are rebated back to small businesses that have paid fuel tax. I am advised that the new arrangements being proposed by the government are highly controversial amongst small business and have been the subject of debate on the government backbench, and that the scheme that Labor is proposing—or would propose, if it were given the right to move a consideration in detail amendment in this House—would remedy this problem for affected small businesses, and a number of government backbenchers are attracted to the scheme that Labor is proposing in its amendment. So yet again—

Peter Dutton (Dickson, Liberal Party, Minister for Revenue and Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Rubbish!

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Well, if you think it is rubbish, debate it out. If you think it is rubbish, you walk over here, you vote against the guillotine and you have the courage to debate it out. But when you are going to hide behind the Leader of the House—

Peter Dutton (Dickson, Liberal Party, Minister for Revenue and Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Dutton interjecting

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Don’t shout at me. If you want to debate it out, debate it out. If you have not got the guts to do that, then don’t.

David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for Lalor will address her remarks through the chair.

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If the same courtesy is returned, that would be very gratefully received. The Minister for Revenue and Assistant Treasurer is screaming and shouting, but of course he has not got the courage, he has not got the simple guts, to debate Labor’s amendment. He is hiding behind the Leader of the House, cowering like a coward, because he does not want to come into this chamber and debate Labor’s amendment. I wouldn’t be surprised if, before this motion was cooked up last night, the Minister for Revenue and Assistant Treasurer sneaked into the office of the Leader of the House saying, ‘Can you save me from this debate?’ and the Leader of the House said, ‘Oh well, I was only going to cook up a guillotine for the immigration motion, but if you are that fragile, I will try to fix you up as well.’

Alby Schultz (Hume, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Get on with it, you windbag!

David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for Hume!

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Hume, if he had the courage of his convictions, would actually be moving a motion about Telstra, but we all know that he has not got the courage of his convictions. The member for Hume is a windbag when he is back in his electorate and in the media, but he never does anything very courageous in here—not once, not ever. I have never seen him cross the floor and I don’t think I ever will.

Here we have government members jeering at simple democratic norms in this House. The only thing you can conclude—and it is a tragic thing to have to conclude—is that they do not care about these democratic norms. They actually do not care about the functioning of this House. They actually do not care about their status as members of the House of Representatives, because they do not think about themselves in those terms. They are not parliamentarians; they are members of the Howard government, and when they are required to choose between those two roles—oh, here we are, bully boy with the gag. Here we go!

Tony Abbott (Warringah, Liberal Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the question be now put.

Question put.