Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you Deputy Speaker, and it is good to see you back after the six-week break from Canberra. You were my pick for the Speaker. I can see that, on occasions, the Prime Minister calls in the National Party to get things sorted out; I am sorry that did not happen with the speakership.

During my winter break I mostly spent time in my electorate, but one of our senators, the Attorney-General, George Brandis, took advantage of the parliamentary recess in a different way. The Attorney-General—the first law officer in the land—decided to make a regulation. He decided to make a regulation that was almost exactly the same as a regulation that the Senate had disallowed on the last sitting day before the six-week break. It was identical in all but one respect. They had increased the fees in the Family Court from $840 to $1,195. The Senate said, 'No, we don't like that, Senator Brandis.' They disallowed it, so 14 days later Senator Brandis, with the Executive Council, went to the Governor-General and, instead of $1,195, increased the fee to $1,200—$5 extra. It was identical except for a $5 increase.

The Legislative Instruments Act 2003 prohibits the reintroduction within six months of a regulation that is similar in substance to one that has been disallowed. I am sure that the nation's first law officer would know this. However, while that regulation had come through the Executive Council, that meant that people who had to file for a divorce—and obviously no-one rushes off to have a divorce unless things are pretty crook in their relationship—had to pay this higher fee. Despite the democratically elected Senate clearly expressing its view that this divorce tax was unfair, Senator Brandis, the Attorney-General, went to the trouble of making that new regulation on 9 July during the recess, taking advantage of the parliamentary recess.

Yesterday in the other place every single crossbench senator united to say to the Attorney-General, 'We do not like that regulation,' and they disallowed it once again. Three times now all of the crossbench senators have voted together. Three times the only person who has received that strike against them has been the Attorney-General. He certainly is a unifying force in the Senate in that he is able to coalesce that range of views against him. Because this divorce tax was so unfair, Senator Claire Moore and I have gone to the Federal Court seeking a decision from Justice Dowsett, which will be handed down at 10.30 tomorrow, pointing out how inappropriate that regulation was.