Julian Leeser (Berowra, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. The Greens political party is a racist, antisemitic party. Will the Prime Minister join with the Leader of the Opposition in committing to putting the Greens last at the coming election?

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Before I call the Prime Minister I will hear from the Leader of the Australian Greens on a point of order.

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

The statements in the question are a clear reflection on members and are disorderly, and I ask that those statements be withdrawn.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The manager on a point of order?

Michael Sukkar (Deakin, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In response to the point of order—and I suspect that you will share this view, Mr Speaker—it was not a reflection on any individual member; it was on the Greens political party. And the Prime Minister seems willing to answer the question.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There are a few problems with this question. In terms of the Prime Minister's direct responsibilities, he can't be asked about party affairs, which is a longstanding part of Practice. But he's indicated that he's willing to take the question. I'd just ask the member for Berowra to make sure his language is in line with standing orders. This is a very sensitive and hot topic; I understand that. But inflammatory language doesn't assist the chamber. I'm not going to ask him to withdraw. I just remind all members—it wasn't directed to an individual, but if it was, as has happened before, I would ask the member to withdraw. I'd just ask, moving forward, that we do use language that everyone can live with. The member for Warringah on a further point of order?

Zali Steggall (Warringah, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, for clarification and consistency. My understanding, from the standing orders, as to reflection is that the question included a reference to a party—completely separate to me—but that is a reflection on its members. The question is that I was required to withdraw when it was a reflection on policy. Yet here it is a reflection on a party, which is the members of a party, and that is not considered to be contrary to the standing orders. So, for consistency—which I'm sure everybody in this place would appreciate—I would submit, respectfully, that there is a discrepancy there.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The manager on a further point of order?

Michael Sukkar (Deakin, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think there are lots of examples in Practice that support your way forward, Mr Speaker, so I would submit that that point of order is not relevant.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Leader of the House?

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Sorry for the delay. I was trying to find the reference. It's on page 517 of Practice. I think the Clerk is referring to the same section, which explains the situations where something that is otherwise generally said may still be required to be withdrawn.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes. Speaker Snedden, back in time, followed a practice where a collective group of people were described in a certain way. I won't read it to the chamber. In the member's case, that was a slightly different variation, where it was directed towards an individual. I'm not going to litigate previous decisions. I just want to remind all members that language is important in this place and to ask members, moving forward, that you just reflect on that to make sure everyone is comfortable. Now, I need to move forward, but that being said, I'm asking, to assist the House with future questions, that they comply with the standing orders and that everyone is shown respect. The Prime Minister has the call.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'll make four points. The first point is, you're quite right, that, within this chamber, leaders and ministers can't be asked about decisions to be made by political parties. The question clearly went to that. I refer to previous answers made by prime ministers, ministers and leaders of political parties that those decisions are a matter for the political parties.

The second point I make is to refer to your comments about the concern about some of the language in the question. I just refer to Director-General of ASIO Mike Burgess's comments about turning the heat down wherever possible. We all have a responsibility to do that. I think that it is in Australia's interests that that occur. I say that consistently.

The third point I make is on the reasons why there are currently four members of the Greens political party in the House of Representatives. In the member for Melbourne's case, he is there directly because the Liberal Party gave preferences to Adam Bandt, which, upon Lindsay Tanner's retirement as the member for Melbourne, saw Adam Bandt elected, and he has continued to serve since.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Fadden is warned.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As for the other three—

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order, Member for Petrie! You've just got to get through this answer.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Of course, in Queensland, the Queensland LNP made a decision to put the Queensland Greens into the Queensland parliament by giving them preferences and getting them elected.

The fourth point is that I joined, at a very young age, a major political party that sought to be a party of government, the Australian Labor Party—a party that I have supported since I came out of the womb. It's a party that seeks to make a difference because, like many of us on this side of the House, being Labor, making a difference and standing up for fairness and equity is something that we were raised with from a very early age, whether it be from our parents or from the Josephite nuns, for that matter.

The final point that I will make—

Alex Hawke (Mitchell, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Time's up!

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for Mitchell is warned. We had this debate yesterday about the time. I don't think we want to go back in time.