Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source

From Labor’s perspective, I say at the outset that we make no comment with respect to the content of the bill itself. That is a matter for Senator Brown. But, in terms of the process, we do support that the matter should be referred to a committee. Clearly, before this government took control of the Senate, these matters would have been, by agreement, referred to a committee for examination, but, since this government has gained the majority, it is now exercising—arrogantly, may I say—its authority to deny references to committees. Even with respect to this matter, Labor would have liked the opportunity to hear from the various interested parties and allow them to participate in the committee process.

As to the final outcome of a committee, sometimes we do not know where they might go. That is the purpose of a committee: to actually hold an inquiry and allow public input. But this government does not want public input into committees. This government does not want references to committees. In fact, this government not only denies references to committees—and it has a record in the last 12 months of denying more references than it allowed—but also has a record of foreshortening committee inquiries to ensure that proper scrutiny cannot be had.

This government needs to be held to account. Regarding the committee process, it should have agreed to allow this matter to go to the committee for examination and report, but the government is now exercising its might rather than its right and says no. There are other references that will come forward. Labor will bring forward other references either this week or next week, and again this government, I suspect, will take the same view and deny the Senate the ability to inquire into matters of importance—matters that should be looked into. Senators have a right to be able to bring forward reasonable references. This is not a reference in respect of a wide-ranging matter; it is a reference in relation to a private member’s bill. We have had references before that allowed committees to examine private member’s bills in this way. I am waiting for a response from the government as to why it has denied this reference in this way.