Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Fisheries, Forestry and Conservation) Share this | Hansard source

Mr President, we have been presented with a bizarre concoction of arguments by the Leader of the Australian Greens. For the sake of those who are listening in to this debate, let us remember that the parliamentary timetable for this year was in fact set last year at a time when, if I might be as bold to say, the government was still doing a bit better in the opinion polls than it is currently. So the argument that was postulated by the Leader of the Australian Greens that we have somehow cut short the sittings because the opinion polls are currently against us and things are not going well for us flies in the face of the objective fact, which is that the timetable was set last year when the circumstances were completely different.

The one telling thing about the opinion polls in recent times, as Senator Parry would well know as a student of these things, is that another party has been suffering in the opinion polls as well, and that is the Australian Greens—only at five per cent, which would mean it would not get a single senator back into this place at the next election. That is the reason that Senator Bob Brown is now trying to become a de facto opposition in this place.

The reality is that this government has moved a motion for extra sitting hours and, indeed, an extra sitting day. We said, ‘Let’s sit on Friday,’ but in response the Leader of the Australian Greens says, ‘No, don’t sit on Friday; let’s sit in April.’ What intellectual prowess would the Leader of the Australian Greens present to the Senate in April that he is unable to present on Friday? Absolutely none. This is a pathetic attempt by the Australian Greens to oppose anything this government does—and for one simple reason: cheap politics without any objective basis to the assertions being made.

All of the bills on this list that we have put before this place have been to a committee or honourable senators in this place have not sought to refer them to a committee. That is the truth about the bills on this list. Either the bills have been considered by a committee—a structure of this place—or honourable senators have said, ‘These bills are not worthy for consideration by the various committees of this place and therefore we believe it is appropriate to bring them on for debate.’ Why defer something for extra consultation when, at the Selection of Bills Committee and at other forums of this Senate, honourable senators have agreed not to refer these particular bills to a committee?

What we are saying is very simply that there are some important things to be done, be it the Farm Household Support Amendment Bill, the Schools Assistance (Learning Together—Achievement Through Choice and Opportunity) Amendment Bill et cetera—those relatively non-controversial bills that have been to committees or that honourable senators did not want to refer to committees but that, in recognition of the important role of this chamber in our parliamentary democracy, we acknowledge should be given extra time. That is why we are suggesting an extended sitting regime—extended night sittings this week and an extra sitting day on Friday.

The date on Friday will be 23 March. What would be the difference if, instead of debating these matters on 23 March, we were to debate them on 2 April? What would be the difference between those two dates and that one week? What would be the material difference between sitting in April and sitting at the end of March? There is none. This is another pitiful example of the Leader of the Australian Greens wasting the time of this place and trying to make arguments where there are none. If the Australian Greens genuinely wanted these bills to be considered, they might have said that the bills were worthy of being referred to a committee. That, of course, did not happen. I ask honourable senators to support the motion.

Question agreed to.