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

Anybody listening to this debate could be forgiven for thinking that the Howard government has steamrolled legislation through this Senate. I remind senators, and all those who have contributed to this debate have made this allegation, that this is in fact a motion to extend the hours of sitting of the Senate. It will allow the Senate extra time above and beyond that which is usual. If the Howard government is supposedly so determined to use the Senate as a rubber stamp and to not listen to debate, why on earth is it moving a motion, and using its numbers against the opposition, to give the opposition extra hours of sitting? This is the sort of humbug that, unfortunately, continually gets reported to the Australian people: that we are treating the Senate as a rubber stamp, when we are the ones agitating to give the Senate more time to consider legislation.

Indeed, the Howard government’s record is very instructive. Since 1901, in the 106 years since Federation, there have only been 30 packages of bills that have taken more than 20 hours in the Senate—thirty packages of bills or programs that have taken more than 20 hours of debate. Do you know how many of those packages have been under the Howard government, in the past 10 years? Fifteen of them; half of them. So you see, on objective evidence, that the coalition as a government have been more than willing to allow the Senate time to consider matters which are of concern to it and to the Australian people. Half of the measures, out of 30, that have taken more than 20 hours to debate in this chamber have been debated during the past 10 years of the Howard government. The other 15 took place between 1901 and 1996—that is, over 95 years. That is how we as a coalition government have treated this Senate: with the respect that it constitutionally deserves and of course democratically deserves as well.

So it is a very bizarre argument when those on the other side assert, ‘We want more time; we need more time,’ but then come in here and say, ‘We will vote down the government’s motion giving us more time.’ That is what they need to explain to the Australian people.

In relation to the quite bizarre contribution by Senator Bob Brown—I emphasise ‘Bob’; I notice Senator Carol Brown in the chamber, so I hasten to make that very important distinction—we have become used to such contributions.