Chris Ellison (WA, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source

Just so that the position of the coalition is clear can I say that the coalition fully sympathises with the sentiments expressed by Senator Brown. This is a very important issue, but I must say that we should look at it in a broader context. Senator Brown’s motion is about China. Australia has long held the view that the death penalty is inappropriate, has said so internationally and has worked at the level of the United Nations to try to achieve a world where the death penalty is not practised across the board. So that is our position: we approach this with an across-the-board, international approach to say that the death penalty is not something that we believe in and we urge all those countries that have the death penalty to do away with it. I might add that that includes the United States and a whole range of other countries, not just China. Particularly where Australian citizens are subject to the death penalty we take every step possible to avoid that being carried out. But our position has been not just to confine it to Australian citizens but to view it very much in the broad.

I want to make it clear that the coalition’s position is that it is against the death penalty. It fully supports any moves by Australia internationally to do away with the death penalty across the world community, but this motion as it stands deals with just China. I think to suspend standing orders and have a debate in the Senate with short notice on such an important topic is inappropriate. Perhaps it is something the Senate could revisit. I agree with Senator Brown’s comment that this is something the Senate is quite entitled to look at. We do not shy away from important issues. You do not get anything more important than this, but to suspend standing orders and go into a debate on the death penalty in China in this way is inappropriate. I say that, whilst we sympathise with the sentiments expressed by Senator Brown in relation to the motion, there are wider considerations which a proper debate would have to canvass. That would engage and involve the international community, not just China. We cannot have a debate of this sort without cherry picking one particular country and leaving out others.

Through you, Mr Acting Deputy President, to Senator Brown I would say that we sympathise with the sentiments of your motion. We oppose the suspension of standing orders in that it would lead to a full debate on the death penalty being exercised not only by China but by other countries. I think that for such a debate to be brought on without notice would not give it the due regard it needs. I am not saying that the Senate should never debate this—in fact, quite the contrary—but I think such a debate should be carefully considered and one where all senators would have an opportunity to participate. You just could not do that today by suspending standing orders and, at short notice, asking everybody to participate in such a debate.

The opposition, the coalition, will oppose the suspension of standing orders. It does so stating very strongly that it is against the death penalty. It fully supports Australia taking measures to encourage other countries not to have the death penalty, and we have made some achievements in that regard. There have been some countries in our region which have done away with the death penalty, but to bring on the debate in this fashion on the death penalty just in China would be, I think, not to give this due regard, being such an important issue.