Andrew Bartlett (Queensland, Australian Democrats) Share this | Hansard source

I would like to put the Democrat position on the record. Like all parties in this place, the Democrats have a strong, longstanding opposition to the death penalty in all circumstances. This includes support wherever possible for all campaigns that seek to abolish the death penalty around the world. That is something that is shared—or, at least, is official policy—by all parties in this chamber now, which is certainly very welcome by most people within all those parties. I understand the misgivings that Senator Faulkner outlined. As he and a number of others have said in this chamber on various occasions, there are issues and difficulties with the process of formal business and seeking a straight up-and-down vote on important issues or complex matters.

This is not a complex motion; it is a very simple motion, but with complex issues arising from it. I appreciate that. If anybody can find a solution for how to deal with that without scrapping formal business—which would be a solution worse that the problem—then I would be interested to hear it. It is one that does need examination. From the point of view of parties in opposition and parties on the crossbench, formal business provides an important way of getting issues of significance on the record and getting a position on the record, which otherwise would not be able to be done. I recommend that people read Senator Faulkner’s and others’ speeches on these matters, and put their mind to finding a solution for this particular dilemma.

But we have to deal with matters that are put before the chamber according to the standing orders as they exist, and this debate we are having now is about whether or not to suspend standing orders to allow a vote on Senator Brown’s motion, rather than a debate on the motion itself. The Democrats believe it is an important issue and, notwithstanding the concerns Senator Faulkner has about singling out a particular nation, in the totality of the context at the moment, the Democrats would support the suspending of standing orders to allow a vote to be put on the matter. By virtue of this motion, we are having a quasi-debate on it anyway, which I think is worthwhile. It is such an important issue that it would merit a matter of public importance debate, for example, in the Senate.

Can I say for the record, and in the possibility that anyone in the chamber is not aware, that there is an ongoing working group of parliamentarians looking at the issue of further advancing abolition of the death penalty. It is a cross-party working group. Its co-chairs are both in the chamber at the moment. If any of you want to get more involved in this, get involved and support their efforts.

As Senator Faulkner said, Australia has ratified the second optional protocol, the ICCPR, which gives effect to an international commitment to abolish the death penalty. As people may not know, Australia has not incorporated that in our law yet, so there is nothing to stop a state government from reinstituting the death penalty should it wish to do so—not that there is any sign that that is going to happen. We have some scope for further advancement in Australia in categorically, completely and fully and permanently removing the opportunity for the death penalty to operate in this country. I certainly support moves to do that, and I encourage everybody that is lending their support to the general principle of abolition of the death penalty through this debate to support and engage all of their various party colleagues to get their support for further advances in this area.

Wherever possible, it is important to promote the need to abolish the death penalty in all countries, particularly in our region. We should all look for opportunities to do that. As has been mentioned, China executes more people than every other country on earth combined. It merits some singling out for that reason, particularly given that the legal processes that apply in bringing down those sentences are far from ideal, particularly when you include the fact that organs from executed prisoners are routinely used for transplant. That adds an extra level of horrendousness to the process of the death penalty. There is ample work still to be done in campaigning in this way. Whilst there may be some disagreement about the best way to do it, I lend my support to all efforts to do so. (Time expired)