Claire Moore (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Women) Share this | Hansard source

You are being very cooperative here, Mr President. The opposition will be supporting the government's motion to put forward the calendar for next year. We do appreciate that we have had this calendar at this time, which is a good time to actually consider what is going to be happening in the future. We are concerned, though; we do not believe that the hours that have been put forward in the proposed calendar are adequate for the degree of legislation and consideration that this Senate should have in terms of a range of processes that will come before us in the new year.

It is the practice, Mr President, to make sure that the calendar meets the needs of the Senate for open and full debate. We believe that the calendar we have seen does not provide enough sitting time in the first half of next year for what we believe will be a tough time. Again, what will happen is: as important points of debate come before the chamber, there will be a request from the government for us to have extended sitting hours, extended times and variation in hours. As we have said consistently, we believe that it should be in exceptional cases only—extraordinary cases—that, because of a particular need and urgency, we have to come back to this place. The way to avoid that happening, and the way to ensure that there is appropriate planning and debate, is to set enough days, enough hours, to respond to the process.

We will be accepting the principle that the government has the right to determine the calendar—there is no debate about that. We will be supporting the motion. But we are putting on record again—and if you go back over hours debates that were held in this place when we were on that side and when the now government was on this side—there is this acrimony about when there is a need for extra hours and extra days. Our position is: when you are planning the forward plan for the Senate, you take into account the need of the place to consider legislation fully and to have enough time for debate so that we do not have to constantly have recommendations for extended hours and changes to plan which are disruptive. So our position is: of course, we have the calendar in front of us and we are supporting it. But we are just saying that, should the time come that they come back to this place asking for extended hours or more days, we will expect that there will be an urgency and an extraordinary need for that, which would not have been covered if we had had extra days in the calendar ahead. That seems to be a regular process, and I do not understand why there is not an understanding that, if you put out extra time for sitting at this stage around which everyone can plan and around which you can plan other things that are needed, it would be a more effective way of managing the business of the chamber.