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

As clarification for the chamber, this allows the possibility for senators to have a discussion on this particular motion. Rather than having more points of order from the other side, we are now in a debate on this particular motion. In terms of the process, I have always said that, when we are having debates on procedural motions, they should be as tight as possible to allow the procedure to be decided and then move on to the core issue. We have moved this motion today to ensure that we have debate in this chamber around the FoFA regulations. That is our intent and that is why we have moved the suspension of standing orders and why we wish to move our hours motion.

In that process it seems to me that what we should be doing is looking specifically at now voting on that decision to see what the will of the Senate is. We are asking for no more than what the standing orders allow: that senators have the ability to move in this chamber to determine what should happen in this chamber. Then there is a vote and the Senate can determine what will occur. We believe it is entirely appropriate to allow for the will of the Senate to determine what will be debated in the Senate.

This is not overtaking the right of the government to set a pattern. In fact, we see that all the time. The reds are produced every day. Most times the reds are produced and immediately changed. But, nonetheless, in terms of what happens what we are doing today is by no means taking away from the right of the government to put forward their pattern of debate. The reason we have come today with an urgency to consider the FoFA regulations is that we believe they are urgent. We believe that the evidence before the Senate—particularly before the recent Senate inquiry—is so urgent. The content of the evidence that was heard is harrowing, it is distressing and we have a right in this place to consider the FoFA regulations, which we believe will respond in some way to allow there to be effective scrutiny in this process.

There will be every opportunity in the future for the appropriate legislation to come forward—which we believe should have come forward earlier so that we would be debating the core legislation—but nonetheless what happened is that the government brought forward a series of regulations that were supposed to be there to offer protection. We do not believe they do. We believe that it is important that we have the opportunity in the Senate to test whether the Senate believes that those regulations are the way we wish to proceed.

Should this motion succeed, there will be ample opportunity for the Senate to put forward all the arguments about why the regulations should stay or be overruled. From the government's side and from this side of the chamber, that will be the real chance in our time—in the Senate's time—to discuss the core aspects of the regulations and to put forward the arguments on which the Senate can then vote and make the Senate's decision.

In terms of the process, I will not be making a long speech at this stage even though the standing orders say that I can. I will urge the Senate to consider moving and agreeing with the proposal that we have circulated and which gives this Senate the opportunity to consider the FoFA regulations and to make a decision on them.