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

I move the following amendment that has been circulated in the chamber:

(1) At the end of the motion, add, "but, in respect of:

  (a) the Transport Security Amendment (Serious or Organised) Crime Bill 2016 the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee report by 11 May 2016; and

  (b) the Commonwealth Electoral Amendment Bill 2016, the provisions of the bill be referred immediately to the Finance and Public Administration Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 12 May 2016.

In relation to the first bill, there was a disagreement in the Selection of Bills Committee about the reporting date. We seriously believe that there needs to be a longer time for the consideration of an important bill, which we have had concerns about. It went through the House of Representatives very quickly, and we believe, because of the importance of the bill, that there should be an opportunity for it to go to the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee for what is not an extensive inquiry and for report back to the Senate by 11 May 2016.

The other element—and I am sure that we will hear a lot of debate around this issue over the next period of time—relates to the important Commonwealth Electoral Amendment Bill. We know that there is a serious need for this particular process to be considered effectively by the Senate. We do not have the ability in the Senate to call for a further inquiry by the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters. We know that there has been a proposal put before the Senate that there be a joint standing committee inquiry. Well, maybe it could be called an inquiry. It is a short-term discussion on Monday where a few people get together to have a chat about this process.

No-one, including the senators who will be sitting around this chamber looking at legislation that will impact on our community in the future, could seriously consider that having a half-day chat on Monday will in any way give people the opportunity to have a full discussion about the important issues that are on the record about the way people in Australia will vote for the senators who will represent them. They will have no opportunity to look at the impacts and weigh up whether the process that was undertaken in the earlier meetings of the joint standing committee will be exactly the same as the attempt to rush this bill through this chamber next week, or whether, in fact, there are more arguments that should be taken into account.

Whenever we move these amendments to the Selection of Bills Committee reports, I come back to the same point: what is this chamber about? This chamber should be about getting fulsome information, having the opportunity to hear from the community about how they feel about an important bill or regulation that has come into this place and then allowing, with the benefit of that information and the views of the people who wish to share in the debate, come to this chamber with the opportunity to exchange views, have debate and come up with a resolution.

There are many times when we will not agree—and this, I believe, is probably one of them—but that does not take away the need for effective consultation and discussion. Our position is very clear. The process that has been given to the Senate to consider this piece of legislation is inappropriate. It reflects the worst type of arrangement—the worst type of concern. We will hear discussion today and next week about shabby deals that are done, about motivations and about what will occur. But the best way to ensure that the community believes that this is the way we do operate is to not have the opportunity for further discussion on this issue.

We know—and I expect to hear this argument from the government—that the joint standing committee tabled reports in 2014 and earlier in 2015. However, we did not know, at that time, when this piece of legislation was going to be placed before either the House or the Senate. We only found out through the media that the minister was going to bring forward this piece of legislation. There was no form of effective discussion.

This bill is important and, because there is a degree of confusion in the community, as there often is when people are looking at voting practices, the least we can do is have the opportunity of putting the legislation out to public comment again, putting the details of the legislation out there, so that people will understand exactly what their government is proposing that they do in relation to voting practices. That is not too much to ask. It is a simple request. It means that there is still an opportunity for consideration of the process in an effective way through the Finance and Public Administration Legislation Committee.

If there had been a process of a longer, extensive discussion with the community through the joint standing committee, that would have been a good result. But that has been taken away. The opportunity has been removed. The only way that we can have the kind of consideration of the true details of this proposed process is to have an inquiry that would report by 12 May this year. That is the intent of our amendment, and we think that that would allow time for appropriate consultation. (Time expired)