Rachel Siewert (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

In that case, Mr Deputy President, I will make sure that I am looking at you and the general direction of the front of the chamber! However, I will get back to the point because I am sure the opposition are trying to distract me from the point I am trying to make. They should hang their heads in shame that they are using this particular bill to try to frustrate the work of this chamber.

We will have ongoing discussions in the future about election reform, but this particular bill is about people with disability, particularly intellectual disability, who have been working in ADEs and other locations who have been short-changed. They have been waiting for years for compensation. The reason I think this bill should be exempt from the cut-off order is that the sooner this issue is dealt with the sooner the Federal Court can settle some of the cases that are currently before it. I, for one, would urge the government to make this noncontro. In fact, I thought it probably would end up as non-contro legislation so it could be dealt with. I thought that everybody in this parliament was now agreed that we should in fact be acting to end the discrimination against people with disability who have been caught up on substandard wages.

In the past in my numerous contributions on this particular matter, I have pointed out to the chamber and those listening that, if people had had access to the money that they have been denied because they were given substandard, inadequate wages, it would have made a substantial difference to their life's progress. In the same way, people getting access to compensation as soon as possible will make a substantial difference. You have picked on the wrong bill to make your point, at the expense of people with disability who deserve compensation. That is not up for argument here. I believe these bills should be exempt from the cut-off order, which is why I think this motion should be brought on.