Deborah O'Neill (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I seek to continue the scrutiny that is required of these bills and hark back to a significant political speech nearly 100 years ago by a very important senator of this place: Senator Gardiner, who in 1918 was trying to make a point in a similar way that I think is being undertaken by the opposition this evening. It was to draw attention to the fact of the unseemly haste of the government in advancing a deliberate agenda to marginalise the voice of the Australian people in the way in which our democracy operates. I just got up to recounting the point that there was a concern about the nature of debate happening through the middle of the night, and that is indeed what we have seen.

In this last bit of the pre-light hours I want to indicate that, at that time, the attempted action was particularly egregious in that it sought to alter electoral law after the issue of the writ for the by-election in the division of Corangamite was achieved. It was for this reason that Senator Gardiner even went so far as to say about the bill that its title should be changed. He advocated that it should be called 'A Bill to Improve the Chances of the National Party at the Corangamite Election'. I am thinking perhaps I should move an amendment to this bill before the chamber to change the title to 'A Bill to Improve the Chances of Larger Parties to Squash the Smaller Ones in the Senate Election,' especially if it ends up being a double dissolution on 2 July.

This government, in cohorts with the Greens, is attempting to wipe out all the Independents who have found their place in this parliament and, I think we could say through the contribution of senators tonight, are well and truly able to hold this government to account in language and practices that the Australian people respect, admire and understand.

As a Labor senator, like all my illustrious colleagues on this side of the chamber, Senator Gardiner was a very astute man. Being the astute man that he was, he made this further observation about the motivation of his political opponents. He said:

I have no desire to make it a personal matter. Like most men with a guilty conscience that they are doing something nefarious, they are anxious to get through with a business that is so distasteful to them that only by suspending the standing orders but also by depriving honourable senators of the ordinary custom which has always been observed in this parliament, namely reasonable adjournments so that the business of the Senate may be conducted without danger to the health of any honourable senator.

Now, I look around and our senators here have withstood the challenge of the task of attending to this chamber through the night, on what I will call the longest St Patrick's night of my life—and it is continuing, members still wearing the green. And it is Greens who will be responsible, not in the great way that the Irish wear the green proudly; the green badge is badge of shame for that party after what they have attempted to push through this chamber in this disgusting and grand coalition of the Liberal Party, the National Party and the Greens.

It just gets better and better. Here we are in the deep, dark dead of night, as a result of this dirty deal by Senator Di Natale, conducting scrutiny of the most fundamental reforms to the Senate voting system in three decades. This is just what the government want and the Greens gave it straight to them. As Senator Collins indicated in her earlier remarks about Mr Kroger's meeting with Senator Di Natale, he had indeed thought that all his Christmases had come at once. This is an issue of concern and some may wonder—indeed, the gentleman in the chamber observing the process—why the minor party vote is increasing in Australia. This sort of practice is the perfect example.

We have a government perpetuating a great fraud on the Australian people, aided and abetted by the Greens party. No wonder they wanted to have us stuck here trying to conduct the committee process to provide some actual scrutiny of this legislation, in a nocturnal environment better suited to the precious Leadbeater's possum, which the Greens constantly speak about, rather than conducting the proper processes of the legislature and enabling full scrutiny and timely discussion. Instead, we have seen them preside over this chaotic presentation of significant legislative reform which is constructed only to their own advantage and the disadvantage of Australians. What Senator Gardiner knew in 1918 is just as true nearly 100 years later—a devious government will push to the extremes of decency to advance a deceitful and duplicitous agenda. Senator Di Natale and his team are right on board.

We have heard much in this place about the allegedly great 2014 report of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters that apparently precipitated this bill, and how magnificent and wonderful it was. It has been so lauded that I will not be surprised to learn that it has been awarded a Nobel Prize for literature in the next year! If the recommendations of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters were so good and this legislation was so important, then why did we not see it straight on the heels of the 2014 report? We did not see it then because it was not to their advantage at that point in time. We are seeing it now.

The government had plenty of time to legislate or attempt to legislate for the $100,000 degrees. They found time for that; they did not find time for the recommendations of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters until now

They found time to allow multinational companies to get away with less scrutiny on their tax affairs, amongst many other abhorrent pieces of legislation that were presented to this parliament in 2014 and 2015.

In many of those most egregious deals they indicated the preliminary relationship that was established with the Greens, which has come to full fruition. They should have a new relationship status on Facebook. The Greens are now in a formal and wonderful relationship. Formalise the coalition. Be honest with the Australian people. Tell them that you are with this government, that you are going to allow them to do as Senator Sterle has said—to cut penalty rates, to take away the opportunities for people to access health care based on Medicare rather than their credit card. This is the grand coalition of the Greens, the Nationals and the Liberal Party.

Yet this government, forcing this legislation through in this unseemly way, could not find time to draft a bill to give effect to the most fundamental changes in the Senate voting in 30 years until just a handful of weeks before it wanted to call a dirty double dissolution. Coincidence? Hardly.

Senator Gardiner was up and down in the Senate for 12 hours nearly 100 years ago, from 10.30 that night until well after the sun rose the next day. I suspect that we might continue in the same vein. I am not quite sure—I have not been outside of the chamber—but it was dark when I came in. Maybe the sun has risen now, but the sun is not rising on a joyous day for the nation. The sun is rising on a dirty deal that has been pushed through by this government. In response to a senator complaining that he was trying to 'starve his colleagues', Senator Gardiner said, 'Since the minister appears to have had adopted the most unusual attitude of refusing to adjourn for breakfast, I appeal to the real leader of the Senate to grant the usual breakfast adjournment, even if it be for only 10 minutes.'

The resolution that establishes the sitting hours tonight states that the Senate shall adjourn 'after a motion for the adjournment is moved by a minister'. In the same spirit as the suggestion Senator Gardiner made, I note that Senator Cormann, the real leader of the Senate, has the option to move the adjournment and allow us all to go home or to have a shower, to have breakfast or to have some version of normality. It would allow the mental health and wellbeing of all participants in this chamber, although I have to question the attitude to life that would allow those in the government to push this process through and indeed to bring this piece of legislation to the chamber.

But Senator Gardiner made that suggestion. Senator Cormann, you as the real leader of the Senate could move that an adjournment be allowed and we could all have a little break. We could return, without such unseemly haste, to this piece of legislation in May. Give it its full and proper consideration. Provide an opportunity for Australians who are waking up this morning, perhaps with their interest now piqued about what is going on here, to get across the detail of the dastardly deal that you are trying to perpetrate.

The problem with what is going on here is that we have a senator who has spent most of this evening repeating trite responses to serious questions that required a decent and proper answer. Senator Collins, Senator Carr, Senator Conroy, Senator Muir, Senator Lambie and Senator Day all asked one critically vital question that would help people understand what is going on, what is being proposed: what does it mean, this change that you have brought in? Will it mean that any political party can put out advertising that says 'vote 1'? Is that legal or illegal? We still have not been able to get a decent and transparent answer to that question from the minister responsible for this piece of legislation. We have given him plenty of hours to do it but, regardless, he is simply unable to answer the question, or unwilling to answer the question, because he does not want the truth to be revealed.

As long as there are matters needing scrutiny in this bill and in other legislation, Labor senators will continue to stand, to perform the role of holding this government to account. That is why, at quarter to six in the morning, we continue our fight for a little bit of scrutiny of this shameful and dirty deal.