Jacinta Collins (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Hansard source

I move opposition amendment (1) on a sheet 7859:

(1) Clause 2, page 2 (table item 1), omit "The day after this Act receives the Royal Asset.", substitute "19 July 2016".

Before I address that amendment, because Senator Rhiannon seems to think that commentary about how we are proceeding is the order of the day—and, of course, hers is not particularly accurate—I will indicate, given some of the nature of the interjections that occurred during that last division, that, as an example of how we are proceeding in a way that deals with the substantive matters in this bill, Labor did not believe it was appropriate or necessary to pull out of the previous discussion amendments such as amendment (6) which is simply:

(6) Schedule 1, items 26 and 27, page 7 (lines 16 to 21), omit the items, substitute:

26 Section 270

  Repeal the section.

There have been accusations during this debate about the time wasting and the like that has been occurring. We have made our points in relation to those amendments and we are more than happy to move on to our first significant amendment.

This amendment, which will delay the commencement of the bill until 19 July 2016, demonstrates to the minister that it is possible to be very clear about when the provisions of the bill will first apply. He could, hypothetically, have been far more clear with us about how an advertising campaign might occur and when it could commence and, therefore, give the AEC the certainty that they need. But of course the one thing it would not do is give the government their policy rationale, which is to run a double-D. So, whilst the minister in the earlier discussion attempted, disingenuously, to argue that the issue of a double-D and the provisions in this bill were independent, anyone following this debate knows otherwise—except, of course, the Greens, who cottoned on a little bit too late. But I will come to that in a moment.

Setting a clear commencement date of 19 July is important because it will prevent the government from using this legislation as part of its plan to hold a double dissolution election. The tandem benefit, though, is that it will also provide the AEC with sufficient time and certainty as to when these provisions should apply. On the first point, it will frustrate the Liberal Party's undemocratic plan to wipe out the crossbench and will save the careers of several Greens senators. Under the Constitution, the latest date the Prime Minister can ask the Governor-General to simultaneously dissolve the House and the Senate for a double dissolution election is 11 May, the day after the budget is delivered—although there has obviously been lots of discussion and hypotheses about when we might see a budget from this chaotic government.

The simultaneous dissolution of the houses is the first step in the double dissolution process. Under the Electoral Act, polling day cannot be held any later than 68 days after the parliament is dissolved. Presuming the Prime Minister asks the Governor-General to dissolve the parliament on 11 May, the latest date the polling day can occur is therefore 18 July, albeit polling day would have to be a little closer, as the election must be held on a Saturday. So, if the Senate, including the Greens party, joins with Labor to delay the commencement of this legislation until 19 July, the government will be deprived of the ability to use this legislation as part of its plan to call a double dissolution. When the Greens seek to delay commencement, their date is of course, as we know, 2 July. The point I have made previously is: that is a half-measure, because we know there are three more Saturdays available.

The only people who will benefit from a double dissolution election are the conservative politicians sitting on the other side of the chamber. Senator Cormann is going around the press gallery telling journalists that he has conned Senator Di Natale into thinking this deal is in his best interests and that, once the Greens have been suckered into voting for this legislation, the government will have the keys to a double dissolution trigger.