Murray Watt (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I want to take a couple of moments to bring to the chamber's attention the reason we are now in the in committee stage and why the position Senator Hanson takes at the third reading stage, when we get to it, will be crucial to the outcome of this bill. I know today is a bit of a crazy day in Canberra. There's lots happening. I think as I speak we see Mr Dutton, the next Liberal Party leader, having a press conference to explain his actions. There is all of that craziness within the government. There has also been a bit of confusion about what's happening here on the vote regarding the company tax cuts.

What happened a little while ago was the vote on the second reading. It was lost, from the Labor Party's perspective, 35 to 34, so 35 people voted in favour of the second reading of the bill and 34 voted against it. What was very notable in that vote was the absence of one particular senator—Senator Hanson. My understanding is that she was not paired for that vote. It wasn't as if there were a prearranged situation where she wouldn't vote and someone else would refrain from voting as well. Senator Georgiou did come in here and vote with the opposition against the company tax cuts, but Senator Hanson was missing. As a result of that, the government succeeded in passing this bill at the second reading stage.

The vote was 35 to 34. If Senator Hanson had been here and had voted with Senator Georgiou, as they had indicated publicly they would do to kill off these company tax cuts, then the vote would have been tied at 35 all, which would have meant it would have been lost and we wouldn't be having this debate now. Senator Hanson's failure to vote or her abstention has meant that the government got the legislation through at the second reading stage by one vote, and that's why we're continuing to debate it now.

No-one seems very clear about what Senator Hanson's actions were based on—whether it was deliberate on her part to miss that vote or whether she had some legitimate reason why she was not here to cast her vote. Whether it was accidental or deliberate, her absence from that vote allowed the government to succeed in passing this bill at the second reading stage and has given new life to the possibility of these company tax cuts going through.

Government senators: Hear, hear!

As I said that, government backbenchers were cheering Senator Hanson on. Their hopes in passing this bill and getting these company tax cuts through rest on Senator Hanson's actions from here on in. If we are to take Senator Hanson at her word and believe her when she says that it was an accidental abstention and that she actually does intend to vote against these company tax cuts, as she has been indicating over the last 24 hours, fortunately for her there is an opportunity for her to come in here and make amends. When we get to the third reading stage of this bill she will have the opportunity to cast her vote and to follow through on her claims to oppose these company tax cuts by voting with the opposition to kill off this bill.

The acid test is really on Senator Hanson. Whether she actually supports these company tax cuts, whether she's going to vote against them with the opposition or whether she will simply abstain from that vote again and help the government out, Senator Hanson needs to be under no illusions what the consequences of her decision will be. If she does assist the government in passing these company tax cuts, then I think she knows very well what is coming her way. She needs to have a very close look at the results in the Longman by-election to understand what battlers in outer suburban areas and regional Queensland think about these company tax cuts. Let's hope she is telling the truth in having accidentally missed that vote and let's hope that she does make amends and, to make sure that these company tax cuts do not pass, votes with the opposition when we get to the third reading stage.