Pauline Hanson (Queensland, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Hansard source

[by video link] I'm not very happy about the Treasury Laws Amendment (2021 Measures No. 6) Bill 2021 being rushed through today. I feel that we haven't had enough time to actually debate it or discuss it. The government has been joined by Labor; Labor is quite happy to do it. I understand the bill will streamline access to superannuation balances. A judge can access superannuation balances to deal with a court case before them. I know that it was a long and costly process to get this.

I listened to Senator McAllister debate this issue. She said it's about protecting women. The last time I attended a court there were both men and women. Both men and women suffer separation and divorce. Both are subject to domestic violence—and I admit that more cases are reported where men are the perpetrators of domestic violence, but 25 per cent are also where women are the perpetrators. Men also suffer at the hands of women in cases and in divorce. I am upset that we have had a family law inquiry that handed down recommendations with regard to the family law courts. We have a submission in at the moment. In that submission is a recommendation about freeing up agreements.

Let's look at superannuation. That is what a person has worked for. Superannuation is in lieu of wages they would have received. We do see people entering second marriages or getting married for the first time at 40, 50 or 60 years of age. They end up in relationships that don't last. These people have accumulated their superannuation over a long period of time. What they have forgone in wages has gone into superannuation. They get tied up in a relationship—they don't have to be married; they just have to be together for six months—and that relationship may break down in a couple of years time. Why should the ex-partner be entitled to the superannuation of someone that they weren't with at the time?

Superannuation in family law courts should be taken from the date their relationship started—upon marriage or after a certain period of time of living together. It should not be taken back to the last 20 or 30 years. Those people think they're going to make some money out of it, and they do. I've heard that from a lot of people. That's where we should have had an amendment to this bill. I wanted to put up an amendment to say that superannuation accumulated prior to their relationship should not come into consideration. That would be fair on all sides. There are probably a lot of men who get tied up with women purely for the money, and we've heard that time and time again. And there is the reverse situation: women will go after whatever they can of their ex-partner. We have power-hungry and greedy people who use whatever they can to pull the other person down and get out of them what they can.

Our parliament should be about what is fair and just for the people. This is not. You're pushing this bill through and we don't have enough time to debate it. You've got a cut-off point that's coming, so you're rushing it through. But Labor said yes, and all Senator McAllister wants to talk about are the poor women out there. Well I wish she would be fair to everyone and look at it from a balanced point of view. She talked about family violence. If you text someone and keep saying, 'I want to see my child,' that's classified as domestic violence. That is totally different to someone who has been bashed. It's totally different. We don't define what domestic violence is, but she put it all in together because it sounds good.

She talked about men having control over the women. I can tell you for a fact that there are a lot of women who have control over men. But she won't admit that. There are controlling women who tell their husbands: 'Sorry, you can't go and have a beer with your mates. You can't go fishing. You can't do this.' It is happening all the time. Or it's, 'You're spending too much money.' It works from both sides. I'm sick of the debate of whether it's men or women. Look at a topic and determine what is fair and just.

I'm sorry to see this being pushed through. We need to deal with this and it should be dealt with. I've heard that the minister wants this to go through in a rush because she's going to be giving a speech. She wants something so that she can go out there, wave the banner and say, 'Look what I've done.' And Senator McAllister supports this. Labor support this. She gave a pat on the back to women's organisations. She's not fair. She's not looking at what's fair and just right across the board. Again, this is where One Nation stand up above everyone else because we're trying to do what is right, right across our whole society. But she won't admit that there are men out there who are being mistreated in our court system, through child support and through everything. She won't admit it. She's always on about the women. I'm a female. I've been through it. I know what I'm talking about. I'm not taking sides here. I'm trying to find a balance that is fair. That's all One Nation ever do in this parliament. We try to find out what's fair and just for all concerned.

I'm not happy with this bill being pushed through, but again Labor have done deals with the Liberal Party to push it through without finding the right outcomes for the Australian people. I won't be supporting the bill based on that, because it is being rushed through. There's a lot more we should actually have been addressing in this bill, not just giving a minister the right to say, 'Look what I've done.' That's basically what it is. I'm not happy.