Senate debates
Wednesday, 29 March 2023
Business
Rearrangement
9:01 am
Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Hansard source
President, I seek leave to move a motion, as circulated in the chamber, relating to the consideration of a private senator's bill.
Leave not granted.
Pursuant to contingent notice of motion standing in my name, I move:
That so much of the standing orders be suspended as to prevent Senator Birmingham moving a motion to provide for the consideration of a matter, namely a motion to give precedence to a motion relating to the consideration of the Productivity Commission Amendment (Electricity Reporting) Bill 2023.
It is the case that as soon as this debate concludes we will move on to the Australian Greens' private senators' time, as scheduled in the normal routine of business. That private senators' time has been respected, notwithstanding the variation of hours motion that was pushed through by the government yesterday. Remarkably though there was another version of the variation of hours motion pushed through by the government yesterday. The initially circulated version also would have reserved private senators' time for opposition business tomorrow morning, during which time the Productivity Commission Amendment (Electricity Reporting) Bill 2023 was to be considered. Before it came to be voted on, a second version of the government's hours variation motion came through. Lo and behold, in the second version the opposition's private senators' time got knocked out. So the Greens' private senators' time was preserved for today but the opposition's private senators' time was eliminated for tomorrow.
This is not the way in which this Senate chamber should be treated. An important principle of this Senate chamber is that across the chamber there is respect for non-government business having an opportunity to be considered and debated. That respect should be extended to all non-government parties, not just to those whom the government chooses to do deals with. It is one thing for the government to have done its deal on the safeguard legislation with the Greens. Of course, we're waiting to see the full extent of the amendments. The substantial amendments weren't available as we debated the bill through until after 4 am. We still did not get to see the amendments that actually deliver that deal.
They also dealt away the usual proceedings and courtesies of private senators' time in this place. Remarkably, despite reasonable approaches from Senator Ruston and the opposition, they have not agreed to reinstate that. It wouldn't have changed the deadline, the hard marker, that actually sees the conclusion of the safeguard legislation. That's already established. The motion before the Senate would not change that deadline. It would simply reinstate the opportunity for Senator Duniam's bill, the Productivity Commission Amendment (Electricity Reporting) Bill 2023, to be called on in the normal, ordinary routine of business, at 9 am tomorrow morning, to be considered for the normal, ordinary routine one hour and 10 minutes tomorrow morning as private senators' time ordinarily would be. There is nothing but routine in what the opposition is proposing here. It should not take a suspension of standing orders motion for us to ask for the routine, for us to ask for normal courtesies to be extended.
Senator Duniam's bill is a straightforward one. It deserves to be debated. It deserves even more to be debated in the context of the safeguard mechanism that this chamber is considering. Because Senator Duniam's bill will bring greater transparency to electricity price reporting. It will bring greater scrutiny to the way in which energy markets and electricity prices are considered. It's a very important proposal, given the other matters that are before this Senate.
So I would urge the Greens, who are about to have their one hour and 10 minutes of private senators' time this morning, to reflect and provide the same—
No comments