Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Hansard source

The Albanese Labor government is facing a growing crisis of transparency. This is a government that has spent the last few weeks giving answer after an answer about its Qatar Airways decision. They keep changing and they never stack up. There's an inability to actually give a clear-cut and transparent response about how on earth they came to make a decision such as that, with consequential impacts for so many Australian jobs, so many Australian families and the prices they pay.

It's a government that has decided, with no consultation with the opposition or elsewhere, to dramatically overhaul the process for how it reports ministers' use of special purpose aircraft, and it's sitting behind a veil and veneer of security concerns in relation to how they're doing that. It's a government that now wants substantial legislation through, but has drafted this legislation in secret. It has amazing nondisclosure agreements, where those who wanted to be consulted have to sign nondisclosure agreements just to be consulted about the drafting of the legislation that's being debated as part of this Selection of Bills Committee report.

We're now asking for a transparent process, which stands in stark contrast to the way in which this legislation has been developed and to the way in which the Albanese Labor government is conducting its business and affairs—a transparent process where the Senate does its job, where senators get to do their jobs and where the Australian public and people, who will be affected dramatically by this legislation, will get to have their say. They should get to have a fair say, a fair dinkum say, about the impact and implications of this legislation. Let's understand that this bill—the so-called 'closing the loopholes' bill, which should really be called the 'opening the doors to greater union influence bill'—which was developed in secret, is nearly 800 pages long. And those near-800 pages have required an explanatory memorandum of about 500 pages to try to explain the near-800 pages!

The opposition is firmly of the view that there are fundamental problems with this bill. Fundamental problems where, yes, as Senator Gallagher indicated, there are large things we could not, would not and will never support. We're very clear-cut about that. But when we have nearly 800 pages of proposed legislative changes, the devil will also be in detail. We have in this Senate an active crossbench, a diverse crossbench, and their votes will determine a number of key issues in this bill. As that detail is explored, that could be the fate upon which some crucial elements hinge. That's why it needs to be explored properly and thoroughly.

It's also, clearly, why the government wants to avoid this scrutiny. They want to avoid this scrutiny because they're afraid of the detail being exposed. They're afraid of there being enough time for Australian employers and, most importantly, Australian employees—those just doing work, day-to-day, in their lives—to have time to understand the full consequences of this; to understand the detail and to have the opportunity to make a submission or to appear before an inquiry. And that inquiry should have hearings in Perth and hearings in other parts of Australia that will be dramatically impacted as well.

Why does this matter so much? It matters for two key reasons. One is that it goes to the jobs and opportunities that Australians have—the individual jobs that Australians have and the choices that they get to make, as Senator Cash touched on. But it also goes to the overall management of our economy.

We face an increasing economic problem in this country. Yesterday's national accounts show we have a per capita recession under way. The economy grew only because the Australian population grew. Productivity has been nosediving under this government, down some two per cent in the last quarter. We have serious economic problems, and what does a bill like this do? It hurts business productivity. It hurts business competitiveness. It will drive up prices for Australians at a time when they cannot afford to pay more and it will limit the ability for jobs to be created at a time when Australians need the opportunity of those jobs evermore. That's why it needs scrutiny. That's why it needs the longer timeframe as proposed by my colleague Senator Cash.