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

Here we have it: it's a Friday special, isn't it? It's a Friday special from the Labor Party and the Greens. It's a Friday special almost like a great Friday long lunch, it seems. It's a long lunch where the government doesn't want to work, doesn't want to be accountable and certainly doesn't want to be held to account. For anybody wondering what the Senate just did: it agreed that on four significant pieces of legislation there will be 14 minutes of debate allowed—14 minutes of debate left for four pieces of legislation. Otherwise, the guillotine falls—bang, bang, bang, bang—on each of these bills. That's the way the government is seeking to conduct its business.

And they're acting in such bad faith. This morning there were discussions across the government and the opposition agreeing to proceed through the first few bills listed today, and proceed through them we did in an orderly way, a swift way, a way that got the business done but gave every senator the ability to do their job and scrutinise the government's legislation. What do we get in return for that good faith? Bad faith. We get bad faith from the Labor Party, who sneak in, in what is clearly a dirty deal with the Australian Greens, to guillotine these four bills after 14 minutes of debate.

What's the price? What's the deal? That's the question. Senator Waters, are you and the Greens going to be honest? What did the Labor Party give you for this deal? What have they offered up for the Greens to be willing to guillotine bills such as a bill on live animal exports. I find it hard to believe the Australian Greens wouldn't want to debate live animal exports. I find it hard to believe they wouldn't want to put their amendments and argue for their amendments. So I find it very hard to believe there isn't something behind the scenes that we don't know about. What is the deal? We've got two social security bills on this list. Do you know how much debate those social security bills have had in this chamber to date? Zero minutes. No time at all has been given to those bills.

Now, you might expect—certainly I would expect it, the way the government behave—for them to bowl up and take and get and seize whatever they possibly can. They're showing an addiction to guillotining. They're showing an addiction to cutting off Senate scrutiny. They're showing that they are the complete opposite of what they promised to be prior to the election, when they said they'd be transparent and accountable. Instead, they show nothing but contempt for the workings of the Senate. And the Greens? They're you're talking the ultimate hypocrites. The Australian Greens, who have endlessly lectured governments about the need for scrutiny and the way in which this chamber works, are apparently happy to do these types of deals with the government.

The coalition won't stand for it. The coalition will call this type of behaviour out. Bad-faith behaviour does nothing to engender good faith in the future in the way we engage. We can see at times in the way this chamber works that we can manage to work cooperatively and get things done. Oftentimes what we will ask for is to sit longer hours, because we're not afraid of sitting longer hours to ensure there is scrutiny applied to legislation. If it means staying into the night, we're happy to stay into the night. If it means staying longer on a Friday, well, we'll stay longer on a Friday if the pressure is there to get the job done. Yet those opposite just want to get out as quickly as they can. They will do quick and dirty and secret deals with the Australian Greens to be able to get out of here faster. That's why this is like the Friday long-lunch guillotine—the long-lunch guillotine, where they want to be able to get out of here as quickly as possible. They want to have rammed through legislation with no scrutiny, with no ability for amendments to be debated or considered, and, in doing so, they are showing their contempt for the Senate.

The Greens don't like being called out. They don't like the fact we know there's got to be a secret deal. We know you've got to have been given something. Why aren't you honest enough to tell us what you've been offered, what the deal is, and why it is that you're willing to walk away from your great moralistic stance on live animal exports and not even debate that issue properly?