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

I note the minister's statement. I thank Minister Gallagher for her attendance and explanation, her explanation about Labor's destruction of democracy. The utter disrespect and contempt shown for this Senate and for the estimates process is beyond reproach. It's not just this instruction; it's the conduct of the bureaucrats that ministers allow. As a servant to the people of Queensland and Australia, I remind all senators that our Senate is the house of review. It is constitutionally empowered to get what it asks for. The government seems to think it can decide what we can and can't see based on what is politically convenient to them. That is contempt.

You are frustrating the ability of the Senate and its committees to receive the information it has requested. At every single round of Senate estimates hearings hundreds of questions on notice are simply ignored. This information is available, but the minister has simply decided they won't hand it over. When officials do the right thing and give the information, as they are constitutionally required to, they are intimidated and berated. Immigration minister Clare O'Neil left immigration official Stephanie Foster in tears after she produced information to an estimates committee. This is evil, anti-democratic behaviour. Quite frankly, there's no reason a question on notice needs to go to a minister. The department should simply answer to the best of its ability without the censorship.

Labor's culture of secrecy isn't limited to what we're talking about at estimates, though. We see orders for the production of documents ignored almost every single time, often with complicity from the Labor-Greens coalition, sometimes with teal Senator Pocock and sometimes from the Jacqui Lambie Network. I'll again flag to the Senate my proposal—I've introduced it many times—for a method to confidentially review a document subject to an order for the production of documents. We acknowledge that there may be arguments for not letting information be released to the public in a very narrow set of circumstances, but it's senators who should judge that; it should not be left to a minister's whim, a minister that wants to hide, to obfuscate. This estimates manual doesn't surprise me. Even if it didn't exist, my repeated experience is that there's a deeply embedded cultural problem in all government agencies to avoid answering questions to protect the minister, so-called, above them.

There's more than one contempt of this parliament happening almost every sitting day. What we need to do as a Senate is punish that contempt, to stop it. That's the only way democracy is going to work in this chamber. This disrespect will continue because it has been allowed to continue. To the opposition I say: you're more than happy to roll into this chamber and gently slap Labor over the wrist with five-minute puff pieces and then walk out, all forgotten; yet you won't move a contempt motion on the dozens of examples that have already happened, as we have repeatedly suggested. That's what we need to do: move contempt motions. As a Senate we need to hold people who have breached Senate orders in contempt—hold breachers in contempt.

The Senate has more powers than a royal commission. It has more powers than any upper house in the world except for the United States Senate. Sadly, the senators in here refuse to enforce those powers. It would only need to be done once or twice. Start taking real action against the contempt of this Senate or it will continue as it has and democracy will die. Senators, let's hold in contempt those who treat the people's Senate with contempt, to revitalise democracy, truth and accountability, and let's see less guillotining from the government as well. I know the Greens and some of the crossbench senators are regular supporters of guillotining, but guillotines don't allow the voice of the people to operate in this chamber. You're squashing democracy with guillotines, which we'll see in another couple of minutes. How many bills are going through? Is it about 18—16? I'm losing count now.

We've had the most far-reaching bill in recent history, the Digital ID Bill, go through with not one word of debate—not one word. Then we saw it go through with some significant amendments, with not one word on any of them. That's what the people of this country face. We need democracy. We need to revitalise democracy, truth and accountability. Let's hold breachers in contempt.