Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Fisheries, Forestry and Conservation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That, if the Senate is sitting at midnight on Thursday, 16 August 2007, the sitting of the Senate shall be suspended till 9.30 am on Friday, 17 August 2007.

Grant Chapman (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I call Senator Brown—

Claire Moore (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Bob Brown.

The Acting Deputy President:

There is only one Senator Brown.

Bob Brown (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, there are two.

Claire Moore (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is Carol Brown.

The Acting Deputy President:

I stand corrected. I call Senator Bob Brown.

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Fisheries, Forestry and Conservation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They are both forgettable.

Bob Brown (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Forgettable, says our fellow senator from Tasmania, but they are both good Tasmanians true. The reasonable thing for the government to do in moving a change which means that we will be sitting tomorrow if the debate on the Northern Territory legislation goes until midnight today is to give an explanation of what the intention is. I heard that on the ABC Senator Abtez flagged the possibility of sitting on Saturday. He ought to be giving information to the Senate, rather than simply flagging to journalists what we might be doing. This legislation is huge. It needs proper scrutiny.

I heard that Senator Abetz indicated that there was filibustering going on in here. That is a direct calumny on the process that has taken place. That is not so. It is patently evident that senators have been contributing very directly to this important debate. The public assertion by Senator Abetz that members of this Senate have been taking time simply to fill in the Senate sitting hours with irrelevancies is quite outrageous. He might be more judicious in the words that he chooses to use outside in a political way to try and defame falsely those in the Senate. There are very serious matters before the Senate and they have been taken seriously by all parties, including the government, in the Senate. That process, as far as the Greens go, will continue.

This is important legislation. The nation’s attention has been drawn to it. This is our opportunity in committee to question the government about it, to elicit more information and to ensure that we are informed before we vote on the various amendments and then on the third reading of the bills. I request that Senator Abetz be a bit more moderate and sensible in the comments that he makes publicly about the process of this very serious debate in this parliament. We can do without the Senate being treated as a political football by the senator. If he were to attend more of the debate about the Northern Territory legislation, he might get to see how serious it is and how good and incisive the debate has been—including the contributions by the minister involved. All parties have been doing this in a mature and sensible way, and the proceedings deserve a better public description than the one Senator Abetz has given.

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Fisheries, Forestry and Conservation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The motion that is before the Senate says that if we have not transacted the business by midnight tonight we will be commencing sitting again tomorrow at 9.30 am. The reason for that—and plenty of notice has been given of this—is that we as a government believe that the Northern Territory legislation, the water legislation and some bills relating to APEC need to be transacted by the end of this week. That was in fact discussed with leaders and whips earlier on. We had in fact wanted the citizenship bill to be part of that as well, but we removed that from the list of bills that we were requesting to have Senate consideration concluded on by the end of this week.

Yesterday, I was asked by journalists some questions in relation to the government’s plan. The government’s plan, as indicated quite some time ago, is to have these bills on the list transacted by the time that we conclude this particular sitting fortnight. It had come to my attention—and I will not say through which sources—that certain people were anxious for the government to apply the guillotine so that they could campaign on the basis of the government guillotining legislation through this place and treating it with contempt. There would then only be the one party that could save the Senate from this heinous activity of legislation being guillotined. All I ask senators to do is to give consideration to the way in which they conduct themselves during this debate. In general terms, what Senator Brown said was right. But I would not say that all senators have conducted themselves in an appropriate manner during this debate, because it has dragged out.

It is interesting that in the 106 years of this Senate since Federation, in 1901, only 29 bills have ever been considered for more than 20 hours. In those 106 years, 29 bills have taken more than 20 hours. In almost half—14 out of those 29 bills that have taken 20 hours or more—and in all that time and in-depth discussion, guess which government provided that time to the Australian Senate? The Howard government. That is a very good and very proud record. But, of course, when the Howard government says: ‘This is important legislation. We might recall parliament to give it more time to consider it,’ it is condemned by only one party. Guess who? The Greens. And we were told at that time, ‘There’s no need to recall the parliament early; the parliament is going to be sitting anyway. We can transact it during that time.’ Guess what happens? When we then do not recall parliament early and deal with it at the time suggested, there is a motion to defer its consideration until October.

Julian McGauran (Victoria, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

By whom?

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Fisheries, Forestry and Conservation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You are quite right to interject, Senator McGauran, just in case people could not pick up who that might be—of course, it was the Australian Greens. And now, we have said, ‘We’ll give the Senate a whole extra day if they need it to consider this legislation,’ but I hear Senator Brown in the media saying he needs to get back to his electorate. Sometimes in life you have to make a decision about what is more important, and we believe that protecting the children and women in particular of these Indigenous communities is vitally important. We also believe it is vitally important for the environment that we get this water legislation through, which has been out and about for discussion and consultation for months. There is some machinery legislation to deal with the APEC conference that is happening very shortly—I think there is unanimity in the parliament in relation to that legislation. That is all we are asking for. We are saying that, if the Senate cannot curtail the debate by midnight tonight, then we as a government are willing to sit an extra day and, if we have to keep sitting, we will then consider the consequences.

The history of the Howard government has been to allow exhaustive debate and, as I indicated, out of those 29 bills that have taken more than 20 hours, nearly half—14 of them—have been bills introduced by the Howard government. Only 29 bills have gone over 20 hours in this place in 106 years, and guess how much time we have already clocked up on this Indigenous legislation for the Northern Territory? Fifteen hours and 17 minutes. So, by the close of today, we will have clicked over the 20-hour mark in relation to this legislation. Then the tally will be 30 bills and exactly half of them, 15, will have been under the Howard government. It shows that we have never taken this place for granted. When we seek to recall parliament early to give it more time we are condemned by the Australian Greens. When we want to give it more time on a Friday, to have an extra day of sitting to consider bills, we are condemned as well. It is the typical, cynical approach of the Australian Greens: you’re damned if you do; you’re damned if you don’t. There will always be opposition manufactured for the sake of opposition so that you can get a cheap headline. I commend the motion to the Senate.

Question agreed to.