Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—We are now in the last two weeks of this sitting period. During this period we usually, through a leaders and whips process, ask for additional sitting hours so we can deal with the legislation that is before us. The amount of legislation that we have to deal with is not insubstantial, and we would like to set additional hours to ensure we can finalise the business by some time towards the end of next week. That will provide certainty to the government and to those on the opposition, the minor and the Independent benches about what those hours will be and what times they will be expected to be here to deal with the legislative agenda. We can also deal with the proposed bills that will come up because we can then schedule, and people can cut their cloth in their contributions to the bills accordingly.

At this juncture we are at what I call a ‘slight stalemate’. The view of the government is that we would like to sit additional hours this evening. There are substantive bills to be dealt with, including the fair work legislation. From the government’s perspective, we would like to use this evening to conclude the committee stage of that debate. However, at the moment we do not appear to have an agreement to sit additional hours. I could seek to move a motion and have a debate about this particular issue now, but I do not think that would be helpful. There is an understanding—as I understand it, but I am happy for the Manager of Opposition Business to contribute to this short statement as well—that we will indicate by this afternoon whether or not we judge that we can finish the relevant legislation for today and towards the end of the week within reasonable hours.

My understanding is that the opposition is minded to participate in that and is willing to cooperate to the extent possible to deal with budget bills and the like. There is a further issue about broader bills within budget bills and those other bills that are on the program that the government wants to progress during this sitting week and next week. I understand the opposition’s position, but the government does find itself in a position of pressing for those additional hours to ensure that those bills can be debated and dealt with in a way that suits all present and so that everyone can contribute to the debate. If that means that I defer moving the motion asking for additional hours until this afternoon, I will do that, but I thought it was incumbent upon the government to at least flag that there may be additional hours tonight so that the whips can deal with that as well. Of course, the Senate will determine whether we do sit late tonight. Hopefully we will be able to reach an agreement, which is always a much better position to arrive at.

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—The opposition is of a mind to assist the government in facilitating its urgent legislation program—and, by urgent legislation, I mean the package of bills that the Manager of Government Business has provided to us and discussions that we have had on it. However, it needs to be noted that, whilst we will facilitate this as much as we possibly can, if we keep agreeing to hours changes by this government, when this government has set the lowest number of sitting weeks in any calendar year outside of an election year since the Second World War, then this parliament will not be proceeding in the correct manner it should in considering bills in a timely, orderly fashion and in such a way that the program is set and not changed on a daily basis. We understand flexibility is needed from time to time, but the government has been warned—and I can quote the Hansard on previous occasions when I have warned the government—that we will not continually facilitate mismanagement of the chamber.

Sitting weeks have been one problem. Also, the opposition have been exceptionally generous in giving up matters of public importance on a constant basis. We have also given up the time that the opposition have on a weekly basis—that is, the Thursday afternoons when we have opposition business. We have facilitated the government on previous occasions just this year on that alone, let alone at previous times during the last calendar year since this government has been in power. We are very mindful that the government has an agenda and that the public of Australia need to have some bills passed. We will not stand in the way of those urgent bills being proceeded with this week and next week. And, if we need additional hours next week to facilitate some of those bills—or indeed this week, if the need can be clearly demonstrated—we will seriously consider that. In relation to the packages for today that Senator Ludwig is referring to, there are four packages that have been indicated to my office as those that we need to have completed, and we have agreed with that. We have said, ‘Yes, these four packages can proceed,’ and it is our view that these packages can be completed during the time allocated on the regular program for today.

To that extent, we have also given up matters of public importance again today to give the government an extra hour. We have lodged a notice for a matter of public importance but it is our intention to withdraw that on the basis that we will assist in the facilitation of the program for the day. I say to the Manager of Government Business that, if the program had been better constructed from day one, if the timetable for the Senate had been set not around the Prime Minister’s travel arrangements and the other needs of the government but around a sensible, full legislative program for the year, we probably would not be having this discussion now. Last night we had an example of a non-urgent bill—a highly desirable bill, according to the list that was provided by the government—being introduced at the end of the day.

The government really needs to consider its program and give us plenty of warning. Do not constantly rearrange. Where this nation needs legislation passed on a more urgent basis, we will pass it. We will never stand in the way of those issues. I give a commitment to the government for today only—and we will do this on a daily basis—that we will accede to the four packages. If we feel that we need extended hours later in the day, we will make that assessment later in the day and then discuss it with the government. It is our belief that, if it is managed correctly, the passage of this suite of legislation, the four packages that the government wants, will be achieved today.

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

I remind both the government and the opposition that the crossbench is seriously involved in the process in this parliament, and if there is a dispute between the two parties it will ultimately determine the matter. The opposition is quite right: the government has not scheduled enough Senate sittings—and that is a matter that should be reviewed forthwith. We are in a period of global economic uncertainty, to say the least. We have rising unemployment, we have huge climate change challenges and we have very important social issues to debate—and you do not deal with these issues by not sitting. So I agree with the opposition—and it is a point that the Greens have been taking right down the line—that these sittings are too few and should be extended. That said, there is a need for us to get on with the business of the nation in the Senate in the next two weeks, and we intend to help facilitate outcomes rather than hinder them.

The Greens have three bills coming on on Thursday. The first is about ending junk food advertising in children’s TV viewing hours. The second is Senator Milne’s bill on the feed-in laws to allow people who have renewable energy, such as solar panels, to be adequately paid for the electricity they feed into the grid, thus saving greenhouse gas pollution. The third bill, by Senator Siewert, is about ensuring that there are equal rights for people in the workplace in this country and that there is not discrimination, as there is under the current laws. We hope that the government and the opposition will be mindful that, in the very limited time available for discussion of important pieces of legislation brought forward by the crossbench, we would be looking for a result—that is, a second reading outcome—on those bills, or at least some of them, on Thursday afternoon in private members’ time. A bit of goodwill would be enormously well received by the Greens. Notwithstanding that, we have goodwill towards this place and we will be facilitating an outcome on, in particular, the bills the government has listed as urgent.

Steve Fielding (Victoria, Family First Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think we need to get on with the debate. Family First will support the government in making sure that their stuff is debated and not rammed through. By the same token, I have never understood the reason why we are sitting for a lesser number of days this year. We get paid to do our jobs both in the community and here in the chamber, so it seems odd that we have a such a small number of sitting days this year. It has not been explained to me at all. So let us get on with it and start the debate on the important issues.

Nick Xenophon (SA, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I agree that there should be more sitting days. In respect of what the government is planning for tonight, I have indicated previously that if it is a matter of sitting until a reasonable hour tonight so that we can deal with the legislation—10 pm or 10.30 pm—as long as it is clearly urgent legislation, that is something I am prepared to consider. I think we need to deal with that. But the government needs to go back to the drawing board when it comes to the number of sitting days that we have, because the number is clearly not adequate. I think there is general consensus that ‘legislation by exhaustion’ is not the way to do things. Sitting until the early hours of the morning and starting up a few hours later is a very poor way to legislate for this nation. So I hope the government understands the concerns that have been expressed by the crossbench and the opposition and that we can have a focused approach to sitting days and sitting times.

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That intervening business be postponed till after consideration of government business order of the day no. 3, the Nation Building Program (National Land Transport) Amendment Bill 2009

Question agreed to.