Sarah Hanson-Young (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Water, Senator Wong. Has the government sought legal advice on the Commonwealth compulsorily acquiring Cubbie Station?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Hanson-Young for the question. Can I say, first, in terms of legal advice: we do not comment on whether or not legal advice has been sought, nor the content of it. That has been a longstanding position of both parties of government.

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That’s not right; you do comment on whether it’s been sought.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If Senator Brandis could perhaps calm down, I will finish my response. The second point is—

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

Mr President, I rise on a point of order. The minister is correct that the government does not have to divulge legal advice, but it is certainly incumbent on the minister to say whether or not advice has been sought.

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is no point of order. Senator Wong, continue with your answer. You have one minute 32 seconds to go.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you. The second issue I would raise with you in response, Senator Hanson-Young—through you, Mr President—is that the government has made it clear that we were not going down the path of compulsory acquisition.

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

Mr President, I rise on a point of order. You ruled that there was no point of order, but I ask you to inform the Senate whether there is a provision under standing orders for the government to be protected from answering whether or not it has sought legal advice on any matter.

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On the point of order, Mr President: the minister was asked a question and she is answering the question. Senator Brown does not like the answer, but there is no point of order. At the end of question time, during ‘taking note’, he can make whatever political point or argument he wishes to make; but there is no point of order.

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, on the point of order: if you are minded to rule on Senator Brown’s point of order now, then can I remind you that on numerous occasions both committee chairs, from the current government and the current opposition, have, in committee proceedings of the Senate, ruled that the question of whether or not legal advice has been sought is a valid question. The same principle ought to apply in this chamber. Mr President, can I respectfully suggest that you consider the matter before giving a ruling which would be potentially at variance with established practice.

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I cannot instruct a minister how to answer a question. They need to answer the question that has been raised—that is within the standing orders—but I cannot instruct a minister how to answer a question. As to whether they want to divulge in their answer everything that the questioner would desire, I cannot force them to do that. Senator Wong, you know the question. You have one minute 19 seconds in which to answer the question.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On the issue of compulsory acquisition, which was also part of the question, the senator would be aware that the government has made it clear that it is not minded to proceed down the path of compulsory acquisition. We have said we will purchase water from willing sellers. We believe that compulsory acquisition has associated with it a range of difficulties. The view that the government has consistently taken has been that we will take a different approach: we will take the approach of purchasing from willing sellers.

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

Mr President, I rise on a point of order. The first part of Senator Hanson-Young’s question was whether or not legal advice had been sought on the matter. I know the minister does not want to answer the question, but it was a very direct, yes-or-no question. Through you, Mr President, I ask her to answer that question.

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I have said, I cannot instruct a minister how to answer a question. You are entitled to raise the point of order in respect of the question that was raised by Senator Hanson-Young. I cannot instruct the minister how to answer the question. Minister, you have 44 seconds remaining in which to answer the question.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I was asked directly about whether legal advice had been sought in relation to compulsory acquisition. I am responding in relation to the government’s policy on compulsory acquisition, which I would have thought was relevant. In relation to this, or any other purchase, the government is open to talking with any willing sellers of water entitlements in the basin. We have made that clear. We will assess any sell offer through our buyback program on the basis of value for money and environmental need. This is consistently the position—

Barnaby Joyce (Queensland, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise on a point of order. The question was specifically asked by Senator Hanson-Young as to whether legal advice had been sought with regard to Cubbie Station. That is the question; what is her answer?

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

On the point of order, Mr President: here is the ridiculousness of the position that the opposition have now got themselves in misrepresenting Senator Brown’s question.

Opposition Senators:

Opposition senators interjecting—

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

Senator Hanson-Young, I should say. That is the difficulty when people take points of order on someone else’s question—even from the Greens. In respect of the nub of the issue, the minister is being directly relevant to the question that was asked by Senator Hanson-Young. It related to the compulsory acquisition of water. The senator is being directly relevant and is answering the question. What we are now ending up with is the difficult position of people raising points of order and debating the point itself. If it is the policy issue which is being—

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! I have already ruled that I cannot instruct the minister now to answer a question. My predecessors would have ruled in exactly the same vein: a Presiding Officer cannot instruct a minister how to answer a question.

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On the point of order: at the beginning of her answer to the first question, the minister asserted, quite wrongly, that she was not obliged to respond by saying whether or not legal advice had been sought. That assertion was quite wrong but, nevertheless, concededly it did directly answer the question. Everything else must be irrelevant—that refusal to answer the question having been given unambiguously.

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The minister has 10 seconds remaining for answering the question.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I again say that compulsory acquisition is not the approach the government is taking. We have made that clear.

Sarah Hanson-Young (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There seems to be confusion on both sides of the chamber as to exactly what it is I am asking, so I will ask the question of the minister again. Has the government sought legal advice on the compulsory acquisition of Cubbie Station—yes or no?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government’s policy is to purchase water from—

Sarah Hanson-Young (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise on a point of order. I am not asking for the government’s policy. I am asking for an answer to the question as to whether legal advice has been sought.

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On the point of order: Senator Hanson-Young set a new record. She got up to raise a point of order within three seconds. So congratulations, Senator Hanson-Young, that is a new record; I think six was the record before that. There is no point of order. Senator Wong is entitled to answer the question in the way she chooses. Quite frankly, I do not know if people have run out of questions but this abuse of question time is ridiculous. Taking points of order within six seconds or three seconds of someone getting to their feet clearly is inappropriate and I think if people are serious about getting value out of question time they ought to allow the minister to at least have a go at answering the question before they take a point of order.

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, speaking on the point of order raised: you have a responsibility to require ministers to be directly relevant to the question. Directly relevant on this question does not mean talking about government policy; it means stating whether you have or have not got a legal opinion. Mr President, you are required by the standing orders to determine and rule on direct relevance.

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I draw the minister’s attention to the fact that you have 57 seconds left in which to answer the question raised by Senator Hanson-Young. The question from Senator Hanson-Young was in relation to legal advice. I draw your attention to that.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I again make the point that the government is not taking the approach of compulsory acquisition. The government—

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! There are people debating across the chamber making it impossible for me to hear the answer.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I said, the government’s approach has been to purchase—

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! It is very difficult for me to hear the answer when there is a debate going on across the chamber.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I have said, the government’s approach is to purchase from willing sellers. Compulsory acquisition is not the path we are taking. The question appears to go to whether or not the government—

Bill Heffernan (NSW, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise on a point of order concerning relevance.

Government Senators:

Government senators interjecting—

Bill Heffernan (NSW, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If people over the other side will listen they may learn something. The bulk of the water on Cubbie Station that has been used in recent years is not for sale because it is not licensed. It is unregulated, unmetered, unlicensed and free—it is not for sale.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On the point of order: we now have the ludicrous situation where those opposite seek to ask the question and then, in asking the question, direct the minister how to answer. ‘Answer yes or no.’ That is clearly an abuse of question time, even under the absurd new regulations bequeathed to us by Senator Ferguson and his supporters. When asking their questions the opposition cannot direct ministers how to answer the questions. So I put to you, Mr President, that your arguments and your rulings have been completely correct and should continue in that vein.

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The minister addressed the question when she said, ‘I will not answer it.’ She asserted, ‘I will not answer the question.’ That assertion having been made, how can anything more be directly relevant.

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The minister is now addressing the first supplementary question asked by Senator Hanson-Young. There are 32 seconds remaining. I draw the minister’s attention to the question.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am having trouble following where we are after multiple points of order but I think we—

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The chamber will come to order.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I again make the point that the commitment we have made is that we will purchase water from willing sellers. We have had dialog with agricultural representatives and irrigator representatives and we have made it clear that compulsory acquisition is not the path we are going. There are those in this place who may have a different view. I accept that that is their view. Also, there are those in this place who would be vehemently opposed to compulsory acquisition. That is a different issue. (Time expired)

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Debating across the chamber at this time is disorderly. The time for debating across the chamber is after question time when a motion to take note of answers is moved, and not now.

Sarah Hanson-Young (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Given that the minister has outlined the government’s policy, would the minister inform me whether it is government policy to make decisions around these types of issues without seeking legal advice?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am sorry, Mr President, but I am not quite sure what Senator Hanson-Young is getting at. There is a government approach of $12.9 billion, which includes some $3.1 million for purchasing water. We have made it clear that the process by which that is undertaken is to purchase from willing sellers. We have had a number of tender rounds in both the northern and southern basins, and the results of those have been made public on the website and have been announced by government. It has been done transparently.

Again in relation to compulsory acquisition, that is a view that has been put to us previously. I think I have answered questions in this place previously about that and we have said that it is not the approach we are taking. We will purchase from willing sellers and we will assess on the basis of value for money and environmental need.