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

I seek leave to move that question time be extended to the full allocated time.

Leave not granted.

Pursuant to contingent notice, I move:

That so much of standing orders be suspended as would prevent me moving a motion that question time be extended until the remaining allocated time is expended.

I do this because there is the important principle here that question time in the Senate is private senators’ time, is the time for questioning the government and ought to run its full one hour regardless of what other procedural matters intervene. Today a failed motion of censure of the government interrupted question time, but the return to question time is the priority, from where the Greens sit, in the further deliberations of this house. There is on the slate an urgency motion which is going to traverse exactly the same ground that we have heard in the recent debate. It is more important, in our view, that the provision of question time in the Senate be upheld.

You know, Mr President, that I and the Greens have moved on a number of occasions in the past to ensure that question time be provided for when we sit extra days and question time is not provided for. It is the Greens’ view that question time, where the government is put under scrutiny, is absolutely central to the proceedings of parliament. It ought to be allocated on any day on which parliament sits, and I would expect that the coalition in opposition will support this motion to ensure that the government is put under the scrutiny that is required.

We sit far too little. We have a very sparse sitting schedule for this year, in particular for this part of the year. There is very little opportunity to put the government under scrutiny, and I expect that this coalition will want to ensure that that opportunity is not truncated at the behest of a government which does not want to have more question time. Of course we should. The matter has to be debated now because, if it is not, the opportunity is lost, so the urgency is very apparent. I put to the opposition that question time be extended and that it is very important. The government will not like it. I know that. The government does not want it. But it is not our job to protect the government from question time; it is our job to search the government in question time.

If we proceed, the next question will be from my colleague the honourable Deputy Leader of the Greens, Senator Milne, then there are a series of question opportunities for the coalition and other senators, including government senators acting as private senators, so it is very important that this proceed. Only a half hour is involved, and the Senate ought to insist that the government not escape from questioning under the unusual circumstances which have occurred today.

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

The government opposes Senator Brown’s suspension motion. The longstanding precedent in this parliament in both chambers has been that, if the opposition seek to move a suspension motion, that suspension motion is debated and, if the time for question time has expired, we do not return to question time. The opposition chose today to move a censure motion fairly early in question time, I acknowledge. The government chose to take that suspension motion rather than defeat it procedurally. Senator Brown may have preferred that we not do that. I understand that; that is a perfectly reasonable position. But the government’s view was that we would rather debate the merits of the case than debate the procedure, so we took that course, and I appreciate the support of the Independents and Greens for the defeat of that censure motion.

To be fair to Senator Brown, he has argued this position before, so I am not arguing that he is not consistent in it, but the reality is that what he is asking is that sometime around half past five I try and round up whichever ministers are still in the building and available and we have another go at question time. Ministers, like all other members of parliament, plan their day around question time being between two o’clock and three o’clock in the afternoon. One of the great things that the Senate has done is that we have always called question time to a halt at three o’clock rather than letting it drag on, as it does in the House of Representatives under certain arrangements. Under successive governments of both persuasions, we have run a more orderly and timely question time process. To suggest that some time, whenever we get around to it, we call question time back on again and hope that ministers turn up, have their briefs and are ready to go is, quite frankly, not very practical. We have a cabinet meeting scheduled shortly which cabinet ministers—and I think there are five in the Senate—are required to attend. It would be a total disruption of the cabinet and government processes—

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

This is the parliament.

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

Senator, it is the parliament, and the parliament has always tried to extend courtesies and procedures that allow everyone to plan their day. I think it would be a grave mistake to overturn all those precedents that have been set in relation to these matters. The fact is that the opposition chose to move the censure motion, as is their right, and that was debated. But the time for question time has now passed.

We have three more question times this week in which the government will be accountable and will be here and, Senator, you will be able to ask us questions. I think your party raised with us earlier in the day whether or not there would be any compensation for the Greens for the lost question today. I indicated, as I have to the Independents in the past, that we will look at that question. We have always tried to make sure that minor parties in the Senate get a fair crack at question time, that they get a proportionate chance to ask questions. As you know, with the agreement of the opposition, on occasions we have extended time to make sure that the Independents got their question up on the allocated day. The chamber has tried to work constructively to make sure that all senators get an opportunity.

The reality is that we have moved past the time for questions. We have precedents for not looking to go back to question time this late in the day. As I say, there has been no warning for ministers and no arrangements are in place, and we have a cabinet meeting due. I think we ought to follow normal practice. I would urge the opposition to think through those practicalities and also to think through their role as an alternative government, in that we have to have arrangements in place that allow governments to function. Exercising their capacity to move a censure motion earlier in question time effectively gives up the right for the rest of question time. That is a tactical decision by the opposition. It is perfectly within their rights. They took it. But I think to then say, ‘We want to do that and, by the way, we’d like to go back into question time,’ is unreasonable. It is not the sort of procedure that the House of Representatives entertains.

So I take Senator Brown’s point, but we are at Monday. There are three more question times. The government is held to account. We were here accounting for ourselves through the censure motion. I suggest that we move on to other business. We have the condolence motion for Sapper Jamie Ronald Larcombe, which we have been due to deal with for some time now. I think it would be appropriate if we moved on and dealt with that.

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have to say, it does pain me to say that the opposition will not be supporting the Greens motion. The coalition is always loath to curtail any opportunity for question time. We always question very seriously any attempt by the government on a sitting day to put forward a reason that question time should not be held. But we have never sought, on this side of the chamber, to frustrate the business of the Senate. We are, more often than not, extremely cooperative with the government; and we do recognise that the chamber has been delayed today—not inappropriately delayed; it was very appropriately delayed. It was very important that the Senate debate the censure motion today. It is a pity that it did not pass, but it was important to put on the record the blatant breach of faith with the Australian people that this government has demonstrated through its pursuit of the carbon tax. But we do recognise that the chamber needs to function, that business needs to be dealt with, so we will not be supporting the Greens motion on this occasion. But we will be continuing with motions to take note of answers, because we think it is very important that, with respect to that part of question time that was held, there is the opportunity to take note of those answers and to further ventilate the matters we have been debating today.

I must say I am a little surprised that the Greens needed to put this motion today, and in fact that they do not have the support of the government. I would have thought that this is actually evidence that the Greens need to negotiate a better coalition deal, a better alliance deal, with the government. Surely Senator Brown could ensure, at the Monday morning tactics meeting between Labor and the Greens—their combined tactics meeting—that these sorts of arrangements are sorted out. That might be something for Senator Brown to place on the agenda of the next meeting that he has with the Prime Minister. Being part of the government, in effect, Senator Brown should be able to resolve these sorts of issues directly with the government.

So, as I said, it is with regret that we will not be supporting the Greens motion on this occasion, but the chamber must continue to function. I would suggest that in future Senator Brown talks with his Labor colleagues about these issues.

Christine Milne (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to note with interest that on this matter the coalition is in the balance of power. The government have a view, the Greens have a view, the coalition are in the balance of power and have chosen to support the government rather than support the scrutiny that question time provides. I think it is worth noting for the record here that, for all of the bluster we have heard today, for all the standing up and shouting we have heard today, when push comes to shove they abandon question time.

Question put:

That the motion (Senator Bob Brown’s) be agreed to.