David Bushby (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I present report No. 6 of 2018 of the Selection of Bills Committee. I seek leave to have the report incorporated in Hansard.

Leave granted.

The report read as follows—

SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE

REPORT NO. 6 OF 2018

1. The committee met in private session on Wednesday, 20 June 2018 at 7.54 PM.

2. The committee recommends that—

(a) contingent upon introduction in the House of Representatives, the provisions of the Treasury Laws Amendment (Protecting Your Superannuation Package) Bill 2018 be referred immediately to the Economics Legislation Committee but was unable to reach agreement on a reporting date (see appendix I for a statement of reasons for referral).

3. The committee recommends that the following bills not be referred to committees:

National Consumer Credit Protection (Fees) Amendment (ASIC Fees) Bill 2018

Superannuation Auditor Registration Imposition Amendment (ASIC Fees) Bill 2018

Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Amendment (ASIC Fees) Bill 2018

4. The committee deferred consideration of the following bills to its next meeting:

Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage (Regulatory Levies) Amendment Bill 2018

5. The committee considered the following bills but was unable to reach agreement:

(see appendix 2 for a statement of reasons for referral)

6. Agenda item 3 (Committee membership) deferred until the next committee meeting.

7. The committee agreed to the members of the NSW Legislative Council's Selection of Bills Committee attending the next meeting of the committee to observe proceedings.

(David Bushby) Chair

21 June 2018

Appendix 1

SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE

Proposal to refer a bill to a committee

Name of bill: Treasury Laws Amendments (Protecting Your Superannuation Package) Bill 2018

Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:

Possible submissions or evidence from:

Committee to which bill is to be referred:

Possible hearing date(s):

To be determined by the Committee

Possible reporting date: 20 August 2018

Appendix 2

SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE

Proposal to refer a bill to a committee

Name of bill: Social Services Legislation Amendment (Cashless Debit Card Trial Expansion) Bill 2018

Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration: Impact on those in the proposed trial site

Possible submissions or evidence from: ACOSS, National Social Security Rights Network, Anglicare, Catholic Social Services

Committee to which bill is to be referred: Community Affairs Legislation Committee

SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE

Proposal to refer a bill to a committee

Name of bill: Social Services Legislation Amendment (Maintaining income Thresholds) Bill 2018

Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration: Impact of Family Tax Benefit recipients

Possible submissions or evidence from: ACOSS, National Social Security Rights Network, Anglicare, Catholic Social Services

Committee to which bill is to be referred: Community Affairs Legislation Committee

Possible hearing date(s):

Possible reporting date: 14 August

SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE

Proposal to refer a bill to a committee

Name of bill: Space Activities (Launches and Returns) Amendment Bill 2018 Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:

Possible submissions or evidence from:

Space Industry Association of Australia

Australian space companies

International and domestic law experts and academics

Australian Space Agency (in the Department of Industry, Innovation and Science)

Committee to which bill is to be referred: Senate Economics Legislation Committee

Possible hearing date(s):

On the papers

Possible reporting date:

13 August 2018

I move:

That the report be adopted.

Nick McKim (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—One of the bills in this report is the Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2018, which the Australian Greens asked to have referred and which has regrettably not been referred to the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee for an inquiry. This bill is part of the slow march down the very dangerous path to authoritarianism and fascism around the world that we are seeing at the moment. That slow march contains an erosion of some of the fundamental freedoms and liberties that we used to hold so dear in Western democracies and in Australia. We used to actually sacrifice lives to defend those fundamental freedoms and liberties.

You only have to look at what is happening around the world now. Look at what is happening in Italy, where they have just announced that they're going to do a census to discover which of the Italian people are Roma people as a precursor to rounding the Roma people up and deporting them from Italy. You only have to look at what is now happening in Trump's America, where children are being ripped from their parents' arms near the border with Mexico, kept in cages and injected with dangerous drugs to treat the very serious psychiatric conditions that that separation from their parents is causing. If you want to look at where this most recent manifestation of fascism, totalitarianism and authoritarianism started, look no further than this parliament and look no further than this country. The words, 'You are worse than I am,' should be ringing in the ears of every Australian right now. That phrase, 'You are worse than I am,' is what US President Donald Trump said—

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Collins, on a point of order?

Jacinta Collins (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I apologise, Senator McKim. I'm not seeking to interrupt your remarks. For a point of clarity, we want to understand which bill you're referring to. Where is it in the report?

Nick McKim (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Down the bottom.

Jacinta Collins (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Down there—that it not be referred?

Senator McKim interjecting—

Okay. Thank you.

Nick McKim (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The words, 'You are worse than I am,' should be ringing in the ears of every Australian right now. Those words, of course, were the words that US President Donald Trump said to Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull in their now infamous phone call where Mr Turnbull was trying to explain to US President Trump why Australia was forcibly separating families and why Australia was forcibly ripping children away from the arms of their parents in the name of immigration detention, border security and counterterrorism. Make no mistake, this is a fascist and totalitarian infection that we're seeing around the world. We're seeing it in the United States and we're seeing it in Italy, where they want to do a census that is a precursor to rounding up the Roma people and deporting them from that country. We're seeing it in populist, right-wing, extremist, neo-Nazi and fascist politics around the world, where they are copying their speaking points from the Australian government's propaganda on its Operation Sovereign Borders system.

All those things, these most recent manifestations of fascism, sprang from the day when this parliament decided it was okay to lock up children in detention in the name of border security. They sprang from the day when this parliament decided it was okay to forcibly separate innocent children from their parents in the name of border security. Make no mistake, as this spreads around the world, this is a very, very dangerous development for democracy, for human rights, for civil liberties and for the things we used to care about so dearly and the things we used to sacrifice Australian lives to defend. With the spread of these things, it is a dangerous time for the world. We need to understand, to look back to the day this parliament decided it was okay to exile innocent people to Manus Island and Nauru, when this parliament decided it was okay to subject them to the torture of indefinite detention, when this parliament decided it was okay to rip apart families in the name of base politics and immigration and border security.

These developments around the world are dangerous. They are troubling. They will lead to mass human misery, mass deprivation of liberty, mass deprivation of freedom. They will lead to death. They will lead to the ongoing separation of families. They will lead to what we're seeing in America, where children are ripped from the arms of their families and locked up in cages. What a dark, dark example Australia has set to the world.

Jacinta Collins (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I apologise once again to Senator McKim. Unfortunately, so many irregular things have been occurring in the chamber today that I missed the precise bill he was referring to when he commenced his remarks. But I was intending to address this report, Report No. 6 of 2018 of the Selection of Bills Committee, for a different but somewhat related reason, which is why I sought that clarity. Senator McKim is referring to issues that we've dealt with throughout this parliament and indeed the last parliament in relation to our approach to counterterrorism and national security issues. And the point that hasn't been raised here but that of course was discussed in the Selection of Bills Committee is that this bill has been to the PJCIS, so parliamentary scrutiny has been provided. I understand that the Australian Greens have some issues in that respect—not that Senator McKim necessarily outlined them here, but I do note what those issues are.

I was seeking to make a broader point in relation to the role of this committee. And whilst some of the crossbenchers are here I do think, given what has occurred this morning, that this is a point that is critical to be highlighted. The general approach to this committee—aside from the point I just made about PJCIS, about security, counterterrorism and issues of that character—as a general rule is that any individual senator can seek to have a matter referred to committee. The reason for that is that each individual senator, quite aside from party groupings, should have the capacity to look in detail at any bill that comes before the Senate. Indeed, I hope we continue this tradition as the house of review. But what's quite extraordinary and what this issue highlights is how the capacity for each individual senator to express a position in relation to a bill was ripped away from us yesterday and today. I hope those senators who cooperated with the government are not going to use this as their next area of attack on democracy, that it's not going to be another way in which this strange crossbench undermines the function of the Australian parliament, because critical to the Australian parliament is our capacity to review legislation.

I never thought I'd be standing in this place saying that critical to this parliament is a senator's capacity to speak on a bill. I never thought I'd be standing in this place and seeing what occurred earlier today, where senators who changed their position on a bill and determined not to insist on the amendments that the Senate had previously made did not get an opportunity to speak or did not seek the call, did not speak in this chamber as to why they changed their position on a policy issue. This will be an interesting question, and I hope I don't have to wait to hear the answer on the radio. So, not only did they not explore the critical policy issues around this tax plan but, indeed, they didn't even justify why they changed their position. Instead, they stitched up a deal with the government to provide camouflage which they hoped might protect them. I don't think it will. I think the Australian electorate is wise enough about our democracy to understand that the positions taken by some of the minor parties here are untenable. They think this parliament is going to operate in a way where we have the Leader of the Government in the Senate directing traffic in the way he was this morning. He was directing traffic in the way he said, 'Five minutes.' I hope we've got the camera footage of what occurred here today, because it has made the Senate function as a farce.

I go back to my point about the Selection of Bills Committee. This report, although it is rarely focused on in any detail by the time it reaches this chamber, is critical to our function. The precedent we have around any senator being able to refer a matter to a committee for detailed scrutiny is critical. (Time expired)

Anne Urquhart (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak on the report of the scrutiny of bills and also to outline why the opposition has decided to support the referral of the bills. Specifically, I'm referring to the Social Services Legislation Amendment (Cashless Debit Card Trial Expansion) Bill 2018, the Social Services Legislation Amendment (Maintaining Income Thresholds) Bill 2018 and the Space Activities Amendment (Launches and Returns) Bill 2018. This house that we are in here is a house of review—that's what this house does. The government has sought to gag debate on another bill today. We've seen that here today. We saw it yesterday, and we've seen it in the even more extreme today.

I believe that these bills should be open to scrutiny by not only the Senate but the community. The community should have access through the process of these bills being referred to committees—people out in the community who are stakeholders who have more information about some of these things than we do here—because it's part of a learning process for us to pick up information from stakeholders who deal with issues on a day-to-day basis and to hear from people who are affected by bills. That's why the opposition has decided to support the referral of these bills here today.

We've seen that this government—the Turnbull government, those on the other side of this chamber—cannot be trusted to allow scrutiny of bills. This is the problem we've got. We've seen it all morning where the government, over on that side, have continually gagged debate. We've seen how they've corralled the independent senators and those others up over on that other side and pulled them into line to vote with them, without us or any senators in this place having an opportunity, if they wished to, to make a contribution to the debate. That's not how this chamber has run in the past, and that's not how it should be run into the future. Quite frankly, the government should be absolutely ashamed of the way that they have conducted themselves over the last day or so.

I might also say that the Independents and the minor parties who have not stood up to vote against the legislation—to get up and have a say—should be ashamed as well. They should be absolutely ashamed of themselves. The people of South Australia will be very disappointed with Centre Alliance. They will be absolutely disappointed that Centre Alliance did not get the chance to put their positions up. Now Centre Alliance have rolled over completely and voted with this government.

Pauline Hanson's One Nation party have completely rolled over and capitulated in this chamber to the government. I don't know what sort of a deal they've got out of it, but the people that they purport to stand up for in Queensland, I hope, will be standing up, rallying around and arguing that what they've done is absolutely outrageous. I hope they will send that very strong message to the Pauline Hanson's One Nation party. They go out onto the streets of Queensland and say, 'We care about the workers, we care about individuals and we care about low-paid workers,' and then they come in here, do a dirty deal with the government, roll over and agree to tax cuts that will disadvantage low-paid workers. That's what they've just voted for: to absolutely disadvantage low-paid workers. I say: shame on them. Shame on them all! It's outrageous that we have workers in this country who earn significantly less than the people in here but it's us in here, and others who are on high incomes, who are actually going to get the advantage of what that lot over there have passed, joined by those from the Centre Alliance party, Pauline Hanson's One Nation party and several independents.

Can I take this opportunity to commend Senator Storer on his position and his stance. Thank heavens he's an Independent and standing on his own. He deserves respect and support, which he should get from the many voters who used to support the Nick Xenophon-Centre Alliance team. (Time expired)

Chris Ketter (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Today is not a shining example of the work of the Senate. It's not a day that we can hold up as an example of the Senate chamber operating at its finest. I'm a great believer in our parliamentary democracy. I believe that this forum is a centre point for the nation's debate on very, very important matters. Today, unfortunately, we saw the reputation of the Senate traduced.

I particularly want to highlight the fact that the Centre Alliance party, in its performance today, certainly did not live up to the goals and aspirations of its founder, former Senator Nick Xenophon. We all had our differences with former Senator Xenophon in terms of his policy positions on a range of matters but there was always one thing that former Senator Xenophon was very, very strict on, and that was that he would not support a gag. He understood that this place is a forum for debate and for trying to fully explore all of the issues that need to be looked at, whether they are bills or important matters of the day. Former Senator Xenophon was a stickler for ensuring that the proper processes were observed when it came to debate. It is extremely disappointing to find that the Centre Alliance senators did not live up to that aspiration of their party. I would hazard a guess as to say that that will probably count against them when next they face the people.

It's also very disappointing that we saw Senator Hanson in her position. As a senator from Queensland, I know there are many Queenslanders in certain parts of the state who see Senator Hanson as a person who reflects some of their views, and, perhaps, some of the disaffection that voters have with major parties. It is extremely disappointing to find that Senator Hanson, on this occasion, has decided to vote with the government. But it's not surprising, in one sense, because we know from Senator Hanson's track record that she has voted with the government around 90 per cent of the time—I haven't looked at the statistics recently but that's the sort of level that we're talking about. That's not something that the average Queensland voter is well aware of, and I'm sure that that's something that they're about to become very much aware of.

What we want to see in this place is proper process apply. We want to see the committees operating as they should. We want to see fulsome debate, particularly when we're talking about things such as a bill which is of the order of $144 billion in terms of loss of revenue to the Commonwealth. I get the point that this is money of the people in terms of their income tax, but we are talking about the issue of the budget of the Commonwealth. This has a major impact on the finances of the Commonwealth. It was only four short years ago that this government was talking about the 'debt and deficit disaster' and saying that we had to have all sorts of swathes of cuts affecting vulnerable people. But now we see that that's gone out the window. We see the fact that gross debt has crashed through the $500 billion mark. We're seeing handouts being given to the top end of town.

The government does not respect our right to debate these important issues. The actions of the government today have been deplorable. What I say is that we need to have an election. We want to bring on an election. We need a Labor government to restore fairness to this country. We need a Labor government to restore fairness to this chamber, a government that would respect the proper processes to ensure that the people have all of these issues properly ventilated and we come out with a proper process here.

Question agreed to.