Rachel Siewert (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I don't know if this is going to be helpful, but I think it might be helpful in the bigger picture. There is ongoing confusion around the way documents are listed. When people read documents, they look at all of what's on page 5 and think you can do it there at item 12, consideration of documents. That's where I think we are getting caught up. Perhaps I could make a suggestion about making that a bit clearer on the Red in the future, because I think it happens more often than just this time.

Cory Bernardi (SA, Australian Conservatives) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Siewert. Just for the benefit of the Senate, it was made clear that we were dealing with item 12, the consideration of documents, which was items 1 to 5 on page 5 of the Notice Paper. We've been through that. Then we were moving to the committee reports, which are items 1 to 15 on pages 5 and 6 of the Notice Paper. The practice is to have all of these reports tabled. Senator Williams had tabled three of them, then there were another two documents to be tabled: one from Senator Singh, one from Senator Ketter. Then there was another one from Senator Di Natale and Senator Smith. Then we can take note of those documents. That's generally how it works. Then we'll move on to taking note of those. What I'm seeking is for the tabling of these additional documents, if someone would like to do that. Senator Ketter, you had one to table. If you can table that, I'll come back to you in a moment.