Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

BIRMINGHAM (—) (): by leave—I move:

That on Tuesday 5 December 2023:

(a) the hours of meeting be 9.30 am to adjournment;

(b) the routine of business until 1.30 pm be as follows:

(i) acknowledgement of country and prayers

(ii) documents to be presented

(iii) committees—proposals to meet

(iv) consideration of the Infrastructure Australia Amendment (Independent Review) Bill 2023, with time allotted for the remaining stages as follows:

(A) second reading—1 hour; and

(B) questions on all remaining stages put at 11.30am;

(v) government business only;

(c) then the Senate shall return to its routine of business; and

(d) paragraph (b)(iv) operate as a limitation of debate under standing order 142.

Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move an amendment to the motion:

Omit all words after "That", substitute:

"on Tuesday, 5 December 2023—

(a) the hours of meeting be 9.30 am till adjournment;

(b) the routine of business from 9.30 am till 1.30 pm be as follows:

(i) government business only,

(ii) at midday, Nature Repair Market Bill 2023 and a related bill, and

(iii) government business only;

(c) the routine of business from not later than 5.30 pm be consideration of the following bills:

(i) Nature Repair Market Bill 2023

Nature Repair Market (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2023,

(ii) Economic Inclusion Advisory Committee Bill 2023,

(iii) Public Health (Tobacco and Other Products) Bill 2023

Public Health (Tobacco and Other Products) (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2023,

(iv) Treasury Laws Amendment (Making Multinationals Pay Their Fair Share—Integrity and Transparency) Bill 2023, and

(v) Infrastructure Australia Amendment (Independent Review) Bill 2023;

(d) the questions be put on the bills, as follows:

(i) at 6.30 pm—second reading of the Nature Repair Market Bill 2023 and a related bill, and

(ii) at 8.30 pm—all remaining stages of the bills listed in paragraph (c);

(e) paragraph (d) operate as a limitation of debate under standing order 142;

(f) divisions may take place after 6.30 pm; and

(g) the Senate adjourn without debate after consideration of the bills has concluded."

Essentially, the purpose of this amendment is that, at the end of the opposition's proposal, we would then move to the Nature Repair Market Bill 2023, the Economic Inclusion Advisory Committee Bill 2023, the tobacco bills that we've been debating, being the Public Health (Tobacco and Other Products) Bill 2023 and the Public Health (Tobacco and Other Products) (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2023, and the Treasury Laws Amendment (Making Multinationals Pay Their Fair Share—Integrity and Transparency) Bill 2023 but not the Infrastructure Australia Amendment (Independent Review) Bill 2023 as listed, because that would have been dealt with in the opposition's motion. The purpose of this amendment is also that Senator Birmingham's motion follow sections (b) to (e) of the government's amendment, which would effectively mean that we deal with those bills by about 8.30 pm tomorrow.

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'd like to speak to the amendment, a copy of which I trust will land in my hand any second now. This amendment is the motion that we saw a short time ago the government had submitted for tomorrow—I see it still includes the Infrastructure Australia bill under the amendment that's been circulated—which sets up a series of guillotines on a series of significant bills. The opposition are not in a position to support the amendment as it is, given what we understand will be very notable changes, potentially, proposed to some of these bills. I particularly note the deeply suspicious motion on the Nature Repair Market Bill that has been lodged by the government for tomorrow, which suggests that significant changes to the EPBC Act are going to be snuck in as part of the arrangements.

The guillotining of these other items is of concern to the opposition. We were seeking, in the motion I moved, to ensure that we brought on an earlier start tomorrow to give us the capacity, from the earlier start, to deal with the Infrastructure Australia bill, which the government was proposing to guillotine tomorrow in any event. In having that dealt with, we then knew that the government would proceed with its motion tomorrow, under whatever terms, to vary the rest of government business, presumably as they had lodged and submitted. Our proposal gave the government no reduction in government business time. It dealt with one of the bills on their list of bills to be dealt with, but the opposition do have significant concerns and are not in a position to support a guillotine for all of the other bills at this stage.

We acknowledge that discussions around the chamber will take place, particularly in the final sitting week of the year, to have matters dealt with. In this case, as I say, we were not seeking to deprive the government of any government business time; in fact, we proposed an approach that provided for extra government business time and that dealt with one of the bills, the Infrastructure Australia bill, that the government wanted to have done. Of course, the government may well have the numbers to amend my motion and, in amending my motion, could get its way, and we could still have the extra hours and consideration of the Infrastructure Australia bill first thing in the morning. So, if the support is there, the Senate could start earlier tomorrow. Tomorrow being Tuesday, ordinarily, with the House of Representatives sitting, the parties of government and opposition are tied up in terms of the consideration of legislation. There are the proposals in party room and caucus meetings, and, during those meetings, we are assessing bills often introduced into the House of Representatives and being briefed upon those. But with the House of Representatives not sitting at this point in time it seemed appropriate for us to convene the Senate at an earlier time to deal with this in what we thought was a constructive, sensible way to provide for the extra hours to deal with Infrastructure Australia, so as not to impede the government being able to work through things but equally not to compromise on the things that are impossible for the opposition to compromise on, particularly some of the bills the government is seeking to guillotine.

I hope the substantive motion can be dealt with. The opposition cannot support the amendment but acknowledges that if it is added to the motion we will, of course, see the motion carried through this place.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I wonder if it would be possible, perhaps by leave, to return to docs and see if we could have a brief discussion.

Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm getting nods from around the chamber.

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

We have a deadline of 6.30.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I understand that. I move:

That this debate be adjourned until a later hour.

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move an amendment to the motion put by Senator Wong:

That the debate be moved to no later than 6.15.

Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the amendment moved by Senator Ruston be agreed to.

Question agreed to.

The question now is that the motion as moved by Senator Wong and amended by Senator Ruston be agreed to.

Question agreed to.

Debate adjourned.