Thursday, 18 May 2023
Business of the house
Notices of motion
Business of the house
Notices of motion
That the consideration of notices of motion, government business, 1 and 2 be postponed until later this day.
James NEWBURY (Brighton) (10:05): I move:
That the words ‘later this day’ be omitted and replaced with the words ‘after consideration of general business, notice of motion 16’.
This week the opposition has made it clear that it wants to work with the government in making sure the Parliament is used in the way that all Victorians would want it to be used. We have made that clear. We have now made that clear for four weeks. But there is one line in the sand, and that is the Parliament being misused in a way that, frankly, is political and is simply the government using its time to sledge the opposition. That is what it is doing. So the opposition is seeking to move a motion to amend what the government intends to schedule for the day and instead insert a very important motion for consideration and debate, that being a motion standing in my name:
That this house notes comments:
made by the Premier in response to the Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission report Operation Daintree citing it as an ‘educational’ report; and
from the Ombudsman that the report was ‘damning’ rather than ‘educational’.
This is an important motion. This is a very important motion for the house to consider, because the house can no longer be used in a way that, frankly, wastes Victorians’ time. This is the people’s place, and the government should have the legislative program to carry the debate of the week. We have not seen that. We have not seen the government with the intellect, energy or will to carry the debate of this place and move forward with the program that it so often stands to speak to in this place. We have now seen effectively this Parliament collapse in on itself in that the government does not have work to do.
On Tuesday the government stood up to speak on the government business program, which is its agenda for the week in this place. It did mention at that time that two motions would be debated this week, and today the Leader of the House has moved a motion which sets out that four motions will be considered by this house this week. So the government itself, when it spoke to its own program two days ago, did not even have the capacity or foresight to work out how to fill its own time for the week, and we learn today in this place that the government is instead moving to motions. Sometimes the opposition is given less than half an hour’s notice, and I do not think it is just discourtesy, though discourtesy I am sure it is, but it is also because I do not think the government knows what it is doing in terms of managing the time in this place.
We will have a division on this question shortly. I note that the Premier again was not here this morning, and it will be interesting to see whether the Premier has arrived at work yet. But we cannot continue moving forward and seeing a Parliament’s time wasted because the government has not got the foresight, will or intellect to fill the Parliament’s time with important work that needs to be done – to debate matters of urgency, matters that are on the minds of every Victorian, like this very motion that I am proposing the house now considers in relation to the motion that I moved relating to the Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission report Operation Daintree, which was cited appallingly by the Premier as ‘educational’ and forced the Ombudsman to correct him in a public way that I have never seen. I do not think any Victorian has seen an Ombudsman being forced to publicly correct a Premier.
I make a final point in saying we cannot keep having this Parliament collapse in on itself because the government has not got the capacity to work out its schedule. They do not have the capacity to work out on Tuesday what they will be doing for two days, and that is what we are seeing. It is frankly shameful, and I call on the government to work with the opposition to debate the important questions and to use the Parliament’s time in the way that every Victorian would expect.
Darren CHEESEMAN (South Barwon) (10:10): I have not heard so much hysterical nonsense in this chamber for some time. The reality is, and I will give the member for Brighton a tip: this is the government chamber. It has always been the government chamber. If you want to set the agenda for this chamber, then there is a very strong piece of advice I would give you: go and win an election.
These motions put forward by the government are in fact very important motions. They are motions that I know a very significant number of people in this chamber want to make contributions to. All the way from that corner of the chamber to that corner a very significant number of people want to make contributions on these very important motions. I will say very clearly to the member for Brighton: if you want to set the agenda of this place, go and win an election. I know you have not had that opportunity for some time, but if you want to set the agenda of this place –
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I remind the member that ‘you’ refers to the Chair.
Darren CHEESEMAN: Indeed. I do apologise, Deputy Speaker. If the opposition wishes to set the agenda of this place, then it should go and win an election. These motions are very important. A large number of Labor government members want to make contributions on these important matters. I certainly wish to make contributions on these matters. These matters have been debated extensively in the Victorian community. They were canvassed in a very broad sense late last year when we went to the Victorian community with a very clear plan. If the member for Brighton wants to make a contribution in this place, if he wants to set the agenda, then he should win an election.
I am looking forward to these matters being debated. I am looking forward to these important issues being canvassed in this place, and I very much commend the government business program and these matters to the Legislative Assembly chamber. I think it is absolutely the right of the government of the day to set the agenda for this chamber. We have set that. We have got these very important motions, and I am looking forward to them being debated and to us getting on with the day. I would hope that the opposition would stop wasting the time of this chamber, as they do every single day, by trying to frustrate the government in getting through the business that we would like to get through. Constantly the opposition try to frustrate the work of the government and of this important chamber. I am looking forward to the debate continuing through the course of the day. I can give the member for Brighton a tip: we are going to clearly win this motion, as we always do.
Emma KEALY (Lowan) (10:14): I rise in support of the amendment by the member for Brighton that we now move to motion 16, which is a very important motion that goes to some of the greatest concerns that Victorians have. They want to know with certainty what is happening in the state of Victoria, particularly around the levels of corruption that we are hearing about in the Andrews Labor government. The motion by the member for Brighton is:
That this house notes comments:
made by the Premier in response to the Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission report Operation Daintree citing it as an ‘educational’ report; and
from the Ombudsman that the report was ‘damning’ rather than ‘educational’.
I note the comments by the member for South Barwon that this is the government’s chamber, and I would like to remind him that actually we have a responsibility to every single Victorian to make sure that we are discussing and debating issues which matter to them. This includes the school students who are here today. They want to know that their voices are being heard. They want to be sure that Victorians are making sure that they are talking about issues including corruption in this government.
When we hear that a very important report about IBAC is looking at issues of corruption within the Andrews Labor government and the only response that we really get is ‘I don’t recall’ or ‘It’s simply an educational report’, it is nothing but a snub to every single Victorian. Now, we have an opportunity in this place to be able to debate this and for government members to be able to put their views on the table. We know that they will not do that through an IBAC inquiry. We have seen multiple reports. In fact I think we are now onto our eighth IBAC investigation with this government. We hear that this government on so many occasions is record breaking in many ways. Well, I think that breaking a record for the most corruption inquiries by IBAC has to be a fairly notorious reputation to have. But there is absolutely no reason why Victorians do not have a right to actually have this debate in this chamber to understand more about Operation Daintree, about what levels of corruption are happening within this government and most importantly that questions are being answered and we do not have the same series of responses that we have heard from the government through so many different inquiries: ‘I do not recall.’ So I urge the member for South Barwon to get on his feet and rather than question –
Mary-Anne Thomas: On a point of order, Deputy Speaker, this is a procedural debate. It is not an opportunity for the member for Lowan to anticipate the motion on the paper, so I ask that she come back to debating the procedural motion.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I ask the member to come back to the amendment to the motion in front of the house.
Emma KEALY: My comments were directly in relation to the member for South Barwon, who kept on saying that they cannot fill the agenda – and that is exactly the problem. We have got complete mismanagement by the manager of government business in being unable to provide enough bills to complete the entire week, so we are having these other things like motions come out. This is not just the government’s chamber; it is the people’s chamber. Everyone in Victoria has the opportunity to elect people to represent them, and they have an opportunity also to make sure that they have the issues that matter to them raised. This is not about the government just directing debate in a certain way and just using it as an attack tool on the opposition. If they truly want to represent all Victorians, which is something we hear on a very frequent basis, then they should also make sure that they are willing to be questioned on the issues that matter to every single Victorian, and every single Victorian is now talking about concerns about corruption in this government – money going to mates in return for donations back to the Labor Party to get re-elected. That is simply unacceptable.
Colin Brooks: Deputy Speaker, I think you can anticipate my point of order. The member has strayed way off the motion that has been moved by both the Leader of the House and the amendment that has been put by the member for Brighton. She is onto much broader topics, and she needs to be brought back.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I will rule on that point of order. I do ask the member to come back to the procedural motion in front of the house.
Emma KEALY: Thank you very much. I again reiterate my support for the motion by the member for Brighton that we now move on to debating issues surrounding the IBAC Commission’s report into Operation Daintree and particularly the dismissal of this report as being ‘educational’ by the Premier, as opposed to being ‘damning’ as it was framed by the Victorian Ombudsman.
We have seen the government business program in complete disarray. We are seeing bills which are only provided to the community for feedback for just six days. We are simply seeing a snubbing not just of the opposition, which I think is how the government think they are framing it; they are snubbing every single Victorian who wants to see these serious issues debated, but most importantly they want answers to all of these corruption allegations.
Sarah CONNOLLY (Laverton) (10:19): Well, if ever there was an award or a crown to be placed on the head of someone in this chamber who has stood here more than anyone else with confected outrage, I think there would be quite a few contenders on the side of those opposite. I notice we have two of the main contenders sitting in the room right now.
James Newbury: On a point of order, Deputy Speaker, on relevance. I would say that the member is covering for the fact that no senior minister has the wherewithal to stand up and speak on this motion, forcing the backbench to stand up. I would ask you to bring the member back to this tight procedural question.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The member had just commenced and will be debating the procedural motion in front of us, I am sure.
Sarah CONNOLLY: I do digress. It was me having a go at confected humour, really. It does not happen very often in this place.
Look, it is just incredible to be standing here listening to those opposite talk about how passionate, how strongly and how intensely they want to stand in this place and debate our legislative reform agenda when, for the past four years – and I am sure it has been eight years for those who have been here a lot longer – those opposite have struggled to have probably more than two or three people in the chamber at any time, while this side of the house –
James Newbury: On a point of order, Deputy Speaker, this is a tight procedural motion, and I do not think it is fair to embarrass the Premier for having not spoken on any second reading this term.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: We are debating a procedural motion on the motion; however, members on both sides have had some context on that. The member to continue on the procedural motion.
Sarah CONNOLLY: Thank you, Deputy Speaker. Time and time again the Andrews Labor government has put some incredible bills before this house, and I have no doubt that people here this week have very much looked forward to speaking about not only the bills before the house but also the motions that have been before the house. They are talking about nuclear energy, and the position of members here in this house about that nuclear energy is really important. It is something that goes to the best interests of people here in Victoria. As the member for Brighton noted, this is the people’s Parliament, very much so, and the bills and the motions that come before this house are things that are important to debate. It is important for the Victorian public to hear what elected members of this chamber have to say in relation to that.
I am very much looking forward to hearing the narrative on this side of the house about nuclear energy. I know I have got colleagues speaking on that, and I very much look forward to hearing what they have to say; they have very strong opinions about that. The schoolkids who were here have left, but I have no doubt that, whether they are Victorian students or adults, and regardless of what stage of life they are at, they would be interested in hearing about nuclear energy and the positions of members of this house.
It was really interesting also to hear the member for Brighton try to talk about the work ethic of the Premier, and I would have to say I have never, ever seen a stronger work ethic in a leader in this state.
Emma Kealy: On a point of order, Deputy Speaker, this is a point of order that has been raised. I hear the groans of the manager of government business.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The point of order is?
Emma Kealy: That the member has strayed far from the topic. This is a very tight, narrow procedural motion, and trying to talk up and suck up to the boss really does not form part of the contribution.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you, member for Lowan. I think I can take it from here. I encourage all members yet to speak to, once again, come back to the procedural motion.
Sarah CONNOLLY: As I was saying, the Premier’s work ethic is incredibly strong, which is why we get stuff done on this side of the house in this chamber each and every single parliamentary sitting week, but whether we are in this house or actually out in broader Victoria, we are getting things done –
Emma Kealy: On a point of order, Deputy Speaker, the member is not adhering to your deliberations, a clear ruling on my last point of order, which was about sticking to the motion which is before the house today. It is a very narrow debate. It is a very narrow debate about a procedural motion, and I urge you to bring the member back to the debate.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you, member for Lowan. As I have said now a number of times to similar points of order both ways –
The member’s time is over.
Michael O’BRIEN (Malvern) (10:25): It has often been said that the essence of parliamentary democracy is ‘the majority gets its way, but the minority gets its say’. I think that is a very important message that people on the other side of this chamber have forgotten, because to hear the arrogance dripping from the Government Whip, the member for South Barwon, that this is the government’s chamber – I am sorry, member for South Barwon, this is the people’s chamber. This is not yours, this is ours. This is every Victorian’s. It was very, very telling, because the use of that language by the member for South Barwon is exactly how this government treats this chamber: with absolute disdain and absolute arrogance.
Members here have not just a right to be heard, we have a responsibility to be heard. This government has a poorly managed legislative program, but despite having all of this time it refuses to allow the opposition to debate any of the motions that we have on the notice paper. Every single time we put motions up, leave is denied. When the motions go onto the notice paper and we seek, as we are today, to have those debated, the government says no. What is the government so scared of? What is the government afraid of? Why don’t you want to debate corruption? Why don’t you want to debate IBAC’s Operation Daintree report? Why doesn’t the government want to debate the Ombudsman’s pulling up of the Premier for calling this an ‘educational’ report when it is quite clearly a report exposing corruption in the government? It is quite extraordinary that not only does the government not have a significant legislative program – and a poorly managed one at that – but it wants to deny the opposition the opportunity to put motions forward and have those debated in this chamber.
I am not a fan of big government. If the government does not have a proper legislative program, then do not put up rubbish. I am not saying just debate bills for the sake of it, but what we see this government doing now is putting on the notice paper what are effectively sledge motions – motions to simply attack the opposition. What a great example of a government that has run out of puff, that has run out of steam and that does not have any greater ambition other than to keep its bums on those green seats. That is about it, because they do not have a legislative program to increase the freedom of Victorians, to increase the prosperity of small business or to improve educational standards in this state. They do not have a legislative program to improve the disaster that is our healthcare system or address ramping in ambulances. They do not have an agenda to help our farmers. They do not have an agenda to attract more major events to the state. They do not have an agenda. They are treading water, and because they are treading water they have to fill up this notice paper with garbage political motions to simply try and attack the opposition. That is an example of a government that has lost its way.
If we are going to be debating motions, how about we debate serious motions like the one proposed by the member for Brighton, number 16 on the notice paper? Let us put it into Hansard again:
That this house notes comments:
made by the Premier in response to the Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission report Operation Daintree, citing it as an ‘educational’ report; and
from the Ombudsman that the report was ‘damning’ rather than ‘educational’.
I think it was in a debate yesterday that we heard one of the members opposite talk about how he had great respect for the office of Ombudsman. He talked about all the calumnies that had been attributed to the office of Ombudsman by the Kennett government, because this government, when they are not attacking the opposition, love living in the past. They have got no agenda for the future, but they love talking about the Kennett government. We do not hear the government talk up the benefits of the Ombudsman so much these days, do we? They are pretty quiet about the Ombudsman. We do not hear a lot of praise for the Ombudsman coming from government members these days, do we? No, no, no, they will talk her down. I am waiting for the day the Premier refers to Deborah Glass OBE as being ‘some woman who used to run some agency’, the same way they attacked Robert Redlich when he stood down from IBAC.
Colin Brooks: On a point of order, Deputy Speaker, I think again you will be able to anticipate the point of order I wish to raise. The member has strayed wide from the actual narrow procedural motion that we are debating today. He is using his opportunity to speak on this procedural motion to sledge the government and make a whole range of assertions about different members of this place.
Michael O’BRIEN: On the point of order, Deputy Speaker, I would say I am actually exactly referring to the issues raised by the member for Brighton and why these should be debated now.
The SPEAKER: The Leader of the House has moved to postpone government business notices of motion 1 and 2 until later this day. The Manager of Opposition Business has moved to omit ‘later this day’ and to replace the words with ‘after consideration of general business notice of motion 16’. The house will divide on the question:
That the words proposed to be omitted stand part of the question.
Those supporting the amendment should vote no.
Assembly divided on question:
Ayes (54): Juliana Addison, Jacinta Allan, Daniel Andrews, Colin Brooks, Josh Bull, Anthony Carbines, Ben Carroll, Darren Cheeseman, Anthony Cianflone, Sarah Connolly, Chris Couzens, Jordan Crugnale, Lily D’Ambrosio, Daniela De Martino, Steve Dimopoulos, Paul Edbrooke, Will Fowles, Matt Fregon, Ella George, Luba Grigorovitch, Bronwyn Halfpenny, Paul Hamer, Martha Haylett, Mathew Hilakari, Melissa Horne, Natalie Hutchins, Lauren Kathage, Sonya Kilkenny, Nathan Lambert, Gary Maas, Alison Marchant, Kathleen Matthews-Ward, Steve McGhie, Paul Mercurio, John Mullahy, Tim Pallas, Danny Pearson, Pauline Richards, Tim Richardson, Michaela Settle, Ros Spence, Nick Staikos, Natalie Suleyman, Meng Heang Tak, Jackson Taylor, Nina Taylor, Kat Theophanous, Mary-Anne Thomas, Emma Vulin, Iwan Walters, Vicki Ward, Dylan Wight, Gabrielle Williams, Belinda Wilson
Noes (26): Brad Battin, Jade Benham, Roma Britnell, Tim Bull, Martin Cameron, Annabelle Cleeland, Chris Crewther, Wayne Farnham, Sam Groth, David Hodgett, Emma Kealy, Tim McCurdy, Cindy McLeish, James Newbury, Danny O’Brien, Michael O’Brien, Kim O’Keeffe, John Pesutto, Richard Riordan, Brad Rowswell, Ryan Smith, David Southwick, Bill Tilley, Peter Walsh, Kim Wells, Jess Wilson
Question agreed to.
Motion agreed to.