Tuesday, 17 March 2020

Business of the house

Program

Ms ALLAN (Bendigo East—Leader of the House, Minister for Transport Infrastructure) (13:14): I move:

That, under standing order 94(2), the orders of the day, government business, relating to the following bills be considered and completed by 3.00 pm on Thursday, 19 March 2020:

Assisted Reproductive Treatment Amendment Bill 2020

Disability Service Safeguards Amendment Bill 2020

North East Link Bill 2020

Sentencing Amendment (Emergency Worker Harm) Bill 2020.

I would like to make some comments on the government business program that I have moved, some additions to that government business program and the intention of the government on how it wishes to see the Assembly run for the remainder of the week.

There are four bills on the program. There are a lot of important policy issues to consider in the four bills that are available to the house for debate over the course of the week, covering important policy matters for Victorians. Also, as we have just seen, the government has first- and second-read a local government bill in relation to the removal of the Whittlesea City Council following the monitor’s report which raises a number of real concerns about the administration in Whittlesea. I would be optimistic that we can move this bill quickly through this place and head it off to the Council very soon after this government business program motion so they can also move that bill through their place and these arrangements can be in place ideally from the end of today.

It is disappointing that once again we have to consider one of these bills; there have been a couple in short succession. But I have appreciated the way on previous occasions the house has cooperated in dealing with these matters. I am optimistic that that remains in place for the Whittlesea bill.

We also have to deal today with the Local Government Bill 2019 that was returned from the Council with amendments. It is the government’s intention that that also be expedited through this place.

I now want to make some observations about how the remainder of the sitting week will work, because keen observers will have noted that the time for the government business program guillotine I have set in this motion is 3.00 pm on Thursday. That is consistent with the motion I endeavoured to move by leave—leave was rejected by the Liberal-Nationals coalition opposition—and also the motion that I intend to move first thing tomorrow morning and have debated in this place. Again, with at least the support of government MPs, I am optimistic that those arrangements will be in place for the balance of the week.

Can I thank members for the conversations I have had with the crossbench and the Greens members of Parliament. We have talked through the issues around why the government has moved in these quite unusual times, quite difficult times, to amend the operation of Parliament in this way. It is not something that we take lightly. The Premier declared, if I remember correctly, at 8 o’clock yesterday morning that Victoria would move into a state of emergency, ensuring that the government, through its various emergency management protocols, has the powers in place to enforce some really difficult decisions that are being made here and around the country and around the world based on the best medical advice. It is likely that this will change. The national cabinet is meeting later this evening. It is a really important forum, as we heard the Premier talk about during question time, where leaders around the country are coming together, getting the best advice and then looking at what needs to be put in place in their own local communities to respond to these really difficult issues we are working together on as a community.

Can I acknowledge the conversations that I have had with the Manager of Opposition Business, which have been cordial. It is no reflection on the Manager of Opposition Business to say that they have not been productive. They were cordial. There was an understanding, I felt, from the Manager of Opposition Business as to why the government was doing this. We made it very clear that we saw that the Parliament had as a priority the scrutiny of government, which is why the maintenance of question time is contained in the motion, and also a focus on legislation. As I have said, there are four bills on the program this week, and our focus has been to pass those four bills through this place and have the mechanism to hold the government to account.

Mr Angus: No rush!

Ms ALLAN: I take up that interjection that there is no rush. That shows a complete and utter failure to understand the extraordinary circumstance we are in, which is why the government is wanting to put in place very similar arrangements to what I believe is happening at the federal Parliament. The Prime Minister himself yesterday made it very clear to the Australian community that the federal Parliament is putting in place scaled-back arrangements, and they are doing so and working through these issues in a bipartisan way. Similarly, the Queensland Parliament are doing so. I am deeply disappointed that we have not been able to reach an amicable agreement on this matter. I had much higher hopes that now of all times we would be able to achieve this sort of bipartisan approach. I note that we have a pairs agreement in place and a quorum agreement in place, but sadly no agreement on how this house will operate this week.

Mr WELLS (Rowville) (13:20): The Liberal-Nationals opposition will be opposing the government business program, and let me set out why we will be opposing the government business program. In a time of crisis people expect leadership, and they expect leaders to stand up and lead and be accountable for their actions. Yesterday the Leader of the House said that the Premier had banned mass gatherings and non-essential meetings and announced certain measures to curtail the spread of the coronavirus. We understand that. And quite rightly, Parliament was exempt from that list of mass gatherings. People of Victoria expect Parliament to continue making decisions and leading, but to be accountable. So reducing the time of the sittings from an adjournment at 7 o’clock on a Wednesday and 5 o’clock on a Thursday to 3 o’clock on Wednesday and Thursday means that we are reducing the ability for the opposition to scrutinise the government.

It is interesting, I have to admit, that when the leader of government business was talking about and outlining what they expected to achieve this week, it was all about the government program. Not once did I hear the leader of government business refer to members statements. Members statements for the opposition are important for when we want to get up and talk about representing our electorates. On the issue of putting the axe through grievances, we have already had this situation. In the end the opposition agreed when we had the situation of the condolences for the bushfires and the condolences for former Premier John Cain that grievances on the Wednesday would not be addressed, and we lost that right to participate in the grievance debate. But now the government is wanting the same thing to take place, that there will be no grievances for this week.

When we are talking about accountability, it makes it really hard to believe what the government is saying when we are only going to focus on the four bills and the four pieces of legislation that they want to put forward, shut down the opposition in regard to the adjournment debate, shut down grievances and not even be able to raise members statements. It means that we are losing the ability to be able to keep the government to account. Democracy is grinding to a halt this week, and the government is using the coronavirus to cover up a whole heap of issues—

Ms Allan: On a point of order, Deputy Speaker, I would encourage you to ask the Manager of Opposition Business to come back to the government business program. In my contribution I did touch on the arrangements that I wanted in place for this week but I did not exclusively focus on that matter. I would suggest that you ask him to come back to addressing the issues that are on the government business program. I would also suggest that I am making this point of order in the hope of saving the Manager of Opposition Business from himself.

Mr WELLS: On the point of order, Deputy Speaker, the manager of government business referred to her own motion. Now, by doing that in regard to the government business program it allows those of us on this side to be able to refer to her motion, so I would ask you to rule her point of order out of order.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I do not uphold the point of order but I do ask the member for Rowville to speak directly to the government business program.

Mr WELLS: We will be opposing this government business program. We understand that it will come in as a motion for tomorrow, but at least today we will be able to follow the proper process of Parliament and be able to have our members statements, be able to debate and raise issues and be able to raise adjournment items on behalf of our electorates. As members of Parliament, that is what we are here to do—to do the work to represent our electorates, not see democracy shut down.

Mr CARBINES (Ivanhoe) (13:25): I am pleased to make a contribution in support of the government business program. Firstly, I would like to just start with the business of the house in relation to legislation this week. The Assisted Reproductive Treatment Amendment Bill 2020 is a bill that seeks to add further to much of the work that has been done by this Parliament and certainly this side of the house. In the past, as a member of the Law Reform Committee, I can say that there have been changes in legislation for all donor-conceived people and their access to information in this place. There has been some significant work done by the Parliament. There was significant work through election commitments made by our government directly from the Law Reform Committee recommendations previously, and the work of that cross-party committee was led by former member for Prahran Clem Newton-Brown. I look forward to further work and debate in relation to those matters. They are very important matters, particularly around not just some of the other commitments our government made at the last election but also in relation to the privacy and the ongoing availability of access to information for donor-conceived people.

As Parliamentary Secretary for Carers and Volunteers and Parliamentary Secretary for Health I am working with the Minister for Disability, Ageing and Carers particularly on the Disability Service Safeguards Amendment Bill 2020. Significant work has been done in that area of policy, and I look forward to discussion and debate on it.

The North East Link Bill 2020 of course is very significant in my community. It is a project that was affirmed overwhelmingly at the recent election right through that corridor with the member for Bundoora, the Speaker. It is very significant work we are doing every day with local communities to push that project and get it moving for the benefit of our communities.

Not only that but there are other bills listed, such as the Sentencing Amendment (Emergency Worker Harm) Bill 2020 and also the bill in relation to the Whittlesea local government area, which is to the north of my electorate in the northern suburbs. It is a very significant piece of work that we need to deal with. That is also most important.

Can I say also that I do support the motion of the Leader of the Government for which those opposite did not grant leave and which will be incorporated in the business program in relation to the changed arrangements for the Parliament for the next couple of days. Obviously there will be further debate on those matters tomorrow. We are already aware, through the work of the chief medical officer in Canberra and the discussions that are going on there, of the changed arrangements that have been put in place for that Parliament, which does not have to sit for another couple of weeks. We are also aware of the changed arrangements for the operation in this place today in relation to access to the Parliament for the public and non-essential staff.

Not only is this a workplace for parliamentarians but it is also a workplace for other staff of the Parliament, the staff of members of Parliament and the support staff that are required to be here and to set the tone and the example across the community by not only taking the advice of the chief health officer here in Victoria and the chief medical officer of the commonwealth but also to demonstrate to the community that not only are we dealing with a range of legislation and several bills in this sitting week but we are also providing the opportunity for our Parliament to demonstrate, to reflect and to set the example of how we want workplaces to be operating in the community. It is very important that we are in step with community attitudes, that we are leading from the front in relation to those matters and that we are taking advice on the way in which we should be proceeding.

I find it an outrageous slur that the Manager of Opposition Business tried to make the point, as he did, that somehow the government is trying to cover over matters in relation to COVID-19. That is an outrageous slur and not only says much more about those opposite and their lack of willingness to cooperate in the running of the Parliament in changed circumstances but it also goes very much to the nature of conservative parties who just have a lack of capacity to adapt to changed circumstances and changed situations or to demonstrate to local communities that the Parliament is not cast in stone, that the Parliament is able to be nimble and adapt and reflect changed practice in workplaces right across the state, right across the country and right across the world.

I commend the motion that has been incorporated in the government business program and that we will be debating in greater detail tomorrow. I commend the work of our government to make sure that we are acting on the best advice and in the best interests of both the Parliament and the people of Victoria and to reflect that in our policies and practice in this place. Those opposite stand condemned for opposing the government business program and opposing the changed circumstances and the best arrangements for the safety and the best interests of all Victorians.

Mr D O’BRIEN (Gippsland South) (13:30): I am pleased to say a few words on the government business program. I am disappointed in the member for Ivanhoe. He normally makes a bit of sense, but the member for Ivanhoe has just argued a completely illogical argument with respect to the suggestion that the Parliament needs to be curtailed this week, and we will have more to say about that tomorrow.

Among the bills that are on the agenda this week are some important pieces of legislation. Indeed I look forward to the debate on some of them, in particular the Assisted Reproductive Treatment Amendment Bill 2020—the issue with respect to police checks for people going through assisted reproductive treatment. I think it is a very important one to deal with, and I strongly support the intent of the legislation.

We have the Disability Service Safeguards Amendment Bill 2020, which again has some important aspects. It is a very small bill and has a very minor number of things to it.

The North East Link Bill 2020 is a decision of the government that we will have a debate on. Indeed the opposition would like the opportunity to go into consideration in detail on that particular piece of legislation given how significant this project is to the state budget and to the future of Victoria. But at the end of the day it is six years at least before there will be tolls on the North East Link, so this is not exactly urgent and pressing business.

Finally, on the Sentencing Amendment (Emergency Worker Harm) Bill 2020. I do not think anyone would oppose legislation that has the intent of trying to protect emergency workers from harm, but this is a particular area where the government has messed up several times already and this is an attempt, belatedly, to try to fix it.

The point I make on all of those is that none of them are particularly urgent this week. While I would be very happy in normal circumstances that we are debating them, there is no reason why we cannot do the usual business of Parliament. If we are to be here for a sitting of Parliament, then there is absolutely no reason that we cannot continue with all the other things that members of Parliament have the opportunity to address the chamber on. This is, after all, the people’s assembly. As one former member used to say to me, ‘Parliament is the pressure release valve for society’. It is not just about question time and not just about the opportunity for the opposition to ask questions of the executive. It is actually about the opportunity for elected members of Parliament to stand up and raise issues of concern to their electorate, and there are a number of ways we do that.

What the Leader of the Government has foreshadowed for tomorrow is to remove those opportunities for all members of Parliament, whether it is members of the opposition, whether it is the three members of the Greens, whether it is the three Independents, at least two of which are not here today, or whether it is government backbenchers. There are members statements, there are grievances, there are adjournments—these are all things where we take the opportunity. Unlike government members, who have direct access to ministers from day to day, those of us in opposition look forward to these opportunities. We cherish the chance we get to raise an adjournment matter, to raise a constituency question, and they should not be taken away lightly.

If the government thinks that we must reduce the length of the sittings, firstly, and I say this to the member for Ivanhoe for his comments before, show us the evidence or the advice from the chief medical officer that says we need to do so, because if there is such advice, why are we even sitting? If it is that important, then we should not be sitting. Secondly, if it is important to reduce the time that we are debating and sitting here in the chamber, let us have an agreement that we reduce the number of speakers on each bill. It would be quite simple to do one or two speakers on each bill, but instead, as we know, on government legislation we will have 20 government backbenchers get up and read the same government notes about the particular piece of legislation. The government members will all get their say, but those of us who really look forward to the opportunity to raise matters on behalf of our constituency will lose that opportunity.

So I foreshadow, as the Manager of Opposition Business has, and I look forward to the debate tomorrow on the motion that the Leader of the House has foreshadowed. It is a blatant and direct attempt to avoid scrutiny and to avoid allowing the Parliament to do its job of representing the people that we are elected to represent here. I am very happy to have the discussions on the other bills, but I see no reason whatsoever why the Parliament should not operate as normal, if it is to sit at all.

Ms THOMAS (Macedon) (13:35): I welcome the opportunity to speak on the very full government business program and to support the Leader of the House in her commonsense suggestions as to how we can, as one house, work to minimise the impact of coronavirus, not just of course on ourselves but importantly—as the member for Ivanhoe pointed out—on the many staff who are required to be here to support the running of the chamber and, unlike ourselves, do not have the opportunity to move in and out of the chamber but are on duty as their shifts require.

I also wanted to make a comment on the member for Gippsland East’s new-found enthusiasm for the parliamentary—

A member interjected.

Ms THOMAS: Gippsland South, I am sorry—the member for Gippsland South and his new-found enthusiasm for spending time in the chamber, perhaps on behalf of his colleagues. Because I well recall—unfortunately I cannot remember the exact day—when I was sitting in here recently for members statements and they did not even put enough people up to take their full opportunity to speak on members statements. Let us not also forget of course when we had the Gender Equality Bill 2020 being debated in this place. They had two speakers only, and indeed there have been many, many occasions on which the very minimum number of people—

Mr Blackwood: On a point of order, Deputy Speaker, this is about this week’s government business program. It is not about other bills that have been debated at other times, so I ask you to call the member back to today’s government business program.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I uphold the point of order. I do ask the member for Macedon to speak to the government business program.

Ms THOMAS: Thank you very much, Deputy Speaker. Can I just say: I look forward to more than usual numbers of members of the opposition participating in our debates this week. We have, as I said, a very full business program and one that I think really reflects so much of what the Andrews Labor government is about. We have the Assisted Reproductive Treatment Amendment Bill 2020. I really look forward to speaking on this bill later today. This is a bill that goes to removing current discriminatory clauses in that act, and that is very important.

The Disability Service Safeguards Amendment Bill 2020 is a bill that looks to protect the rights and interests of some of the most vulnerable members of our community. I know that there are so many in this house, but particularly on this side of the chamber, who are very passionate about the rights of people living with disability in our community, particularly at this very challenging time when the federal Liberal government is refusing to pass on the money that is needed to ensure that the national disability insurance scheme (NDIS) operates successfully in this state. Instead of that, they are using it to underwrite their surplus. We will see how that continues to travel for them. But I say to them: hands off the NDIS funding. Put it in the hands of people living with a disability as it was intended.

The North East Link Bill 2020 is yet one more of our signature infrastructure projects—the work that this government has done in delivering the much-needed infrastructure our community needs, and with that of course creating jobs. Never, I think, given the extraordinary times in which we find ourselves, have these job-creating projects of the Andrews Labor government been more important. Let there be no mistake: we are in for extremely challenging times, but I know that this is a government that will continue to lead and continue to ensure that we are delivering as much as we can the projects that will keep our economy going.

Of course there is the Sentencing Amendment (Emergency Worker Harm) Bill 2020. I listened to the crocodile tears of those on the other side in relation to our emergency services workers. As I did, I was looking at the member for Melton. The member for Melton will, I am sure, be speaking on this bill, and he will do so with relish.

Finally, we have a bill to dismiss the Whittlesea council. We must stand up for competent and accountable representation in local government. While I will not be speaking on that bill, I look forward to the contributions of others who are more connected with that council. It is an excellent government business program. I support the Leader of the House, and I commend this— (Time expired)

Mr BLACKWOOD (Narracan) (13:40): I stand as the deputy whip for this week, filling in for—

A member interjected.

Mr BLACKWOOD: Acting whip? Always acting.

I understand that the Manager of Opposition Business did request for us to go into consideration in detail on the North East Link Bill 2020, and that was denied—I believe denied in a very unceremonious fashion in terms of—

Members interjecting.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The member for Narracan, you have the call.

Mr BLACKWOOD: I guess that is one very important reason why we will be opposing this government business program. It is very important for us to be able to go into consideration in detail on important bills such as the North East Link Bill. There is a lot of concern about the North East Link. The impact that will have on the community out in the north-east is extensive, and going into consideration in detail is an opportunity for us to seek questions on how those impacts will be handled by the government.

We get to what has been proposed in terms of changes to the government business program for this coming week, and I get back to leadership and the importance of each of us being able to represent our communities when we come to this place. That is our primary role, and I really think that shortening the sessions tomorrow and Thursday is going to have serious impact on that. It will curtail opportunities for members to provide members statements, who in that context express concerns from their community about a whole range of things—not just coronavirus but other things that are of concern to the communities that they represent.

The grievances, for example—if we do not get to speak on the grievances. There are a number of issues as well as coronavirus that are impacting on our communities. I touch on a couple: the recent bushfires and the bushfire recovery. We need to ensure that we as members are able to articulate the concerns of our community through that process of bushfire recovery. The timber industry: the way that it is being treated at the moment, and the impending closure of that industry. There are enormous concerns—indeed there are even serious mental health issues—in that timber industry community because of what the government plans and because of the answers they cannot get in the short term. It is extremely important that we have that opportunity this week.

I guess the other bills on the program are of relevant importance, but I do not think that they are that important that they should be promoted as more important in terms of status than members statements, adjournment matters and the grievances debate. With those few words, I intend to oppose the government business program.

Ms SANDELL (Melbourne) (13:43): I will be very brief, but I just wanted to put on record that we have supported a lot of the government’s initiatives around increasing social distancing and dealing with the coronavirus—these are very, very important initiatives that the government has taken—but in this instance we will be opposing the government business program, primarily for the reason that we have consistently opposed the guillotine. Victoria is one of the only jurisdictions that still imposes a guillotine of this nature, and I just wanted to put it on record that that is the reason that we will be opposing it this week.

House divided on motion:

Motion agreed to.