Senator WONG (South Australia—Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) (13:54): I seek leave to make a statement of between five and 10 minutes. The PRESIDENT: Leave is not granted, Senator Wong. Senator WONG: Pursuant to contingent notice of motion standing in my name, I move: That so much of standing orders be suspended as would prevent me from making such a statement. On the suspension of standing orders motion, Mr President, I want to be very clear what we are debating here and what we are about to do. The Senate is about to vote on amendments we have not even debated. The Senate is about to vote on amendments we have not actually debated—in fact, no-one in the parliament has debated them—because these amendments are not even the same as the ones which were rammed through the lower House. What has occurred is this: we have a deal that has been done in secret, behind closed doors, between the government, the Palmer United Party and other crossbench senators. Let me tell you what the crux of that deal is. To any Australians who may be listening, what has been traded off by the government is your superannuation. The government did not give anything. What the government did was put their hand in your pocket and took out your superannuation increases over the next seven years. That is what has occurred. This minister comes in here and says to the Senate: 'You've got to pass this now.' He talks about the importance of repealing the mining tax. Let everybody be clear: the mining tax repeal bill was passed previously by this Senate. What the government did not like was the amendments that senators attached to it. That is what the government did: they had already passed it but they did not like the amendments and so they brought it back. What have they done? They have now done a dirty deal, which means your superannuation will be frozen for seven years. Senator Back: What's wrong with that? Senator WONG: I will take the interjection from Senator Back, who is having a go at me. I am sure that all the workers from Western Australia will be most happy, Senator Back, that you want their wages to go down. You are telling them that you want their wages frozen. The PRESIDENT: Senator Back! Senator WONG: Go to the next election, Senator Back, and say: 'The Liberal Party stands for freezing your superannuation. Senator Ian Macdonald: I raise a point of order, Mr President. I understood this was a motion to suspend standing orders and I understand the purpose of the debate is to convince the Senate on why standing orders should be suspended. So far the speaker has not gone close to addressing that. I seek you advice, Mr President. It is clear that this is a breach of standing orders and, if the standing orders are not going to be pursued, why don't we get rid of them? Senator Moore: On the point of order, Mr President, it is clear that the Leader of the Opposition in this place is arguing that there needs to be a suspension of standing orders. She has put forward that this is an important issue; she has spoken about the necessity and the dire consequences of amendments which we had not seen. The Leader of the Opposition has identified that we have been asked to vote on a series of amendments that we have not seen. Not only have we not seen them, but the people in the community, who will be scrutinising what we have done in this place, have not seen them, either. It is not a false argument— The PRESIDENT: Thank you, Senator Moore. You are debating the point of order. On the point of order, Senator Macdonald, you are correct: it is a motion in relation to the suspension of standing orders, but the practice has been over many years that the debate can be wide-ranging and can touch upon the reasons for the suspension. The Leader of the Opposition is in order and she has the call. Senator WONG: I am very happy to go directly to the point. I always listen to Senator Macdonald—he is so interesting at the moment on these issues. I look forward to him telling Australians what he said in the party room when this deal was discussed there. I am assuming it did go to the party room; if it did not, I look forward to him explaining why it is that he can come in here and vote for this deal when he has not had the opportunity in his party room to put his view. Very simply, the reason for the suspension of standing orders is this: it is to enable debate. It is the only way we can actually get debate on the amendments, because the government has put a guillotine in place, and this Senate is unable to continue to debate the amendments which were dropped on us just a few hours ago. They are not small amendments; they are not minor amendments; they are amendments which tell eight million Australians that they have been traded off. They have been traded off in order for Mr Hockey to get a win. I tell you what—he really needs one, doesn't he? Eight million workers are paying for Mr Hockey's incompetent display over recent weeks. Eight million workers are paying for the fact that this Treasurer has so incompetently sold the budget and told Australians such gems of wisdom as 'poor people don't drive cars.' That is what eight million Australians are paying for—this government and this Treasurer want a political win. The PRESIDENT: Order! It being 2 pm, the debate is interrupted. Two o'clock is a hard marker in relation to the suspension of standing orders. The question is that the motion moved by the Leader of the Opposition, that standing orders be suspended, be agreed to. The PRESIDENT: As I commenced prior to 2.00 pm the putting of questions pursuant to order earlier today, I will now put the remaining questions. The question before the chair is that schedules 6 to 9, as amended, be agreed to. A division having been called— Senator Moore: Mr President, under standing order 195 I ask that the question be read in full so we can understand exactly what we are voting on at this stage. The PRESIDENT: I will ask the Clerk to read the question. The Clerk: The question before the chair is that schedules 6 to 9, as amended, be agreed to. The PRESIDENT: Order! Lock the doors. The question is that schedules 6 to 9, as amended, be agreed to. I have just been advised that the bells did not ring for one minute. Because Senator Moore took a point of order, the Clerk, rightly, did not ring the bells. I had assumed they had rung because the clock on the timer had run down. However, we will now ring them for one further minute, to make sure. The bells are ringing. Senator Moore: Mr President, as we had not had the bells rung at all and people had left, I submit that we should have them rung for four minutes. There has been a gap, and senators are very easily confused. The situation should be clear. The PRESIDENT: We will ring the bells for four minutes to make absolutely sure. The bells being rung—