Senator DASTYARI (New South Wales) (16:17): I have fundamental issues with the legislation as it has been proposed. My issues with it stem from the fact that, frankly, from what I can see, what we have here is an electoral gerrymander masquerading as transparency and reform. It is a predetermined outcome with a model built and retrofitted to achieve that. Let's be clear: the coalition and the Greens got into bed together and asked, 'How do we wipe out the minor parties?' Then they built a model to achieve that. Then they created a set of arguments to justify that. If this was real, serious reform, if this was actually about what it purports to be about, we would not be having a one-week inquiry to look at the biggest changes in Senate voting structures since 1984. These would be the biggest changes in 31 years. I believe the Senate is a better place because of its diversity of views. I believe the Senate is a better place because there are so many different views being expressed here. A lot of them are views that I do not agree with. Someone like Senate Day and I have little to nothing in common when it comes to policy positions, but the fact that there is someone advocating positions that are different to my own I do not think weakens this institution. I believe it strengthens it. Fundamentally when you have this type of system, these kinds of changes mean—and let's not pussyfoot around this; let's be honest about what this is going to result in—there will be only three parties in this chamber and perhaps occasionally a Senator Xenophon. This is the behaviour of a bunch of schoolyard bullies getting to turn around and say what kids do and do not get to participate and who does and does not get to play. The hypocrisy of this coming from the Greens party is that it is a party that grew from being a very, very small minor party with a very, very small vote that over a period of time used this system to build its support. To turn around and try to shut the trapdoor behind them is, I think, deplorable. I think it is disgusting. I think it is a terrible development. If the Greens political party decides that it is going to spend the rest of its time being the lap-dog of the coalition parties that is a matter for it— Senator McKim interjecting— Senator Waters interjecting— Senator Rhiannon interjecting— Senator DASTYARI: No, on all the big legislation I have been involved with in the past year all I have seen, time after time, is this new coalition between the Greens, the Libs and the National Party. That is a matter for other political parties— Senator McKim interjecting— Senator Waters interjecting— Senator Rhiannon interjecting— The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT ( Senator Whish-Wilson ): Order! Senator Dastyari, just take your seat for a moment, please. I will remind the chamber that interjections are disorderly and that other senators will have their turn to talk shortly. Senator Dastyari, please continue. Senator DASTYARI: At the end of the day, what is it that we want to achieve in the Senate? I believe a more diverse and more open Senate with a range of different views is a better outcome. I believe that these proposals that have been put forward are going to result in a narrowing of the divergent views. The government wants this because it wants a more compliant Senate. That is what this is about achieving. It is not about transparency. If there were a more compliant Senate then what worries me is what would happen with a situation like the 2014 budget. A more compliant Senate would not be prepared to stand up to the government. A more compliant Senate would have fewer and fewer different voices. We as an institution are better and stronger because of the different views held here. This proposal will result in a giant exhaustion of up to one-quarter of the vote. Let us talk about what this proposal would actually do. This is the introduction of optional preferential voting. Senator Rhiannon interjecting— Senator DASTYARI: No, this is the introduction— The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Order! Senator Dastyari, please address the chair when you are speaking. Senator DASTYARI: This is the introduction of an optional preferential system, which will result in a massive exhaustion of votes. This is about making sure that the votes of those people who choose to vote for a minor party will go nowhere. That is what this proposal will result in—that is what the modelling itself says it will do. This is an electoral fix. This is a rort. This is a set of rules, a structure and a system that have been created with the sole purpose of wiping out a handful of crossbench senators and locking in a handful of Greens senators. This is bad policy, this is bad law and it is being done for the wrong reasons. If we are serious about electoral reform, why aren't we looking at how we can reform below-the-line voting? Why aren't we using a lengthier process? This has been rushed in for a double dissolution election and the Greens should be appalled. You should be appalled.