Senator WONG (South Australia—Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) (20:46): Senator Brandis described us as shameless, and what he has done is rocked up in here on the bill that has been on their agenda for years. It was the double disillusion trigger. All of a sudden, they come in and say, 'Bang, we want to get this voted on tonight because we've got the numbers.' It is pretty clear what has happened. The government believe they have got the numbers. They want to get this through tonight, so they are coming in here, without notice, to move a motion to require that the Senate sit until this bill is dealt with. You would have thought that, given how long this matter has been on the agenda, the government might have been able to get themselves into order to actually work out how it is that they are going to resolve the debate on this bill and how they are going to manage it. But, no, yet again what we have is disarray—the same sort of disarray we saw in the vote before. I do not know if others noticed, but the Nationals voted against the government. The Turnbull government split on the floor of the Senate. The Nationals voted with Senator Leyonhjelm. Where were the Nationals ministers? Where were the Nationals cabinet ministers? Were they here? I have to say— Senator Brandis: It was a mick. Senator WONG: It was a mick he says. That was very, very mediocre, Senator Brandis. We will have a bit more to say about mediocrity, I am sure, in the days ahead, as will your colleagues, but that is a different point. We saw the disarray from this government—the disarray which was government senators voting against the government's position, against the Prime Minister's position, in the few minutes before this motion came on. Nationals cabinet ministers were not even here to back in the Prime Minister's position. Now the Leader of the Government in the Senate walks in here, put down the motion and says: 'Guess what? We're going to be here all night if that's what it takes, because we've got the numbers.' Senator Brandis: I did not say that. Senator WONG: He says, 'I didn't say that.' What does this mean: 'The hours of meeting shall be 10 to adjournment and government business order of the day No. 1'—which is the registered organisations bill—'will be called on immediately and have precedence. The Senate shall adjourn after it has finally considered the bill listed above'? In order words, we have got the numbers, so we want to sit here until it is done. You could just own it, George. It is the exercise of numbers. But do not come in here at a later stage and tell the Australian Labor Party, when we want to resolve something—we want to bring something to a vote—that somehow that is an unreasonable thing. The government wants to finish the debate on this bill. It wants to ram it through tonight. It wants to get this bill resolved and it is clear that it does not want to have to deal with the set of amendments that Labor, and potentially the crossbench, are seeking to move. We are very clear about this. We do not believe the Senate ought be treated like this. We do not believe that the Senate ought be in the position where the Leader of the Government in the Senate comes in without notice and slaps down a— Senator Brandis interjecting— Senator WONG: You really are talking a lot. There is a quite a lot on Twitter about you at the moment, Senator Brandis. We could say some of the things that Liberal MPs are currently talking about. Quite privately, LNP MPs were fuming over the comments. 'George has been such a shining example of good government,' said one, on the condition of anonymity, but I digress. The point here is this: we had an orderly process for dealing with this piece of legislation—orderly to the point, I suppose, because the government finally actually listed it. But what we have is the Leader of the Government in the Senate coming in and slapping down a motion to enable this to be voted on tonight. This bill has been an example of this government's inability to manage its legislative program. This bill has been an example of a Prime Minister who goes out and demands a double disillusion, partly to clean out the crossbench—remember that was one of the reasons he used: to clean all the crossbench out. He said, 'This bill is so important, we are going to go to a double disillusion on it.' He gets a crossbench that he is not sure he can get the numbers on for this legislation. Then he refuses to list the legislation, despite the fact that this was the great fight that Malcolm Turnbull was going to have. This was the great economic reform—this legislation. He refuses to list it and now, finally, what we have is the government coming in and saying, 'We have to have the debate. We have to finalise it tonight, because we do not want the Senate to have tomorrow to debate it,' as would be normal. 'We want to finish it tonight, even if it takes all night.' That is no way to run a legislative agenda. (Time expired)