Senator BIRMINGHAM (South Australia—Minister for Education and Training and Manager of Government Business in the Senate) (15:27): Well, listen to it: the feigned outrage from those opposite, the fake moral indignation of the Australian Labor Party. The PRESIDENT: Order! There's a point of order being raised by Senator Wong. Senator Wong: Mr President, I was standing absolutely in line of sight then. Senator Cameron was on his feet first. I agree that, if they'd stood together, the minister would have had the call. He absolutely stood first, and you ought to have called him. The PRESIDENT: Senator Wong, firstly, Senator Cameron stood while Senator Collins was still speaking, while I was calling Senator Collins to order. If you would like that to be the precedent for this place, there'll be a lot of people standing up. Secondly, I might say that, if a minister had not stood and I had called another member of the opposition, I think that would have been an unfair representation of what happens in these limited debates around the chamber, where managers and leaders are given precedence to represent the positions. Senator Wong: That's the case when people stand together. Mr President, I accept that your version of what you perceived was Senator Cameron standing earlier. I saw Senator Cameron on his feet well before Senator Birmingham, after Senator Collins had finished speaking. In those circumstances, the appropriate thing for you to do would have been to call him. The PRESIDENT: Senator Wong, I'm not going to be calling people who stand before the end of another speech lest it start a chain reaction in this chamber which I don't think would be productive for the operation of the chamber. Senator Jacinta Collins: Well, this isn't productive. The PRESIDENT: You're quite right that it's not productive, Senator Collins. Senator Cameron: There was one second on the clock when I stood. You are entitled to stand and seek the call. That's exactly what I did, and I was first on my feet. Senator Birmingham didn't even consider standing until I stood. The precedent is there. I stood properly and at the right time. The PRESIDENT: I thank you for admitting you stood while Senator Collins was still speaking. I'm going to call Senator Birmingham to continue and conclude this debate. Senator BIRMINGHAM: Indeed, the outrage and the indignation continues on so many levels, but of course it's the hypocrisy that strikes home time and time and time again when you listen to the arguments of the Labor Party on this. This is hypocrisy from the party who saw fit to apply a guillotine 188 times during their time in government, against the coalition, who have applied the same approach just four times in five years. Look at the scorecard of respect for the Australian Senate: 188 times over there, four times here when it's necessary and warranted. Why is it warranted? Senator Collins comes in and says: 'What's the urgency? What's the import?' The import is that these tax cuts matter to Australians. These tax cuts matter to a stronger economy. And what else is the import? The very long list of other legislation that senators right around this chamber expect to be dealt with. The PRESIDENT: Order! Senator Wong on a point of order? Senator Wong: To clarify: these are the tax cuts six years away—very urgent! The PRESIDENT: Please resume your seat. That was not a point of order. Senator Birmingham. Senator BIRMINGHAM: Of course, these tax cuts are a full package, much of which takes effect much sooner, and that's why you want to make sure that Australian businesses and Australian taxpayers have certainty. But it is not just certainty over the tax cuts; you also want to ensure they have certainty over other important reforms that come out of this year's budget, other important reforms that the government's brought legislation before this chamber for. We've seen that the Labor Party are happy to soak up time in this place to ensure that other business cannot be dealt with. Yes, we heard the Labor Party say, 'Well, we gave additional hours last night,' and yes they did. But what did we see during those additional hours? Twenty-minute speech after repetitive 20-minute speech from Labor Party senators, who would have happily kept on doing that as long as the window was available for them to do so. We see it time and time and time again. Senator Wong: Don't worry; you won't get it again. Senator BIRMINGHAM: And there we have Senator Wong come out with the threats. The PRESIDENT: Order! Senator Birmingham, please resume your seat. Senator Bilyk on a point of order? Senator Bilyk: Senator Simon Birmingham— Senator Wong interjecting— The PRESIDENT: Order, Senator Wong! One of your colleagues is on her feet trying to raise a point of order. Senator Bilyk: Senator Birmingham has absolutely misrepresented what happened last night. A number of us only spoke for about 10 minutes. The PRESIDENT: That is not a point of order, Senator Bilyk; it's a matter of debate. Senator Birmingham. Senator BIRMINGHAM: What we see now is of course that, once they do the indignation and the hyperventilation, the Labor Party move on to the threats. They threaten the government, they threaten the chamber and they threaten the crossbenchers. I trust that the Senate crossbenchers, of course, will be better than that in terms of acknowledging— The PRESIDENT: Order! Senator Collins on a point of order. Senator Jacinta Collins: The minister is misleading the Senate. There have been no threats, and to suggest that senators have been threatened is out of order. The PRESIDENT: Senator Collins, that's not a point of order; it's a matter of language used in the chamber. Senator Wong interjecting— The PRESIDENT: Senator Wong, I'm trying to rule on your colleague's point of order from the chair. Can I conclude this ruling before you raise the next point of order? Senator Collins, I don't take that as a point of order. It's a matter of language used in the chamber. Senator Wong. Senator Wong: Mr President, I'm happy to respond to your admonishment, but I do think, if it's in response to a minister yelling at me, you might at least be even-handed about it. The PRESIDENT: Senator Wong, I like to think I am even-handed from the chair. You have been vocal today. I have respected the privilege normally granted to leaders. Senator Birmingham, please continue. Senator BIRMINGHAM: The simple message that everybody should take is: don't listen to Labor's bullying, don't listen to Labor's threats, don't listen to Labor's feigned outrage or moral indignation; look at Labor's hypocrisy. This party thought that it was okay in one week to do on 53 occasions what it now condemns the government for doing just once. This party thought that it was okay through its time in government to do on 188 occasions what it condemned the government for doing on four occasions. This is what was, as Senators Cormann and Fifield rightly pointed out, standard operating practice for the Labor Party in government, yet in opposition they rail against it. In the end we hope the tax cuts will deliver savings for Australians for years to come, for generations to come, setting in place a better, fairer tax system that addresses the problems of bracket creep. The Labor Party can go to the next election, if they want, promising to roll on taxes. 'Roll on new taxes' is what Labor's policy is going to be, but that's no justification to stand in the way of this Australian Senate, this year, at this moment in time, giving Australians better, fairer taxes, a tax cut that would create a better opportunity— Senator Wong: Then debate the bill. Have the courage to debate the bill. Senator BIRMINGHAM: And indeed, Senator Wong, debating it is what we have done. It is what we have been doing. Now is the time for decision, for action, to give Australians the tax cuts that they deserve. The PRESIDENT: The question is that the minister's motion to suspend standing orders be agreed to.