Senator WATERS (Queensland—Leader of the Australian Greens in the Senate) (09:12): I thank you, President, and the Deputy President, for the leadership that you've shown in saying that this chamber will no longer tolerate, and that there is no place for, unparliamentary language or personal reflections and that people must take responsibility. I strongly endorse that approach. We are very pleased that Senator Hanson was forced to withdraw the racist language that she used. That is a strong statement of this chamber that racist language is not acceptable here or anywhere— The PRESIDENT: Order! Before I go to—and I'm not sure who jumped first. I'll give the call to Senator Colbeck. This is a very serious matter. Senator Cash interjecting— The PRESIDENT: Senator Cash, it doesn't require commentary. That's my whole point: it needs to be listened to in respectful silence. Senator Colbeck. Senator Colbeck: A point of order— Honourable senators interjecting— The PRESIDENT: Senator Colbeck, please resume your seat. Senators, we have just had a statement from myself, endorsed by Senator Birmingham and Senator Watt, about the need to be respectful. I've called for silence. That's what I expect. Senator Colbeck, please continue. Senator Colbeck: It's unfortunate that in this debate we are having about respectful language— Senator McKim interjecting— Senator Colbeck: It is a point of order. Thank you, Senator McKim—that we have a reflection on another senator made as a part of the debate. Honourable senators interjecting— The PRESIDENT: Order! Senator Colbeck: So, President, it would be useful if those speaking in this debate, which is about reflections on other senators and not reflecting on other senators, which has just occurred—I think that statement should be withdrawn. I'm not interested in political parties in this context; I'm interested in the operations of this place. An opposition senator interjecting— The PRESIDENT: Order! Sorry, Senator Colbeck; please resume your seat. This is really unhelpful. This is really unhelpful, particularly given the context of the debate. I'm asking senators: if you wish to make a contribution, stand and seek the call. The interjections across the chamber are disorderly. Senator Colbeck, did you finish your point of order? Senator Colbeck: The point is the language was a reflection on Senator Hanson. Whether we agree with Senator Hanson or not, it was a reflection on Senator Hanson. If this debate is going to be carried out in a reasonable manner, that sort of language should not be used and should be withdrawn. The PRESIDENT: Thank you, Senator Colbeck. Did you wish to make a separate point of order, Senator Roberts? Senator Roberts: Yes, I do. The PRESIDENT: I will come to you in a moment. I'll just come back to your point of order, Senator Colbeck. In a technical sense what Senator Waters said doesn't breach the standing orders, but you are correct: we are having a debate about unparliamentary language and the way that we refer to senators in this place, so it could be that a senator could take offence at the comments that Senator Waters made. I would ask Senator Waters to use that standing order that I have quoted and to refrain from using what could be construed as inflammatory language. I'm now going to go to Senator Roberts. Senator Roberts: Thank you, President. Your statement— An honourable senator: Is this a point of order? Senator Roberts: Yes, it is; it's a point of order. Senator Waters was maligning and impugning motive to Senator Hanson that was not true. Your statement this morning talked about unparliamentary language. Senator Waters raised 'racist'—there was nothing racist about what Senator Hanson said. I need to get her to withdraw. The PRESIDENT: Senator Roberts, in exactly the same way as I've asked Senator Waters to refrain from using language which could be offensive to other senators, that applies to you. You've stood on a point of order very similar to Senator Colbeck's, which I have addressed. I believe Senator Waters has the call. Senator WATERS: Thanks very much, President. I appreciate your ruling there. I specifically sought advice on what words were permissible to use that did not breach standing orders, and I stand by my remarks that are parliamentary and that are within standing orders—that the use of racist language is not appropriate in this chamber. It's not appropriate anywhere, but we need to be setting the standard in this chamber to help keep people safe out there. So I'm very pleased, President, that yourself and the Deputy President have made such a strong ruling this morning. I think it's appropriate and I'm very pleased that you've referenced clause 11 of the code of conduct, because that specifically, as I hope we all know, precludes discrimination in all of its forms by people in this chamber—and it will soon apply to Commonwealth workplaces everywhere as well. If we are to give meaning to those words, then accountability needs to flow. And so I'm pleased that Senator Hanson was forced to withdraw her racist language used against Senator Faruqi. I'm very disappointed that she didn't take the chance to apologise to Senator Faruqi, as she should have done, but there is still time. Honourable senators interjecting— The PRESIDENT: Senator Waters, please resume your seat. Once again, I remind senators of the need to listen in silence. If you want to make a contribution then seek the call, otherwise listen in silence. Senator Waters, please continue. Senator WATERS: Thanks, President. And just in relation to the matter that the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate raised about whether your withdrawal of the call was appropriate, there were four instances, President, where you asked Senator Hanson to withdraw and each time she backchatted and did not respect your request and defied your ruling. Our party believes it is entirely appropriate that the call was withdrawn, and the Procedure Committee may well look at this. When we finally have the enforcement body that will enforce the behaviour code—of which clause 11 says, 'Don't discriminate against people on the grounds of race, religion, gender or age'—there will be a range of sanctions, consequences that should and will apply to people, for racial discrimination, for sex discrimination, for discrimination of any kind, as is appropriate. That will include withdrawal of the call. It will include being forced to make an apology. It might even include being removed from positions that you might hold on committees—serious implications. That's what accountability looks like. That's why we need this behaviour code to be enforceable, not just something where we rely on the good faith of people to comply with it. That's why we need the Independent Parliamentary Standards Commission, which is overdue. It was due to be established last month. It's late. We are urging both of the large parties in this place to work collaboratively to get that independent commission up and running so that it's not up to us to stand up for our colleague when racist language is used to impugn her, so that that's actually a standard that we are all bound by that is independently enforced. Let's set the standard in this place for the rest of the nation, because people deserve to be safe and feel safe.