Senator GALLAGHER (Australian Capital Territory—Minister for Finance, Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Women, Minister for Government Services and Manager of Government Business in the Senate) (12:28): I rise to make a couple of points, but, before I do, I'll respond to where Senator McKenzie ended. There isn't a government that's done more for veterans than this government has. There isn't a minister who has done more than Minister Keogh has in shepherding through the recommendations from the royal commission and ensuring that veterans get their entitlements, which is something that this government has done. That's meant that thousands of veterans have actually got the compensation that they were owed and that they weren't getting under the former government. I come back to the point. I had to respond to where you left it, Senator McKenzie. The PRESIDENT: I've got Senator McKenzie on a point of order. Senator McKenzie: It's on relevance to the suspension motion before the chamber. Could you draw the minister to the motion. The PRESIDENT: The minister has drawn herself to the suspension order. Senator GALLAGHER: I think it's right that the government is able to respond to the sledges that you just did in your contribution, Senator McKenzie. I've got a couple of points here. The government understand how the numbers work in the Senate, so we understand that this suspension will get up and that this bill will be discharged. I'll say a few things: (1) this is the first the government has heard of it. This is the first the minister has heard of it. So it's clear that Senator Pocock, Senator McKenzie and Senator Shoebridge did not have the courtesy to raise this with Minister Keogh— Senator McKenzie: This isn't the first time— The PRESIDENT: We're not in committee. Why are you on your feet? Senator McKenzie: The shadow minister has been raising this issue— The PRESIDENT: Senator McKenzie! You don't just stand and launch into a debate. You're either standing on a point of order or standing on something else. Senator Shoebridge? Senator Shoebridge: I have a point of order as to relevance, given your earlier rulings in relation to both my other colleagues. The PRESIDENT: I think that Minister Gallagher is being relevant to the suspension order. I will continue to listen closely. If the minister is not relevant, I will draw her to the suspension order. Senator GALLAGHER: It's relevant because we are suspending on a matter to discharge a bill that has not been raised with the minister by any of you. He's just told me. He said, 'This is the first I have heard of it.' This is why it is not urgent. That courtesy should've been extended to Minister Keogh. The PRESIDENT: Minister Gallagher, please resume your seat. Senator Shoebridge? Senator Shoebridge: A courtesy to a minister is not— The PRESIDENT: Senator Shoebridge, we are not in a debate! Senator Shoebridge: My point of order is to relevance. I again draw you to your earlier rulings to Senator McKenzie and Senator Pocock, and I ask that you address the same rulings to government speakers. The PRESIDENT: I am addressing the same ruling, and the minister is being relevant. Senator GALLAGHER: This motion wasn't even on the Notice Paper. The motion that you seek to discharge legislation—we just had formal motions. Why wasn't it put on the Notice Paper yesterday? Why are you having to suspend to put this on? You've had all week. You've had two weeks! An honourable senator interjecting— Senator GALLAGHER: No! You put it as a formal motion. Senator McKenzie: Because you denied leave! You denied leave. That's why we have to suspend! Senator GALLAGHER: What, because you didn't get it in on time? The PRESIDENT: Order! Minister Gallagher, please resume your seat— Senator McKenzie interjecting— The PRESIDENT: Senator McKenzie! This is not—this is the Senate chamber. It's not okay to be trying to engage in some debate. You are out of order. Minister, please continue. Senator GALLAGHER: The Senate has sat for eight days. This is day 8. It could have been put on the Notice Paper. The minister could have been afforded the opportunity to speak with people about it or indeed to withdraw the bill himself if he felt that that was the outcome that was going to be needed to be done. But there was no courtesy—no observing of how the Senate runs through formal motions. It's just a straight stunt pulled at the end of formal motions on the final sitting day without any courtesy to the minister and whilst a bill is before a committee. I've been in here long enough to have had lectures from a number of people in this place that, if a bill is before a committee, it's sacrosanct. That is, the inquiry is underway. The Senate voted on 20 October to extend the reporting date to 21 November. We haven't got to the reporting date. The government hasn't received the report of the committee. That report of the committee might have said, 'Discharge the bill from the Notice Paper,' and the government would have responded to the report. But the report hasn't even been written. It hasn't been delivered. I have sat here plenty of times and been given lectures about why bills before committee should be allowed to report—but not this one, after the Senate itself has voted to extend the reporting date. I understand how this is going to go today. But I am saying the standards here are unusual: the lack of consultation, the lack of discussion and the lack of opportunity for the minister to speak with any of the movers of this motion—Senator Pocock, Senator McKenzie or Senator Shoebridge—and to respond to your concerns on a matter that is currently before a committee which Senator Ciccone chairs and isn't due to report until 21 November. I would have thought—again, after we've just resolved one of the other issues in the Senate this week—that courtesy and convention matter. It just seems that that doesn't matter to most in this chamber. They can go and stand and pontificate about everyone else but when it comes to actually observing some of the conventions in this place—have a talk to a minister, for goodness's sake. Put it on the Notice Paper. Put a formal motion. Put a notice of motion on the Notice Paper. That is why you give notice that people have courtesy to actually understand and the opportunity to talk or amend or discuss or— Senator Henderson: Or shut down! Senator GALLAGHER: Well, no, Senator Henderson, we don't shut down. No-one has the numbers in this place. We all work together to deliver the outcome. This is an ambush without proper consideration of all parties who are involved, including the committee and including the Senate that voted to extend the reporting date to the 21st. That doesn't matter anymore. I urge people to think about that.