Senator SHOEBRIDGE (New South Wales) (12:36): Lack of consultation and lack of discussion—that's what the government says is the fault of this urgency motion seeking to discharge this bill. 'Lack of consultation and lack of discussion'—is there no sense of shame in the Labor Party? 'Lack of consultation and lack of discussion' is almost the definition of Defence Amendment (Defence Honours and Awards Appeals Tribunal) Bill. 'Lack of consultation and lack of discussion' is why the Labor Party are where they are at this moment in the Senate. They brought in legislation, in relation to veterans, which impacts deeply on the veterans community. You don't understand that until you sit there and listen to them. We've consulted with a series of veterans and veterans organisations, and this bill touches deeply on them. What they find utterly insulting is that this bill came without ever speaking to them. Then, the government here seeks to criticise this motion to wipe the bill off the papers because of a lack of consultation and a lack of discussion. I say this—through you, President—to the minister: I did meet with Minister Keogh in the last week, and I conveyed to him what I'm going to convey to the Senate now. This bill has no friends. Every single veterans community feels attacked by this bill. They were excluded from the consultation for this bill. I said to the minister, 'The sensible thing would be for the government to withdraw the bill.' The government hasn't withdrawn the bill. That's why this motion, co-sponsored by Senators Pocock and McKenzie and by myself on behalf of the Greens, is before the Senate now—because the government hasn't withdrawn a friendless bill. Every day that the bill remains on the papers—you ask why it's urgent, President—the veterans community feels insulted and attacked. They feel like the rights that they have for their family members—their grandfathers and their great-grandmas—to be recognised could be taken away. Every day this bill is on the Notice Paper, the veterans community feels insulted because they're being disrespected and ignored. I'm not going to pretend the government hasn't done good work for veterans. I've celebrated the work that the government has done in putting extra money into processing veterans' claims. I think the secretary is doing great work within the department trying to fix some of that claim stuff. The PRESIDENT: Senator Shoebridge, I bring you back to the suspension. Senator SHOEBRIDGE: I'll stop saying nice things about the government. But, with the history of that work—then coming in without talking to any of the key stakeholders and not even talking to the tribunal itself—how could they bring a bill that is amending the tribunal without getting the views of the tribunal? I invite those members who might be thinking to vote against this resolution to read the submission from the tribunal. The tribunal itself said that this bill is not only unnecessary; it's harmful for their work. In many ways, by bringing this motion up, we're actually doing the government a favour. It's a nice, clean, early kill to a bill which has no friends and which causes the Labor Party harm every day it's on the Notice Paper. Most of the time the work in the veteran space is multipartisan. We try and work it out to help the veterans community, because we all care about ensuring the outcome to help the veterans community, and this bill really stands out as being seriously against that flow. I say again that every minute it's on the Notice Paper it's causing actual harm in the veterans community. Let's get this urgency motion done. Let's get the motion adopted, and then, if there are significant issues—and they have yet to be ventilated through this bill—in how the tribunal works, work with the veterans community, talk through the issues and come forward with something which we can all agree on.