Mr FITZGIBBON (Hunter) (17:04): I have nothing but the greatest respect for the member for Kennedy. Over 24 years in this place, and before that in the Queensland parliament, he has been a great champion for the people of north central Queensland and, indeed, all of that state and, indeed, all of the country. I should say that, throughout the course of the sugar debate—which I think is what this motion is largely about—it is only the member for Kennedy who has serious conversations with me as the opposition spokesperson. It is only the member for Kennedy who has been lobbying me on behalf of canegrowers. I have not heard from One Nation and I certainly have not heard from Minister Joyce or anyone representing the government. There has been no greater fighter for Queensland canegrowers than the member for Kennedy. But the opposition will not be supporting the suspension, because we cannot support the motion in these terms. I am not sure what has brought this unusual motion on at this unusual time, but I have no doubt that more than anything else it is about the current debate in the sugar industry and this particular report, which the minister for agriculture finally released this week. He received in November. It was his initiative—one of the initiatives of his white paper—but having received it in November, he snuck it out only this week without any response whatsoever. Why is that so? Having commissioned the report, the minister now finds that the commission has been broadly critical of just about everything he has done in agriculture. It is pretty voluminous; there is a lot of reading in there and a lot to learn about how Minister Joyce has made a mess of his portfolio. Of course, we now learn through the newspapers that, having wrecked the joint, Minister Joyce plans to flee the portfolio and leave it for someone else to clean up the mess. This report is specifically critical of Minister Joyce's intervention in the sugar market. Indeed, this report is critical of the Queensland LNP's intervention in the sugar market. This report says that the Queensland legislation is flawed and a re-regulation of the sugar industry in Queensland, or anywhere in this country, will be a bad thing for growers, millers, people who work in those mills and the broader Australian economy and, therefore, a bad thing for the broader Australian community. The Productivity Commission— The SPEAKER: The member for Hunter will resume his seat. The member for Kennedy, on a point of order. Mr Katter: It is just a reasonable request that I am putting in, that you say whether you are for arbitration or whether you are for a monopoly. That is all I am asking you. Mr FITZGIBBON: I am very happy to answer that in one moment. The Productivity Commission is not always right. No-one is arguing that it is, but we want evidence-based policy in this place, and it is the pre-eminent adviser and the body that gives guidance on microeconomic policy, including regulation. I will answer the member for Kennedy's question. I am against precipitous compulsory arbitration without notice or without consultation. In an attempt to grab back the initiative from One Nation Queensland and having had the Treasurer say on Monday that the Queensland dispute is all fixed—the Treasurer has fixed it; it is in hand; it will just take another couple of weeks to cross the t's and dot the i's—last night, the Minister for Agriculture, no less the Deputy Prime Minister, and the Treasurer walked out to the cameras and said, 'We are going to have a sugar code. We are going to have a code of conduct under the Trade Practices Act in the sugar sector.' There was no code released, no consultation undertaken, no speaking with the millers, no speaking with the growers; we are just going to have a code of conduct. Extraordinarily, we learned today, confirmed by no less than the Minister for agriculture on Sky News only an hour or so ago, that this code of conduct will go to executive council without being seen by anyone in this place or in the other place, and without being seen by the millers, the growers or any member of the Australian community. There are two precedents being set here: this will be the first mandatory code of conduct containing compulsory arbitration; and this will certainly be the first code of conduct to go to executive council without any consultation with anyone, sight unseen. This is extraordinary and will send a chilling breeze through the business community right across this country. Every sector tonight, as we speak, will be asking themselves: is this how this government works; are we now going to have mandatory codes of conduct with compulsory arbitration without any consultation or warning? This is economic vandalism at its worst. Those who will be hit most will be the growers of Queensland.