Senator ARBIB (New South Wales—Assistant Treasurer, Minister for Small Business, Minister for Sport and Manager of Government Business in the Senate) (17:07): I have to say this is a disappointing end to the sitting week. I am not surprised, given that sniping from opposition senators has typified the sitting period. Opposition senators apparently think it is more useful to use the chamber to snipe at other senators than to use their time to develop and detail alternative policies for the nation. As ever, there are no plans, no policies, no alternatives that the opposition Liberal and National parties are prepared to discuss. Really they should be in here outlining their ideas for managing the Australian economy, making the country more productive and helping Australian workers, families, pensioners, farmers and small businesses. But alas, that is too much to hope for. The government has been consistently clear on this issue: the Senate should not become a Star Chamber. The government has been consistent in its view that it will not use Senate motions to condemn individuals, the public, members of the House or other senators. The use of motions as tactics to personally attack or name senators is completely inappropriate. There are proper procedures to deal with any matters which may arise regarding the behaviour of senators. If we are to be respected as a chamber, we must respect the processes of the chamber. There are processes in place that should be used, and the Senate should always provide procedural fairness. The Senate is not and should not be the place to examine a senator's individual behaviour as has happened in motions such as those we have seen in the last two days for general business debate. There should be no room for undermining the processes of the Senate or indulging in personal attacks. It reflects poorly on the opposition and, more importantly, it reflects poorly on the chamber and all senators. The government will not be addressing the substance of the issue raised in Senator Cash's motion today, nor will we partake in such ad hoc debate in the future. I am disappointed that during this week established processes have been tested. In my opinion and in the opinion of the government the Senate has wasted its time on personal attacks. This should not be a place of duelling motions attacking individual senators. This is a chamber for considered review of legislation. I know I am quite new to the position of Manager of Government Business, but I had expected that the element of cooperation for reaching the best outcomes for the Australian community would be more typical of Senate debate. Senator Brandis: If you mean what you say, will you chastise Senator Conroy? Senator ARBIB: Let me be clear: the government believes there are established and well-tested methods for dealing with the conduct of senators, and Senator Brandis knows them quite well. It is our intention to support these processes and we will support the rulings of the President in relation to matters of determining precedence on any privilege motions. The position of President will continue to be respected by the government. The position of President is an inherently difficult one—we all know that—and we will continue to support the duties he exercises with proper process and fairness. I remind the chamber that, as the President said yesterday, a determination of whether a matter requires precedence is in no way a reflection on, or a preliminary assessment of, the facts. It is for the Senate as a whole, not the President, to determine whether matters should be referred to the Privileges Committee. As I have already said, general business should be about discussing matters of substance. This chamber should have a high standard of debate on issues and challenges facing this country. Debating quotes out of context, and senators spending time settling scores and pursuing minor personal arguments, should not become the standard of debate in this place. The government has a significant agenda of reform. During a period when the world faces ongoing insecurity about economic stability, the government is determined to keep our economy strong, create new jobs, invest in our country and make our economy more productive. The opposition unfortunately rejected most of those policies last year and we have seen that typified in the debates this week. We have all heard their noes, but what are the opposition's answers? What plans do coalition senators have for this country? We await their policies. I am sure that senators opposite do have views and do have ideas. Why do they not use the opportunities in this place to argue for their alternative vision? Even I am not so jaded that I assume opposition senators have no ideas and just want to indulge in petty squabbles. Now is the time to outline for the country your policies to make this a better place and to improve the quality of life of our people. Use the time; end the squabbles. These are the critical issues challenging the country. These are the critical issues that should be debated in this chamber. The government will not support the motion and will not support any motions like these in the future.