Senator JACINTA COLLINS (Victoria—Manager of Government Business in the Senate and Parliamentary Secretary for School Education and Workplace Relations) (16:00): Pursuant to contingent notice of motion standing in the name of the Leader of the Government in the Senate, Senator Conroy, I move: That so much of standing orders be suspended as would prevent me moving a motion to provide for the consideration of a matter, namely a motion to give precedence to a motion to vary the hours of meeting a routine of business for Wednesday 20 March and Thursday 21 March. As senators will be aware there have been matters occurring in the House of Representatives, with respect to the broadcasting and related bills that the government is determined to progress in this week. The motion that was circulated will be amended to respond to Senator Fifield's concern with respect to progressing matters around the national apology for forced adoptions. The further motion will allow the Senate to express its position on these bills that were voted on in the other place this week. Senators would be aware that it is not unusual for such a motion to tightly order business of the Senate in the last few sitting days of a session. The issues contained in the bills have been widely canvassed and debated over quite some considerable time. The government reform follows extensive consultation and discussion. I recognise that the Senate has made good progress in considering legislation on the days that we have sat for the autumn sittings. Time-management motions by a government in the last weeks of a sitting are, as the opposition knows, not unusual. Governments of all persuasions are faced with the same options in managing their legislative program. I do not apologise for the use of the time management motion when the alternative is extended weeks and hours of sitting to grind through sometimes very repetitious contributions. Some senators, particularly those from the opposition, may not appreciate reasonable attempts to manage time. It is for the Senate to decide whether it supports diversity in the media and upholding press standards, and indeed others are also keen, across all parties, to move forward on the NDIS. I recommend the motion to the chamber. Senator FIFIELD: The motion that Senator Collins is foreshadowing seeks to do two things that should not be done: it seeks to guillotine debate on the National Disability Insurance Scheme. If there is any piece of legislation that has come before this chamber this year or even last year, where a spirit of bipartisanship should be at play, it is this piece of legislation. If there is any piece of legislation that deserves proper scrutiny, we all agree with the NDIS and we all support this legislation. But it is complex legislation and there is no reason it should not have the same scrutiny as any other piece of legislation. There is every reason why the 1,600 people who made submissions to the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee inquiry into the NDIS should have the opportunity to have many of the issues that they have raised ventilated in the committee stage of this bill. It is appalling that the NDIS legislation is going to be a victim of this government's media reform package. The other thing that should never happen—which was foreshadowed in the earlier motion that Senator Collins circulated and which she is now seeking to insert into the motion which we just passed—is having consideration of the package of media bills tied to the arrangements for the apology to those who were forcibly adopted. We had reached agreement around the chamber that the arrangements for Thursday would be agreed on a cooperative basis. We said that we would support a motion that outlined arrangements for Thursday that would facilitate the arrangement for the forced adoption apology. That was done by agreement. Yet, this afternoon we have sprung on the chamber, with no notice, a proposition by the government to run those two things together: the arrangements for the forced adoption, which we have agreed upon, and then to take advantage of our goodwill and cross party support for that change in arrangements, to try and use time in the afternoon for the media package of bills. That is appalling. I think anyone who is coming to Canberra for the apology for those who were forcibly adopted should be aware that this government has sought to sully their day. This government has sought to drag these tawdry bills, these appalling bills, these Orwellian media bills into a day that should be dedicated and focused on the apology to those Australians who were forcibly adopted. I thought that the government had a modicum of decency. I thought that the government had a modicum of good will. I thought that they were able to separate their nakedly partisan objectives in relation to the media package of bills today. But no, they could not help themselves—they are going to mire Thursday, they are going to mire that day, which is meant to be about the apology to those who were forcibly adopted. I cannot believe it, Mr President. Senator Collins knows better than to do this. I can only assume that those on the other side have directed that she take this action. We cannot support the debasement of tomorrow, which is meant to be a significant day for those Australians who have sought an apology. The apology is no small issue for those who were forcibly adopted. The media package of bills should not blight what is a very important day for those people. But I come back to where I started. What appals me more than anything is the proposed guillotine on the NDIS legislation. But we should not be surprised. We know that the government want to gag a free press, they want to gag debate on the NDIS, they want to gag debate on the media rules and, to that extent, I have to acknowledge they are being totally consistent.