Senator WONG (South Australia—Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) (17:45): This is the second time today the government has sought to up-end the Senate's rules. On the first sitting day of the new Senate, they sought to up-end the rules so they could bring on debate a week early. For all the huffing and puffing, and for all the chest-beating—I saw Senator Fifield thumping the table in an act of great strength—what we are talking about is the government demanding that the Senate overturn its own rules and suspend standing orders simply so the government can debate the bills a week early. Let us recall: the Labor Party previously did not agree with the proposition that this bill be put off forever. We did not agree with the proposition that this bill be put off for months. We agreed with a very simple proposition, and I say to crossbench senators that it is a proposition which has served this Senate well: where a party or parties, or a senator or senators, want a bill to go to a committee for a report, the convention—the default position—is that we agree to do so. That is because committee reports are key to ensuring there is good debate and good scrutiny of legislation before the chamber. It is the job the Senate is elected to do. The standing orders very sensibly provide that, if you do send a bill or bills to a committee for a report, the bills not be debated until after the date that the Senate has set for that report—which, in this case, is 14 July. Senator Fifield: They can report early! Senator WONG: I will take the interjection from Senator Fifield. He says they want to report early. No—a majority of government senators have worked out that the government wants the debate on and have slammed through an early report. That does not change the operation of the standing orders, which require that further consideration of a bill referred to a standing or select committee shall be an order of the day where a day is fixed for the report of the committee that day—in other words, next week. The only reason we are having this debate, for the second time today, about up-ending the rules of the Senate is that the government wants to have a debate on the first day as opposed to a debate next week, when, let us be frank, senators will have had a far better opportunity to consider the committee report and the new senators—the crossbenchers—will have had an opportunity to settle into their job rather than being asked to vote on their first day. We all know what the politics of this are. This is about the government wanting to talk about something other than the budget. They do not want to talk about the things for which they clearly do not have a mandate. There is a lot of talk in this chamber about mandates. Where is the mandate for this budget? Where is the mandate for a tax on the sick? Where is the mandate for a cut to pensions? Where is the mandate for a cut to hospitals and the closure of hospital beds? Where is the mandate for the fuel excise et cetera? I assume the government has had discussions and is likely to get majority support for the up-ending of standing orders. I would also say this to senators on the crossbench: the standing orders protect all senators, and particularly senators who are in a minority, against the oppressive behaviour of those who have the majority in this place. That is what they do: they ensure that every senator can do their job. They ensure that just having the numbers in this chamber does not mean you can ride roughshod over Senate processes, the scrutiny of legislation and the work of committees. Senator Seselja: That is how a suspension works! Senator WONG: Do you know why you are shouting? Because you do not like the truth. That is why you are shouting and interjecting. Senator Seselja: You're the only one who is shouting! You're the one who's upset! The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Order! Senator Wong, ignore the interjections and address your comments to the chair. Senator WONG: Those opposite do not like the truth. The standing orders are there to protect the role of the Senate and the rights of every senator to initiate inquiries and refer bills to committee. They are there to ensure that the government cannot override the key role of the Senate in scrutinising legislation simply because the government of the day might be able to cobble together a majority. I say to crossbench senators: it is unfortunate that a suspension of standing orders is something you are being asked to vote on, on your first day. I say to you: these standing orders will protect you. I may not agree with many of the views some of the crossbench have, but what I do agree with is ensuring that this Senate functions as the Australian people expect it to, which is as a chamber that properly scrutinises legislation. That is what Labor will continue to vote for.