Senator BELL (10.00 p.m.) —Provocative though Senator Kemp is, he has yet to see the result of fully intimidating somebody who is not easy to rile. The fact is that several speeches were made on this matter in the second reading debate. If Senator Kemp's interest is professed to be real and not just a series of the usual games he plays in this place, the lack of seriousness with which he approaches this matter can be illustrated by the lack of attention he pays to answers. I counted the times I actually answered one of Senator Kemp's previous questions. It was five, yet still we had the same garbage trotted out.

  On this occasion the answer has been given and I think it is quite clear. I indicated on behalf of the Democrats in relation to this proposition that, if this court is to be operated in the way described by the minister, we hope that he will take account of the need to operate such a court with a minimum of cost and procedural fuss and bother.

  In the negotiations which took place, in which I encouraged the minister in the formulation of this proposed legislation to consider various matters and also to consult with employer groups, one of the very important concessions that was made in response to the argument that was put by the Democrats, in line with that which I have just described—the need for a minimum of costs and procedural matters—was that judicial registrars will be established. We believe that judicial registrars will have the capacity to deliver more rapid and less costly access both to employer groups and to those who are aggrieved by what virtually are small claims.

  It is with that satisfaction that we understand the minister's true motive in establishing this special court; that is, to serve the purposes that Senator Harradine hinted at and also the purposes specifically outlined by the minister in his second reading speech. If Senator Kemp needs to come in here and adopt intimidatory language and make his usual set of vague assertions and inflammatory remarks just to get what has already been said said again, then I do not see any need to respond any further.