Mr BRADFORD (4.23 p.m.) —I appreciate having the opportunity to make a few—

Mr O'Keefe —I am glad there is no pressure on the time!

Mr BRADFORD —As the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Transport and Communications observes, we might all be punished by the Leader of the House (Mr Beazley) for taking up time now. I am cognisant of that fact, and I will be brief, but I could not let the opportunity to speak pass. I have entered into debates in this House on many occasions and with considerable enthusiasm.

Mr Cleeland —Riveting!

Mr BRADFORD —That might be overstating it, but I have certainly been enthusiastic. When I was elected to this House I thought that debate was an important part of the job. It has only taken me three years to learn that in many ways this place is treated as a joke. The joking and laughing that are going on over on the other side of the House makes that fact very clear.

  This is a very serious matter indeed. I do not want to come back here next week, but I take the view that I have been elected to come here to do a job which entails giving proper consideration to matters put before us. A large number of matters have been put before us today which are to be subjected to the guillotine. I do not know whether any one matter is ultimately more important than another. I personally take a great deal of interest in matters concerning veterans affairs, and that is one matter that is listed. What concerns me is that when the guillotine has been applied on previous occasions there have been consequential delays in enacting the legislation. To think that decisions can be made and votes taken without any debate at all is absolutely disgraceful, and that has happened on occasions. It has also often occurred that proper consideration has not been given to matters and we have had to come back at another time to correct the problem that we have created. There are numerous examples that I can cite of such unintended consequences.

  If the Leader of the House gets the chance, I would like him to justify what is going on here. I feel that the honourable member for Brisbane (Mr Bevis) takes this place seriously, and I respect him for that. Perhaps he will not acquiesce to this sort of activity. He has said on more than one occasion that we should be able to debate things properly. This House of the Parliament is what represents democracy to the people of Australia. Perhaps the people do not know what I have learnt over the past three years: that the proceedings of this House are a farce. I object to that. I am paid to come here to do a job. The guillotining of these Bills precludes me from carrying out my responsibilities. The people of Australia should be aware that it is the Government that has created that situation.

  As I have said, for the people watching and listening to the proceedings of this House, this House represents democracy. I say to them that it does not. What we are witnessing today shows that the Government treats democracy with contempt and treats it as a farce. I ask the Leader of the House to give a reason—a reason that we can take back to our constituents—that explains why the Government is preventing us from properly doing the jobs we are elected to do and, perhaps more importantly, paid to do. If I am not here to debate and take part in the process properly, what am I here to do? Will the Leader of the House answer that question for me? I do not ask that question facetiously. I seriously challenge the Leader of the House to answer it.

  Ultimately, we could dispense with the proceedings in this place, and perhaps that is what the Government intends. We could sit outside and the Government could go on its merry way. It might yet come to the point where, by way of protest, I will stay away. Why should I participate in such a farce? Why should I acquiesce to the contempt in which the Government holds this process?

  As I said, I do not want to come back next week. While I am not going overseas, there are other things to which I could attend. However, because I am paid to do a job I would happily come back next week to do the job properly. I am prepared to do that, as are all honourable members on this side of the House. Why is the Government not prepared to do so? I ask the honourable member for Brisbane, because we often participate in debates, how he views this process. How does he justify this process? The Government shows by what it is doing today—as the honourable member for Bennelong and the honourable member for O'Connor (Mr Tuckey) have both said—that it has contempt for the process. But it goes beyond that: it shows how little consideration the Government has for propriety, for convention or for tradition. It wants to change everything. It is no wonder that the people of Australia are concerned about the Government's agenda. The Prime Minister (Mr Keating) would like to be not only president but also dictator. The people of Australia should be very concerned about anything he proposes. Those opposite should tell me why we cannot debate important matters—whether it concerns veterans affairs or wool—otherwise, they should change their minds and do the decent thing by the people of Australia.