Senator COOK(4.49 p.m.) —When we adjourned this debate last night there had been a suggestion, by way of an observation made in the chamber by Senator Harradine, about the amendment that had just been lost on the voices. It was the amendment I had moved concerning the discretion of the Prime Minister to refer the opposition's policies for costing to the Treasury and/or Department of Finance, my amendment being for that discretion to be curtailed so that the Leader of the Opposition would be able to directly approach the departmental secretaries.

Following the defeat of that amendment, Senator Harradine made an observation, which is set out in Hansard, that there may be a way of resolving the issue in dispute; namely, that the Prime Minister should not exercise discretion over what parts—whether whole or some part—of an opposition policy should be referred. If the opposition wanted its policy referred then all of those policies should be referred, and it would be inappropriate for the Prime Minister to pry into the detail of opposition policy before it was referred. The timing of the reference was also a matter of some crucial significance.

Senator Harradine suggested that some provision may be able to be worked up and agreed to that would mean the appearance of things would be maintained and the Prime Minister's ability to interfere would be put beyond question—that is, he would not interfere. That would require some automatic transmission by him so that the convention that the Prime Minister directs the Public Service, even in the caretaker phase of government, could be protected. The goal that the opposition was seeking could then also be met.

Since that suggestion was made we have been busily working on a form of words. We believe we have got there, but we have not had the opportunity to disclose it widely at this stage. We wish to do so privately to the government, to the minor parties and to Senator Harradine now that we believe we have the right set of words that captures the spirit of the chamber last night. We hope to do that in order to speed through the issue of debate rather than have an argument about it here, because there was, I thought, a willingness on behalf of everyone to act in that manner.

I understand that the government's position, as articulated by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer, Senator Ian Campbell, is that they would be prepared to look at this but that—I think these were his words to Senator Harradine—they would not artificially inflate Senator Harradine's hopes. He said that there was no other guarantee to do anything about it. Generally, it was a bleak observation from the government in terms of a hopeful outcome. But I took him to be prudent in those circumstances and trust that what we have drafted might even meet the rigorous and somewhat defensive mood of the government on this occasion. I make that as an explanation.

I understand that the amendment has been circulated. It seems to me to be therefore appropriate to suggest that we proceed to other amendments and come back to this so that there is a chance for the matter to be properly considered at some leisure. I object to matters being sprung on me at the last moment, and I am sure that everyone else does too. I thought leaving this aside and coming back to it before we complete the committee stage would be a reasonable way to proceed. Having made that explanation, I want an indication as to whether or not that is agreed to so that I can move to my next amendments.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Senator Chapman) —Senator Cook, my understanding is that the amendment has not yet been circulated. It is being printed at the moment. So your suggestion is appropriate.