Senator HARRIS (7:30 PM) —I rise to indicate to the chamber that One Nation will also support Senator Harradine's amendment. In supporting it, I would also like to raise the issue that, in relation to a person possibly being victimised for being a conscientious objector, the government has said that this could be covered by bringing a different bill into this chamber and moving amendments to it. This raises an interesting situation, because we have seen consistently in this chamber that, when the government brings a substantive piece of legislation in, it brings in at the same time what are referred to as consequential amendments. Yet here we have a bill that not only has the potential to impact socially and morally on the fabric of our society but also has the ability, if passed in its present form, to victimise a conscientious objector to the use or provision of embryos for research. In the past, in the majority of instances, as well as bringing the primary bills into this chamber the government has brought in the consequential amendments. My question to the minister is this: why, in the face of such a substantive piece of legislation, has the government not indicated to this chamber the consequential amendments that it is willing to move and brought those into the chamber at the same time?