Senator RONALDSON (5:43 PM) —Senator Wong was quite right that this is serious legislation, but she neglected—

Opposition senators interjecting—

Senator RONALDSON —If you want to interrupt in this debate, that is fine, but I will continue. What Senator Wong failed to tack onto her comment that it is serious legislation was that it is serious legislation addressing a serious issue. This debate has got to be in the context of (a) the serious legislation, which I acknowledge, and (b) the serious situation that we are facing.

Senator Carr —Have you got your serious face on? If you make this sort of speech, you have to have your serious face on.

Senator RONALDSON —I was not here to interrupt Senator Carr when he was speaking. Perhaps he can do me the favour of not interrupting me when I am discussing a piece of legislation that they are saying is extremely serious. At least indulge me on that.

Senator Kemp —Mr Acting Deputy President, I rise on a point of order. I sat here and listened to the wanderings of Senator Wong in this debate. She repeated herself endlessly and took up the time of the Senate, but she was heard in silence. The Senate extended her that courtesy, and I think it would be appropriate—if I may advise you, Mr Acting Deputy President—that you bring some order to the other side of the chamber so that my colleague can be heard.

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT (Senator Hutchins)—Yes. I ask Senator Carr in particular to allow Senator Ronaldson to speak uninterrupted.

Senator RONALDSON —Senator Wong interjected that there is not legislation. She is quite right, and I apologise for that. We are talking about the situation further down the track. But I repeat that this is serious legislation addressing a very, very serious issue facing this country. I think something has been lost in this debate today. With the greatest respect for some—not all—of those opposite, there was a level of self-indulgence that did not give this debate the gravity that it deserves. Really, what we are talking about today is a balance between the obligations we have as senators as to how we operate internally and the obligations we have to protect the public interest.

Senator Carr —Ahem.

Senator RONALDSON —I presume that cough was not in relation to my comments about protecting the public interest. We have the opportunity here for the week running from the end of October to 8 November, potentially, to discuss this legislation. The simple fact is that, right around this country, there are a number of jurisdictions who are looking at exactly the same things that the other place and the Senate are looking at in relation to the need to address an extraordinary threat to this country. The debate today is about an appropriate balance. It is a balance between the obligations of this place and our obligations to the public to protect the public interest. I think most people listening to this would agree that there is an obligation on the Senate, as Senator Hill has countenanced, to make sure there is the opportunity for a Senate committee to look at this.

But there is also the obligation on us to make sure that this legislation passes through not only this place but every other jurisdiction in this country to afford the Australian people a level of protection that they quite rightly demand. If we go to the Australian people and say, ‘Here is a choice between Senate process or the passage of this extremely important bit of legislation,’ I hazard a guess that the Australian people will opt for the passage of this piece of legislation as opposed to an extended Senate process.

What the government has done is to provide the opposition and the minor parties with the opportunity to take this to a committee to discuss what I acknowledge is a serious piece of legislation. That opportunity has been provided. But under no circumstance should any senator in this place put at risk the passage of this legislation.

Senator Bartlett —How do you know?

Senator RONALDSON —I will take the interjection from Senator Bartlett. I do not for one minute assume that he does not see the necessity for this legislation. If he does not believe this legislation is required then he stands condemned. What we are debating today is the balance between the public interest and the rights of the Senate. The decision that has been made by the government accords an opportunity for the Senate to abide by its processes but also provides the Australian people with the certainty that they require by the passage of this legislation.

This is a situation where the government has not just plucked out of the air some piece of legislation. This has been as a result of the most serious discussions at the highest level of the federal and the state governments. This is not a process that was driven by a government that had some philosophical desire to ram some bit of legislation through. This comes from discussions at the highest level between the Prime Minister and the premiers, with a general acknowledgment that this country is obligated to protect its citizens and will do so by way of passage of legislation not only federally but via the states. I ask those opposite to take a step back and consider: are you prepared to put the public interest at risk for the sake of an extension of the Senate going through its committee procedure? I think that, if you are honest with yourselves, you will protect the public interest, because your foremost responsibility in this place is not the protection of Senate procedures but the protection of the public interest. That is an obligation for every single one of us.

Senator Bob Brown interjecting—

Senator RONALDSON —Senator Brown, if you do not agree with that then I will remind a lot of people a lot of times over the coming months, and I am happy to do so. I do not believe that the number of people I know opposite are prepared to put the public interest ahead of the processes of this chamber. This chamber has the opportunity to have this matter considered by a Senate committee. There is up to a week for this to be discussed by a Senate committee. Our obligation is to balance both of those two imperatives. We are here as senators to protect the processes of government and the running of the country, yes, but we also have an obligation to protect those people who put us here.