address to parliament - BUSINESS - Rearrangement

I'm very disappointed and I'm very disillusioned. When Labor came to office in May 2022 it promised to be accountable and transparent, and yet we have seen the opposite occur. It started when Labor didn't allow all the members in this place to talk on the Appropriation Bill (No. 1). That was the first time I can recall that that particular debate had been gagged, guillotined and cut short. We have another case here today. This is why the suspension of standing orders motion moved by the member for Bradfield—the Leader of Opposition Business—is so important and needs to be treated as such.

When you have a motion such as this put forward by a leading Liberal member of the parliament and seconded by a teal, the member for Wentworth, you know just how important and unusual it is. That's why standing orders need to be suspended and the amendments, very carefully and thoughtfully put forward by the member for Bradfield, need to be considered. It's not for us, it's not for politicking and it's certainly not to support the member for Wentworth's cause for re-election or ours. It's for the people of Australia—the public, the business owners, the workers.

Australians need to have this legislation and these amendments considered in a far better fashion than what we've seen today. It's been unedifying and unfortunate. Standing orders need to be suspended because the government's handling of the legislative process with respect to its so-called closing loopholes bills has been mismanaged badly. The opposition are not going to just stand by and allow this to happen in a fashion whereby the issues and concerns that we bring forward responsibly, on behalf of Australian taxpayers and Australian businesses, are just washed away.

Let me remind members about the origins of these amendments. Members would recall that the first time the House considered a form of these amendments was in September last year when the bill was originally introduced. That bill was hundreds and hundreds of pages long. We've had less than 24 hours to consider legislation that's already had—and will have with these further amendments—a ripple effect across Australian workplaces and the economy, even if you just look at what the Senate was proposing and what the Greens were putting forward regarding the right to disconnect between workers and employers.

Whilst this debate was going on in the House of Representatives, a private member's bill pushing, promoting, advocating and encouraging it was put forward by a Labor member in the Federation Chamber. We heard the member for Lalor talking about how teachers don't deserve to be phoned at 9.30 at night by the team leader. To my way of thinking, team leaders are not employers, as such, and this goes to the nub of just how difficult, complex and far-reaching this legislation could indeed go. Team leaders are not responsible for the wages of teachers. Yes, they are at middle management level and they are important. Whilst I appreciate that teachers do a very hard job, it's not just a nine to 3.30 job. My daughter, Georgina, is a schoolteacher and I know how hard she works. The member for Lalor, in using that example, forgot to mention that it's actually principals who have the responsibility for employment at their schools.

This legislation is very complicated. The member for Bradfield has brought forward very good amendments. That is why standing orders need to be suspended and why the member for Wentworth has seconded a coalition motion to suspend standing orders. That, in itself, should say everything about this legislation and everything about how important these amendments are. When you get the teals and the coalition agreeing, then it really is important.