Senator REYNOLDS (Western Australia) (15:19): I too rise to speak on this motion to take note of answers. For me, listening to question time today, it was the perfect demonstration yet again of why the Australian public is so disillusioned in all of us in this chamber. The questions from those opposite and what I have heard during this take note really highlight the divide between both sides of this chamber. First of all, Senator Pratt just said that not all views are equal. I have got to say, that again highlights the ideological difference between those opposite and those on this side. We on this side firmly believe that the views of all Australians matter, that they count, and not just those of the ideological left. All views count and that is absolutely replicated in our party room.

So not only am I happy to defend, along with my colleague Senator Fawcett, the process that we have gone through to date but I am actually very proud of it and I will tell you the reasons why. As we know, to do nothing on this critically important issue is not an option. Let’s have a look at the process. COAG commissioned a review on this critically important issue of energy security by none other than our Chief Scientist, Dr Alan Finkel, and there was no better to undertake this review. I commend him and his team for the production of this report. There are 50 critically important recommendations for all of us in our party rooms and in this chamber to discuss.

The report was delivered to COAG on Friday. On Tuesday this week, we had a brilliant brief by Minister Josh Frydenberg, who I commend for his work in this very challenging policy area. We had a great brief, a very comprehensive brief. My colleagues got together again later that afternoon after we had had an opportunity to digest some more of the report. Yes, it was discussed. Yes, it was robust but it was respectful and comprehensive. This is absolutely no different a process than we have in our party room all the time. Unlike those opposite, unlike Senator Pratt, we believe every single voice in our community counts, as Senator Fawcett said. We represent quite a broad church in our party room but that is a strength, not a weakness as those opposite seem to assert. We have had a great robust discussion on the report. The government no doubt will go away and look further into the issues that have been raised in the party room and come back to the party room in due course unlike those opposite, who clearly spent their party room time yesterday discussing all of these great zingers, all of these great insults they can throw our way—knuckle draggers, ideologues, those sorts of things.

Senator Moore: Socialists!

Senator REYNOLDS: Socialists? Absolutely, if the shoe fits! We on this side had a discussion of substance on security, affordability and reliability—the most important issue facing our nation at the moment—and on how we do all of that and still meet our emission reduction targets. Again, this was necessary because Labor and the Greens together with their ideological zealotry—words that have been used by those opposite—have actually made the power go out in South Australia. As Dr Finkel said, it has put us in a very precarious situation in energy security. That must be addressed.

While those opposite may not believe that every voice counts and may not have actually gone through and started to come up with substantive debating points, would it not be fabulous if tomorrow they actually came back into this chamber whether during in the MPI, question time or take note and actually started asking questions about the substance of the Finkel report? Bring questions about the recommendations for security, for affordability, for reliability, about meeting our international targets instead of throwing insults at us. How fabulous would that be for our democracy if those opposite actually came in and discussed the issues of substance rather than throw insults at us? But sadly, I am very confident that they will not do it. Those opposite will come in tomorrow and will repeat the same zingers and insults at those of us on this side rather than raise issues of policy. I think this country is all the worse for that lack of ability of those opposite to come in here and debate the issues and not try to debate the process. (Time expired)