Mr HIBBINS (Prahran) (By leave) — I rise in support of the motion put forward by the opposition. We do believe that we should be having a joint sitting to fulfil what is required of us in the constitution. I think this is certainly — —
Mr Pakula interjected.
Mr HIBBINS — The government is seeking to conflate the suspension of the Leader of the Government in the upper house with the filling of this casual vacancy, and we believe it is wrong to do so. There is a different path it can take, which is to fulfil the requirements that are in the standing orders of the upper house. If they do not believe that they should be revealing these documents — I note that the grand prix contract is one of the documents requested — then they can seek arbitration, which is provided for in the standing orders of the upper house. If they are seeking to negotiate in regard to those provisions or seeking to change those provisions, my colleague in the upper house Sue Pennicuik has been requesting these documents for many years. She is awaiting your phone call, and she is more than willing to have a chat to you about this matter, so I will put that as a better course of action, rather than this course of action, which is essentially trashing the constitution.