Tony Abbott (Warringah, Liberal Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Hansard source

What I am attempting to do is to explain some of the context in which this matter of public importance debate has taken place. There was a marvellous metaphor for the state of the contemporary ALP today. The Leader of the Opposition did not want to wait to be run over by the proverbial bus, he went to the Belconnen bus depot; but there were just two problems—there was no-one on his bus and his bus was going nowhere. This is the absolute metaphor for the Leader of the Opposition and for the contemporary Labor Party.

What we have seen from the member for Griffith is the old ‘Either you’re a fool or a knave’ thesis. ‘The government knew that AWB was giving kickbacks and it did nothing, in which case it was corrupt,’ or, ‘It should have known, in which case it was incompetent.’ I say again: does anyone seriously believe that a government that was contemplating military action against Saddam Hussein would have knowingly funded that regime or would not have investigated any accusations that it was so doing? There is no significant evidence, despite all the bluster and bluff that we have heard over the last two months from members opposite, that the government has been either knowingly complicit in corrupt conduct or negligent in its pursuit of any such conduct.

Let us go back to the period in question. Who were the AWB’s greatest cheerleaders? None other than members opposite. They put out press releases publicly congratulating the AWB for selling wheat to Iraq. Who were the greatest critics of the sanctions regime, the breach of which they now wax so indignantly about? Members opposite. They said that the sanctions regime was killing the Iraqi people.

Let us take the precise point that the member for Griffith has alleged today. The member for Griffith alleged that there is no power, as things stand, for the Cole inquiry to inquire into misdeeds by the Commonwealth. Let me quote paragraphs 7 and 8 of Commissioner Cole’s statement issued on 3 February:

7. It necessarily follows that the knowledge of the Commonwealth of any relevant facts is a matter to be addressed by this Inquiry, and is within the existing terms of reference in the Letters Patent.

I would suggest to the member for Griffith that, rather than forming an unholy alliance with his rival, the member for Lalor, he actually listen. Instead of this odd unity ticket that we see forming now on the opposition front bench, he should listen to the words of Commissioner Cole. Why is he scared of listening to Commissioner Cole? Why does he raise his hand in horror at hearing the words of Commissioner Cole thrown back at him? The statement continues:

8. That means that this inquiry will address and make findings regarding at least the following:

a.

the role of DFAT in the process of obtaining United Nations approval of AWB wheat contracts within the United Nations Oil-for-Food Programme;

b.

the knowledge of DFAT in relation to such contracts;

c.

what AWB told the Commonwealth, and in particular DFAT, relating to the Iraqi wheat contracts; and

d.

Whether the Commonwealth, and in particular DFAT, was informed of any knowledge AWB may be found to have had, regarding payments by AWB to Alia.

So the existing terms of reference allow Commissioner Cole, should he think such findings justified, to make critical findings of the Commonwealth, its agents and its agencies. That is what is clearly apparent from the commissioner’s statement of 3 February.

As I said, members opposite know that there is no foundation whatsoever in the charge that underlies this MPI. It is a complete smokescreen to hide the rancour that exists inside the Australian Labor Party right now. We all know that they are desperately hoping that the mounting leadership challenge will go away. I quote the member for Hotham in the Weekend Australian of 11 March:

I’m not saying you can’t have factions. I’m saying you can’t have leaders as dud as the current ones that are in control.

We have the former leader of the party claiming that the current leader of the party is a dud. That was Crean on Beazley. Then we have Beazley on Crean in response.

See this speech in context