Kim Beazley (Brand, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Hansard source

Senator Ferguson said: ‘You don’t have to run two different campaigns, you don’t have to run two different organisations. When parties merge it does not mean the end of the party, it means the start of something new.’ The member for Blair said, ‘If we are to be competitive, if the good conservative people are to have the strength of representation that they expect, they need one strong political party to represent them.’ The member for Fisher said, ‘Look, I think this is a very positive initiative.’ The Minister for Health and Ageing said: ‘I am happy to see people in Queensland doing what is necessary to beat the state Labor government there. I am always pleased to see new Liberals. I love new Liberals.’ Doug Anthony said: ‘From my point of view it would be brilliant if it can be done quickly. The nation would be served by two major political parties.’ Larry Anthony said, ‘There is no doubt a united conservative party in Queensland would really challenge the supremacy of the state ALP.’

This has been an extraordinary time. This is a time when the National Party has finally declared itself irrelevant. Understand this was not an amalgamation; this was a surrender—this was a takeover. Here is the relevant section of the agreement between the relevant party officials:

Liberal Party of Australia Queensland division to remain and continue to be part of the Liberal Party of Australia with existing name, an amended constitution incorporating transitional provisions—

That refers to the proposed constitution; in other words, the Liberal Party is the proposed party. It continued:

National Party of Australia Queensland to become part of this organisation in accordance with the following process.

Then it goes through a series of approvals from various organisations. This is the National Party in Queensland saying: ‘We no longer exist. We are there for the Liberal Party and no-one else.’ Elsewhere it says:

Staff and assets of NPAQ and LPAQ, including intellectual property, such as livery and use of names ...

The intellectual property would be in a very small basket indeed—probably something like the 2c an hour that Annette Harris was offered. That would be the equivalent of the intellectual property. Under this agreement all that would pass over to the Liberal Party.

The essence of it is this: the National Party has ceased to consider itself an effective representative of regional Australia. Eighty-six years ago the National Party was created in order to contest the bush with the Labor Party. People may have forgotten this, but at the time the Labor Party actually held most of the bush seats. The Labor Party was strongly founded on the working men and women in regional and rural areas of Australia. It is no accident that many of the iconic sites, as far as Labor Party people are concerned, are all in regional Australia—Barcaldine is a good example.

The National Party, then called the Country Party, was put in place to contest the bush with the Labor Party. After 86 years the con job has finally come to an end. The con job is now completely exposed, as the National Party has surrendered every position that matters to ordinary workers in regional Australia. Its members surrendered palpably on Telstra. They surrendered despite the fact that there was barely a person in regional Australia who did not absolutely comprehend that, for them to be guaranteed the services they need, Telstra had to remain in public hands. And they totally surrendered on these industrial relations propositions.

As we go around the country now, we see the Spotlight case in Coffs Harbour, but we also see the meatworks in Cowra. We see people having to compete with foreign workers and losing their apprenticeships and jobs in Ballarat. We see the affairs at an abattoir in Naracoorte. We go around regional and rural Australia and we see examples of the first assault of that termite-like undermining of the industrial conditions of this nation. The National Party guaranteed the passage of that legislation.

Of course, what does this mean for people in rural and regional Australia? These people do not have choices. I do not think workers get choices in many places anyway, but they certainly do not get many choices in the country towns of this nation. When a Spotlight store in one of those rural centres says to a person coming into town, ‘You take this AWA,’ it means that that person would have to undermine every other worker in that shop and threaten them with a $90-a-week wage cut. If that worker does not take that AWA, it is likely to be the only job they would find on offer in that town. Therefore at that point they would determine to leave. It is as simple as that.

You can take that through to apprenticeships. It is unbelievably difficult to get an apprenticeship in any industrial centre outside the main metropolitan areas. It is possible, but it is incredibly difficult. It is difficult to get a kid in the bush a chance at an apprenticeship, let alone a university degree or anything else—very difficult. So what does the government do after it puts in place its industrial legislation? It brings in this idea of foreign apprentices coming in. Where are they going to be located first? In regional Australia—in the bush. So what little chance the kid had goes forever, as the employer in the bush is invited to bring on at half price an apprentice from overseas. I simply cannot believe that the National Party sits in this place and permits these things to go on.

You can see it too in the trashing of universities in this country and how extraordinarily difficult it now is for kids to get an opportunity to educate themselves in regional Australia. The government do not care. The seriousness of the situation even goes to nation building—once you move away from those little bits and pieces that encourage a National Party member to stick a plaque up somewhere in his constituency so he can pretend to be working. When it comes to something serious which will determine whether or not anyone with any decent progressive business, such as Telstra, invests in the bush again, we respond in the Australian Labor Party. We say, ‘We have a plan for high-speed broadband connection across Australia which we know, if put in place’—and it is affordable with the slush funds handed out to the National Party, and thank God not yet spent by them, for little penny-packet stuff—‘would actually create an opportunity for employment in regional Australia.’ But they do not care.

All that they and the Deputy Prime Minister care about now is sustaining themselves in office. The Queensland section thought they had a cunning plan for sustaining themselves in office to become Liberals. I tell you what our cunning plan is: to expose The Nationals in every regional area in Australia with positive alternatives to their propositions, which really do serve ordinary people in this country. We will start this century off where we started the last century off—as the party of regional Australia. We are on their side. We think about them, not about us. We think if they put in, they ought to get something decent back. That is what we think, and we are going to pursue The Nationals and their hypocrisy to the next election. (Time expired)

See this speech in context