Lindsay Tanner (Melbourne, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Hansard source

At the first Labor caucus meeting after the election victory of the Rudd government, a rather sobering fact was pointed out, I think by the chairman of caucus, Daryl Melham, the member for Banks. That is that only about a dozen of us have been members of a Labor government in this place previously; only about a dozen of us who are members of this government in the House of Representatives were members of the former Labor government that lost office in 1996. It is a rather sobering thought that I am one of them.

I actually was here for the last term of the former Labor government—and it does have its benefits; it does have significant benefits. In particular, in the context of this debate, it has given me some good memories. It has brought back great memories of the great champions of parliamentary democracy that from time to time lurk within the ranks of the Liberal and National parties. Sadly, those champions of parliamentary accountability and democracy have been on the interchange bench for a while—for nearly 12 years.

But what is extraordinary is the recovery, the amazing transformation, that has occurred. As a result of one election outcome, they are now in opposition, and the champions of accountability, the champions of parliamentary democracy—who for so long have been so quiet and who for so long have had nothing to say about the question of the accountability of the executive to this parliament—have suddenly rediscovered their voice. It is indeed a great thing—the change that an election brings and the sudden realisation that the atrocities that they have committed in government can no longer be seen as a good thing because they no longer suit their political interests.

The champions of parliamentary democracy that we see here today are the same people who for the last 11 or 12 years have done everything possible to restrict and minimise the ability of this parliament to scrutinise and hold to account the executive. Why? Because they were the executive; they were the government. Suddenly we see a dramatic change in tempo, a dramatic change in mood and a dramatic change in position on issues because they no longer are the government.

I turn to the individual reforms. There are a number of quite significant reforms here, the most important of which is the creation of more sitting days. There is a five-day sitting week for the parliament, which entails more private members’ business for the parliament, more government business for the parliament and more debate on bills than has previously been seen in the parliament. There are a number of other changes, which have not been mentioned much—although they have been mentioned by the Leader of the House—but which are worthy of noting: a petitions committee, so that petitions from the community can actually be dealt with seriously in this parliament—

See this speech in context