Gary Gray (Brand, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Regional Development and Northern Australia) Share this | Hansard source

I am once again surprised by the dross that gets presented as matters of public importance. Those opposite usually bring forward a matter that looks like an all-purpose resolution from a Young Liberals conference. It is usually a life support system for a sound bite and not much more than that, but today it is simply extraordinary. I have been around politics and public policy for long enough to remember some incidents of importance: mortgage brokers in Western Australia, people who went broke, taking with them families, seniors, investors—decent people, many of them in my electorate. The shadow Treasurer’s political party did nothing to support them, nothing to back them, nothing even to rein in the minister, her friend, who at the time was responsible for mortgage brokers. After that, we walked into HIH. I come to the conclusion that, when those members opposite stand up and talk about prudential regulation and the matters that are so important to managing the current global financial crisis, those listening to our broadcast should not listen to them. Why shouldn’t they listen to them? Because when it came to HIH and even to appointments to the Reserve Bank—the most significant of the prudential advisory bodies to any Australian government—both HIH and the Reserve Bank had one common thread for those opposite: they were full of donors to the Liberal Party. What do we mean by that? We mean those opposite appointed Liberal Party donors to the Reserve Bank, believing somehow they were attending to the prudential affairs of the Liberal Party, not to our nation.

It was a disgrace, and those opposite know that it was a disgrace. It brought our nation into disrepute and it framed those opposite, as they should be framed, as low-rent seekers of nothing more than pockets full of votes who were filling their own pockets with donations from grubby individuals seeking nothing more than their own personal advancement. Those opposite have worked very hard to create as much instability and uncertainty as they can in our financial and banking systems. What do you think that other nation states around the world have done as they have grappled to understand the current financial crisis? What do you think the oppositions have done in countries around the world that are trying to deal with this issue? They have not acted as those opposite have—not even in the US, where this problem started, where the cost is measured in the tens of billions or even the trillions, where families find themselves out of jobs, where communities are finding themselves in pain and where there is currently a presidential election. Not even in the United States has anyone acted to undermine the banking system like those opposite attempt to do here today, did last week and did the week before that. It is not simply disgraceful. It is not simply shameful. It is, regretfully, acting true to form.

When this crisis began to unfold in Australia, we got the first offers of bipartisan support. Then we got undermined. As always, we see the Leader of the Opposition using the banking system merely as a life support system for sound bites and TV grabs. Why work to create as much instability as possible in our banking system? It is about political expediency. It is about political opportunity. It is about seeking to do as much as you can to damage the government; to damage the surplus, which you have been working at for the last four months now; to create uncertainty in the community—to create uncertainty amongst our retired community, amongst our age pensioners, amongst our retired services veterans, amongst small business and amongst self-funded retirees. And, as if farmers did not have it hard enough, your matter of public importance here today specifically references farmers. It is not just a disgrace; it is an embarrassment.

The Leader of the Opposition and shadow Treasurer are lawyers. They are used to mastering a brief without engaging in morality, ethics or propriety. They are lawyers; they prosecute their brief. They turned up in this place on the first day, I have no doubt, thinking they had all the integrity of Atticus Finch. No, they do not. They are just grubby politicians seeking a vote under whatever rock they can find it under by creating whatever nervousness and instability they can create in our banking system.

See this speech in context