House debates
Tuesday, 14 February 2012
Bills
Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2011-2012, Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2011-2012; Second Reading
7:00 pm
Harry Jenkins (Scullin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source
It is a pleasure to be able to take part in this appropriation debate. Can I say from the outset that the second reading amendment moved by the member for Goldstein, Andrew Robb, of course does not have my support and it actually gives us the clue to what the coalition sees as important. The member for Paterson in his contribution talked about the carbon tax and the fact that a coalition government, if elected, would repeal it. What a nonsense. What a silly statement from the coalition. I just remind them: if they think that they are going to repeal the carbon tax legislation they will not be able to do it before July 2014. So what they are telling us is that a piece of legislation will come into play in the middle of this year but they are going to say to Australian businesses, 'Live with the uncertainty for the next two years in doing your business.' What a nonsense. Even if a House of Representatives election was held on Saturday, the point is that they would not have the numbers in the Senate until the new Senate is elected and takes its place in mid-2014—and, even then, do they really expect to have control of the Senate?
I highlight this because of my concern about the level of debate that we have seen in this place since the last election. We have an opposition that cannot come to grips with living in a world where there is a minority government in this place that is getting on with the job, that is passing legislation and doing the job. The member for Goldstein's contribution as the lead speaker on the resumption of this appropriation debate was all about negatives, talking down the economy, absolutely distorting facts about the way in which this economy is in a very good state and the way in which this government does have a handle on the economic levers—and that can be seen in any fair critique. It is a waste of a half-hour contribution in this sort of debate for a senior member of the coalition to talk in the way in which the member for Goldstein spoke.
Before returning to the economy I wish to take the opportunity of this appropriation speech to talk about the work of this parliament. I think from time to time we have to remind ourselves that, no matter what people see through the prism of the argy-bargy of question time, there are very many things that take place around this parliament where there is a great degree of cooperation in the national interest. I picked up the December edition of About the House and it is replete with articles about the work of House committees that are very positive and that should make those that send us to this place have some confidence that we know we are here to work in the nation's interest. The member for Moreton mentions the front-page article 'Muddied waters: insurance without assurance'. And the member for Wright, as a Queenslander, understands that these are issues that in the aftermath of the Queensland floods are still on people's minds. It is up to us, through the opportunities that we get to debate and through the opportunities that we get to do good work on committees, to make sure that people know we see these things as being important. In About the House we have articles to do with the House environment committee's inquiry into boosting protection for the Antarctic and the audit of Australia's diplomatic service that one of these subcommittees of the joint foreign affairs, defence and trade committee is doing. There is a major article about the problems of flood insurance, previously identified in an earlier report, which have really come home to those who have suffered losses through the floods. I say to members that what we really need to do is see this type of work has been very important and something that we can say to people it is appropriate for the House to do.
The only other inquiry I wish to mention, because it is in the context of yesterday when we celebrated the fourth anniversary of the apology, is the House Indigenous affairs committee's inquiry into Indigenous languages. This is a very important inquiry because language is so important to Indigenous culture. It is the way in which the stories have gone down through time—the dreamtime stories, the association with place. So anything we as legislators can do to ensure Indigenous languages are a protected is important.
On this side I follow the member for Fraser in this debate. The member for Fraser has been celebrated as an acknowledged economist throughout the world. I am pleased to be able to enter into this debate. He made the valid point that the strength of the Australian economy is acknowledged throughout the world. Yet if you sit in this place and listen to question time and contributions to a debate like this, the coalition have not got it in them to acknowledge that. Instead we have silly stunts that try to emphasise things that are out in the media and say these are distractions to the government. If the government were as distracted as people believe, we would not be having the economic results that we see in Australia.
Mr Deputy Speaker, as you are so aware, the strength of the Australian economy was shown in our performance through the global financial crisis that became a global economic crisis. I refer to table 8.1 entitled 'Total Economic Growth' from the Parliamentary Library's monthly series that is now available as an e-table. I seek leave to have this table incorporated in Hansard. I spoke to the person on duty for the opposition previously and I hope that I am able to get leave.
No comments