House debates

Thursday, 21 March 2013

Business

Withdrawal

1:33 pm

Photo of Bob KatterBob Katter (Kennedy, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

But, in speaking to the motion, my position—once I could understand what was taking place here—was taken behind closed doors. Our decision was made behind a locked door. It was not made in conjunction or negotiation with the Liberal Party or the Labor Party. I most certainly spoke to all of those people; it would have been improper if I had not spoken to them. I spoke to the honourable opposition spokesman. I spoke to the people on the other side as well. But my decision was taken behind a locked door—and that was not to accept the Liberal Party position, which was to continue with a corporate lapdog called the Press Council.

If the honourable spokesman comes into this place and wants to look after the interests of the corporates, from which he comes—his own group and his own background—then I applaud him for at least being honest. But don't come in here and try and portray me as going along with the ALP proposition. The whole of the Australian public saw the ALP proposition as the Thought Police—let's be honest. So this mob wants a corporate lapdog, and this mob want a government attack dog. It would be nice if someone in this place thought that the people of Australia might have a watchdog to protect their interests. At all times I moved my own piece of legislation saying that the watchdog would be set up by an entirely independent body—nothing to do with government—and that body would have some teeth to stop media concentration.

The honourable spokesman for the opposition, let's face it, would have been talking to these people. He would already know the media concentrations that they are moving towards. That may be in the interests of the corporate classes in Sydney; it is most certainly not in the interests of any single person in this country outside the corporate interests in Sydney, which the honourable member obviously represents.

We put forward a proposition—and how could anyone think this was unreasonable?—that a panel be appointed by the Australian Press Council. They are entitled to some representation. Most certainly and importantly, the Australian journalists association are entitled to some representation. Then, finally, six of those positions would be selected by the Australian people, not by politicians but by people at a great distance. Who can you pick out in Australia to do that job who are respected? I think the people that decide upon the decorations—the people who give out the OAMs and the AMs—have done a marvellous job over the years. They are very much at distance from government. They have absolutely nothing to do with government. They have an independent appointment.

Comments

No comments