Robert Oakeshott (Lyne, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

Please listen—as happens with majority governments, we also have had a high number of bills that were withdrawn by the government and did not progress. We also have had government legislation amended on the floor of parliament and government ideas that, frankly, did not even make it to the floor of the House once conversations had occurred. All of these are important indications of a parliament that is alive and doing its job.

It is also instructive that 87 per cent of all government legislation has been bipartisan, with both the Labor Party and the Liberal and National parties in agreement. Importantly, this includes all three budgets from 2010 to 2013. Committee work is now at record highs, and adoption of recommendations from committee work is also at record highs. This is because of agreed reforms at the start of this parliament, and these reforms at a committee level have proven to be successful when not abused. I hope MPs value these changes for the better, even though it has meant more work. Hard work on the detail and being busy for the nation is, after all, what voters and taxpayers expect of us. Private members' business has also reached record levels. More than 300 private members' bills and motions have made their way to the House, more than 100 motions have been successful, seven private members' bill have become law and one private member's bill, the Bali bill, was voted down in another place despite passing the House. I am honoured to have sponsored two of those eight bills.

All of this backbench activity has at times been difficult for the Leader of the House and executive government, but I for one say, 'So what!' The parliament should be a house that welcomes all ideas and does not fear debate or a vote on the most contentious of ideas. It is a dead and dull den of executive command and control if we give up the important voice of the backbencher, and it will further separate government from the people if this important avenue of the people is lost.

The voice of the House of Representatives does matter and does often challenge the rhetoric and spin of the day. Look at the full passage of all three budgets from 2010 to 2013. Outside the parliament we hear of and read about a budget crisis, yet we see on the Hansard record, for the years to come, a House of Representatives which voted for all three budgets in this tight parliament, including budget 2013. We hear of and read about a politicised Treasury and Finance, yet only last week the full confidence of the House was expressed in Treasury and Finance. Full confidence was expressed in the apolitical job of Treasury forecasting and confidence was shown in the words of the Secretary of the Treasury that PEFO on budget day would have been no different in substance. The House itself has blown the rhetoric of some and blown the opinion commentary of others. Likewise, only a fortnight ago the House of Representatives expressed full confidence in the science of man-made climate change and that it is not a con or a conspiracy but a real and known threat to Australia that deserves a detailed and serious response. This is an important historical marker, to make sure the 44th Parliament and beyond continue to focus on best policy for the nation when dealing with this very real, acknowledged science advice.

To those in the community who think the 14 September ballot is somehow going to elect people who do not believe in climate change, or do not have a policy on climate change that costs taxpayers money, all I can say is that you have been successfully fooled or are indeed a fool. No-one in the centre of the public square denies the science and everyone in the centre of the public square has an economics policy in response to the science. This 43rd Parliament has made it and has delivered more than ever before.

To those who choose not to see, those who view their politics through the emotion of a personality or a leadership contest of some sort, and those who are so wedded to their party of choice that they opt to hate their parliament if their party does not control it, then frankly I question their loyalty to their nation. Since when has disrespecting a parliament rather than respecting a parliament been an act of loyalty? I would say never, so why now? Since when has disrespecting the office of a Prime Minister rather than respecting it been an act of loyalty? I would say never, so why now? And since when is reinventing an elector's vote, that they somehow got it wrong in 2010, anything other than a disrespectful, patronising disregard for our democracy. I would say it has never been so, so why now? Of course, none of these are acts of loyalty or respect at any level. They are the acts and views, in my view, of radicals.

I therefore, in conclusion, make a point about the future. There is talk again of rumours, formally or informally, of the stalking of Julia Gillard as commissioned Prime Minister. I am not going to buy into a personality contest and I am not going to buy into party politics. I will make decisions, as I have for the last three years, on policy. I have a full list of those policies for anyone who wants to see them but they are pretty well all on the table now. That will be decisions made by me. I have felt it a great honour to work with the commissioned Prime Minister on all of them. I would encourage the parliament to do the same. We have made it—I am pleased we have. Hopefully, after the ballot, in 2014 the 44th Parliament can do the same.

See this speech in context