Andrew Wilkie (Denison, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

I just want to put on the record my strong support for what the member for Mayo is trying to achieve here, which is to make the penalties much harsher. I agree with the member for Melbourne: the penalties should be much harsher. Let us put this in perspective. If someone—anyone; a member of parliament, a business, a welfare recipient—if anyone knowingly and deliberately takes a sum of money from the Commonwealth—steals a sum of money, effectively—whether it be a few hundred dollars or a few thousand dollars, that is theft. That should be regarded as a criminal matter. For some reason, we have this idea that if an MP effectively steals a sum of money from the taxpayer, then we might shame them and we might ask them to pay back a little bit extra as a fine, but otherwise it is okay. How would we treat someone who tried to defraud Centrelink of a thousand dollars? The police would go after them, and put them in front of a judge. What would we do if a business tried to defraud the Commonwealth for $1,000? The police would go after them and we would try and drag them in front of a judge in a court. There is no reason for this exemption for members of parliament—that they should pay some paltry little fine, and maybe get a slap on the wrist, and maybe named and shamed.

No wonder the community is sick and tired—they have absolutely had it up to here—with politics and politicians and most of the political parties. Because they think that we have got our snouts in the trough. And they think that we think we are above the law. And how can you blame them for thinking that—when we think it is okay, when the government thinks it is okay, when the opposition thinks it is okay, to have some token penalty for what amounts to theft? If a member of parliament trips around this country and, on that trip, does what any reasonable person would say is substantively a private matter, and then they sign a form to say it was for official purposes, then that is theft. That is a criminal matter. The police should be called in.

Regrettably, I am not surprised at this half-baked approach by the government and the opposition when it comes to penalties, because all of the evidence is that the government and the opposition have been dragged kicking and screaming to this day—kicking and screaming. The fact is that when former Speaker Bronwyn Bishop got into strife over the use of a helicopter and other matters—and there was an inquiry into that—there were something like 36 recommendations. It was early last year that the government announced that those recommendations would be implemented. And here we are, a year later, and they have not been implemented, and the only reason the government is moving now is because of the political pressure as a result of the former health minister. I make the point again: the government and the opposition have been dragged kicking and screaming to this point. Neither side is beyond fault here—the Labor Party: you were in government for years, you did not do anything; the Liberals and Nationals: you are now in government, and it was only the former health minister's scandal that forced you to act. What I would like to see done is exactly what the member for Melbourne has foreshadowed—that is, much tougher penalties.

How dare the government and the opposition come in here and say they will not support the sensible amendments from the member for Mayo? While I agree for the member for Melbourne—we should go much further, and it should be a criminal matter—how can you not bring yourself to support the member for Mayo's amendment? It really goes to demonstrate that you have been dragged kicking and screaming to this point in time, and that what you are doing is the bare—

See this speech in context