Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade and International Security) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Deputy Prime Minister. I refer to his statement today that the government had moved quickly to address the current crisis confronting Australia’s hardworking wheat farmers and the Prime Minister’s statement just now that he had discharged all his responsibilities to protect the interests of those wheat farmers. Does the Deputy Prime Minister believe, to use his own words, that the government moved quickly to try and address any of the 15 warnings delivered to the government over the five-year period that this $300 million ‘wheat for weapons’ scandal ran—warnings in January 2000, March 2000, November 2000, March 2001, May 2002 and June 2003, right through to September 2004? Does the Deputy Prime Minister agree that, if he had actually moved quickly in response to any of these warnings, Australian farmers would not be facing the crisis they are currently facing?

Michael Danby (Melbourne Ports, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They can’t hear and you can’t read!

David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for Melbourne Ports is warned! Before calling the Deputy Prime Minister, I remind the member for Griffith that he should not be asking for an opinion. The Deputy Prime Minister is not obliged to answer the middle part of the question. I call the Deputy Prime Minister.

Mark Vaile (Lyne, National Party, Minister for Trade) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This is again part of the political scaremongering campaign that the member for Griffith is running on this issue to progress his own leadership aspirations. He has been in the media all the time talking about how he has still got the baton in the knapsack. He continues to say that—

Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade and International Security) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Under any interpretation of the standing orders, how could that be possibly relevant to the question that has just been asked about the warnings on the ‘wheat for weapons’ scandal?

Tony Abbott (Warringah, Liberal Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I raise a point of order. Points of order are being used clearly by members opposite to completely corrupt this question time and to prevent ministers from quite properly answering the questions that they are asked. I really do think that, if the order of the House is to be maintained, these points of order need to be curtailed.

Kim Beazley (Brand, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, on the point of order: we have, as an opposition, an opportunity in question time to deal with the issue of relevance. Quite clearly, the Deputy Prime Minister has decided on a strategy of bluster.

David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The Leader of the House will resume his seat. I will rule on the previous two points of order. The Deputy Prime Minister has only just begun to answer his question. I think it is reasonable to give him time to get to the question. He is therefore in order. I call the Deputy Prime Minister.

Mark Vaile (Lyne, National Party, Minister for Trade) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The core of the member for Griffith’s question was about how quickly the government moved to look after the interests of Australian wheat growers. Can I say that the government moved very quickly to assist the Volcker inquiry; the government moved very quickly to establish the Cole commission of inquiry, straight after Volcker reported; and, when the news came out about the Iraqi market this week, the government moved very quickly to look after the interests of Australian wheat growers.