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

I seek leave to move a motion of censure against the government.

Leave not granted.

I move:

That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Warringah moving immediately:

That this House censures the Prime Minister for her failure to achieve anything of substance in 12 months of government after supplanting her predecessor on the basis that the government had lost its way when it is clear on any assessment that things have just gone from bad to worse.

Mr Speaker, I am seeking to move a motion of censure of this Prime Minister, and she is fleeing the chamber. Let me repeat my motion:

That this House censures the Prime Minister for her failure to achieve anything of substance in 12 months of government after supplanting her predecessor on the basis that the government had lost its way when it is clear on any assessment that things have just gone from bad to worse.

There is no more important step that an opposition could take than to move to censure this Prime Minister. This Prime Minister, rather than listen, has fled this chamber—no doubt for another Tim Tam and cup of tea in the Whip's office. It is one thing to gag the Australian people and it is one thing to muzzle her ministers, but she should not run away from this parliament.

Twelve months on, there is the ghost of a real Prime Minister hovering over this parliament—a real Prime Minister who was actually elected by a majority of the people and who was cut down by a politician who turned out to be very good at executing her party leader but hopeless at actually running the country. That is why this House should move a censure of this Prime Minister and that is why it is necessary to move to suspend standing orders to give us this opportunity.

What has been achieved in 12 months? What has the execution of the member for Griffith achieved? What has the political assassination of an elected Prime Minister achieved? We heard the Prime Minister today struggle and struggle and struggle to name any single measure of substance that had been achieved by this government. It is no wonder that members opposite look so downcast, so deflated, so lost, so flat and so defeated today, because they know that they conspired in the political assassination of an elected Prime Minister—for what? For a government that had lost its way 12 months ago and has just been going from bad to worse ever since and a country that is going from bad to worse because we have a Prime Minister who is both incompetent and utterly untrustworthy.

I do not say for a second that the former Prime Minister was a great Prime Minister, but at least we knew what the former Prime Minister stood for. Yes, he was dictatorial; yes, he was arrogant; yes, he was incompetent—but I tell you what: he had a few convictions and he had a few things that he believed in. He did believe in the 'moral challenge' of climate change. He did believe in the 'education revolution'. He did want to improve educational standards in our country. He did want to improve hospitals in our country. Sure, he did not do it very well. Yes, he blew the budget surplus that had been carefully accumulated over 12 years by his predecessor; yes, he rolled back important economic reforms—but at least he stood for something. All this Prime Minister stands for is herself and her ambition, and that is why she has been such an incompetent, untrustworthy and unworthy Prime Minister over this last 12 months.

When the Prime Minister said 12 months ago that the government had lost its way she nominated three things that she was going to fix. She was not just going to fix these things; she was going to get the whole country back on track. 'I have taken control', she said. Such brazen arrogance—'I have taken control, for precisely that purpose: to get the country back on track.' What has happened to this country and to this Prime Minister's promises in the last 12 months? She was going to sort out border protection, wasn't she? We know what has happened there. First of all, there was the East Timor solution that came to nothing. Then there was the Manus Island solution. I tell you: it helps if you actually speak to foreign governments before you announce things. It helps if you actually talk to the East Timorese government before you announce a processing centre there. It would help to actually get an agreement from the PNG government before announcing a processing centre on Manus Island. And it would help if there actually was a concluded agreement with Malaysia before you announced a people swap with this country.

Over all of this hangs the shadow of the former Prime Minister, the Minister for Foreign Affairs—the foreign minister who this Prime Minister refuses to involve in any of the serious difficulties now facing this country. This Prime Minister took away her predecessor's' job and now she will not let the foreign minister do his job and help her out of the jams that she has created for herself. Why won't she let the foreign minister sort out the Manus Island detention centre? Why won't she let the foreign minister do something about East Timor? Most of all, why won't she let the foreign minister fix up the unfolding disaster now threatening the whole of Northern Australia with the demise of the live cattle trade? We know what she was doing in there with the foreign minister a few days ago. It was not a polite chitchat over Tim Tams and tea. She was ordering the foreign minister to stay out of the live trade issue. She was banning the foreign minister from travelling to Indonesia to sort out this problem, because she could not bring herself to admit that the man she executed is actually a better politician than she is.

That is why it is necessary to move this suspension. That is why it is necessary that this Prime Minister be censured—because she has been a thoroughly incompetent and untrustworthy Prime Minister. The government had indeed lost its way 12 months ago, but it has got worse—every single day, every single week, every single month—since then, because this Prime Minister is just not up to the job.

Let us come to the Prime Minister's ultimate failure: her total failure to be honest with the Australian people about the carbon tax. We all know she executed her predecessor in part because he had mishandled climate change policy.

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! I gently remind the leader of the context of the suspension of standing and sessional orders.

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

It is necessary to suspend standing orders, Mr Speaker, because nothing is more important on this anniversary, on this day which the foreign minister himself has dubbed 'Assassination Day', than the discussion in this chamber of these important issues.

This is a Prime Minister who, having been dishonest with her predecessor, was then utterly dishonest with the Australian people at the last election. She said that there would be a people's convention on climate change. There is not. She said that there would be no carbon price until there was a deep and lasting consensus. There is not. She said, notoriously, 'There will be no carbon tax under the government I lead'. Having made that solemn commitment to the Australian people, what have we got? We have got a carbon tax.

This has been the most incompetent, the most deceptive, the most dishonest government in modern Australian history. I tell you what: some people say Gough Whitlam was bad and he was incompetent, but at least he never sold his soul to the Greens. He never deceived the Australian people the way this Prime Minister has. This Prime Minister will not even come into the chamber to face a censure motion. What is wrong with this Prime Minister that she will not come in and face the music in this parliament? What does this Prime Minister stand for? She does not stand for telling the truth. She does not stand for standing up for Australia's national interest. And she does not even stand for honesty in the face of the parliament. Shame on this Prime Minister. She should be censured. (Time expired)

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the motion seconded?

Warren Truss (Wide Bay, National Party, Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the motion for the suspension of standing and sessional orders so that this critical debate can occur on the eve of the anniversary of 'Assassination Day', the eve of the anniversary of 'Ascension Day' for the new Prime Minister. Surely, 12 months is an appropriate time for this House and for the Australian people to make a judgment about whether the right choice has been made.

I notice that a survey by Essential Media Communications published today tells us that the Australian people have made a decision about whether they think Australia is a better place since the ascension of this Prime Minister. A whopping 13 per cent of Australians think their country is better off for having had Julia Gillard as their Prime Minister—13 per cent. Fifty-one per cent say they are worse off. How could you come to any other judgment? The report card shows a gigantic F for fail for this Prime Minister. She has failed.

We are a year older, just deeper in debt, if I may misquote Tennessee Ford. A year older and deeper in debt by $50 billion. Every day she has been in office, another $100 million has had to be borrowed to pay for the excess of expenditure over what she has earned. Yet this government has not been short on raising taxes. There are always new ideas, new schemes, to take more money from the Australian people. The Australian people have had enough. The Prime Minister has burnt her own credibility. She has burnt the credibility of the Labor government with the people. Building the Education Revolution, the computers in schools, the boats and the new taxes are all burning holes in the wallets of the Australian people. And, of course, the Home Insulation Program is still burning down the houses. This is the record of this government: failure and burning down houses. This government has no understanding and no appreciation of the pain that it is inflicting on ordinary Australian people. Is it any wonder that they are angry?

The Prime Minister told us that she needed to replace the former Prime Minister because the previous government had lost its way. How many people now think that the government has found the right road under the new Prime Minister? No-one. Indeed, it has lost the compass. She could find the road to the Lodge, but that is about all. She has found no road forward. She has found no way of dealing with the significant issues that our country must address. This was supposed to be a year of delivery and decision. Remember the promises about the mining tax, the illegal boat arrivals and the climate action plan? All of them, one year on, are not resolved.

Look at the mining tax—what a debacle. She inherited this tax from her predecessor and said she would fix it. She had to rely on the Minister for Resources and Energy to try to stitch up a deal that let off all the big miners so they make little or no contribution but put a huge burden on those trying to develop new mines—the future of our country, those who will employ the Australians to keep our economy strong. The mining supertax has been a superdisaster.

Next it was the illegal boat arrivals. She was going to stop them. There have been 89 more boats—5,000 people. Remember the Prime Minister saying there would be no more onshore detention centres for asylum seekers? Within weeks there were three new ones opening up, and then all sorts of other solutions along the way. But now we have the master solution. Five thousand extra people is not enough. We are going to take five for every one that we give away. What sort of a solution is that to the problems?

Then there is the carbon tax—the carbon tax that was categorically ruled out twice. Earlier than that, she said there would be no carbon tax without a consensus. She has achieved a consensus. There is consensus on the carbon tax: we don't want it! Yet she will not listen to the people who surely ought to have the authority in matters like this.

So one year on, deeper in debt, more in trouble than ever before and with broken promises and a litany of disaster and failure, this Prime Minister has failed. She deserves to be censured and she should be censured today, on the anniversary of her ascension. (Time expired)

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am very pleased to once again be taking a suspension of standing orders by the Leader of the Opposition. I am pleased to be able to do it, but I am a bit disappointed about when I am doing it, because in the sweep that has gone around in the gallery from members of the opposition and members of the government, staff and, indeed, just members of the public, I tipped 2:58. It is beyond me how the Leader of the Opposition has allowed Play School to go ahead without its preamble every day. That was a great tweet yesterday about what time it was from someone who said, 'I think it will be 2:50 and I also think it will be the round window.' They will pick on Play School. I also think it will be the round window. I understand that maybe it was the round window yesterday when there was a bear in there.

But we know what we have opposite is a relentless, negative, political animal who is just engaged in negativity all the way every day, every week, every month and every year. We should not suspend standing orders because we should have the opportunity to ask questions in this House. The questions should be asked, of course, by members of the government and members of the opposition and crossbenchers. Today, members of the government asked questions about Afghanistan, the National Broadband Network, the economy, climate change, mental health and families. They asked questions about the achievements of this government and about the future agenda of this government.

What did those opposite do? They asked a series of questions, all of them out of order under standing order 100(c), that engaged in abuse and engaged in political stunts. We know that the Leader of the Opposition is all stunts and no ideas. He is all opposition and no leader. Remember that on Monday at 10 am he was coming in here to move his bill for the best stunt that he has come up with in terms of its going down in flames everywhere. The fact is that we are now at Thursday, we are nearing the end of the session of this financial year and it still has not been moved. He has not even attempted to move it. All that puff and all those page 1 stories amounted to absolutely nothing, because he could not get past the first hurdle that was that really difficult question he was asked, which was: how will you respond to the result of the plebiscite? It was a real toughie. They workshopped it through, but he just could not bring himself to say yes to anything, because this is someone who is all division and no vision—he is simply engaged in stunts.

The vuvuzela will make an appearance—do not worry about that. The fact is that he has had his staff members writing to members of industry saying things like this:

I hope you are well. I was wondering if any of your members would be happy to host Mr Abbott for a site visit [with media]?

He has been out there writing not that they have any policy concerns with the government—it is more than one; there is a series of them from the office of the Leader of the Opposition—but:

In addition, as we discussed, Mr Abbott is keen to continue to visit industry across Australia as part of his program. We are always keen to add to our list of potential visit locations. Thank you for the opportunity to meet today.

What we have here is members of industry who are meeting with the opposition—and who are getting follow-up emails about site visits with the media—and who regard his tactics with such contempt that they are giving those emails to the government to put out there. That is how pathetic it is. He is just trawling Australia looking for cheap stunts. He is not looking for policy input and he is not looking for policy ideas—he is not interested in any of the big issues.

We have had the visit to Canberra of the failed Liberal Party candidate and we have had the head of the Warringah Club, his chief fundraiser. They are on page 1 of the Australian this week calling for a return to Work Choices, calling for the rights of workers to be ripped out. We know that they are engaged in this massive battle with Peter Reith, who wants to come back to set them straight because he thinks they have gone a bit soft and they should actually tell people that they want to do Work Choices rather than do it after the election.

An article by Tom Arup published in 2010 entitled '"Mad monk" meets Monckton' spoke about the famous meeting between Lord Monckton and those opposite. We know, of course, that Lord Monckton overnight has been exposed with his great plan to expose the world government conspiracy that is climate change and that Professor Garnaut, who is one of Australia's most respected former public servants—

A government member: What did they call him? A Labor Party hack.

The member for Mackellar calls Professor Garnaut a Labor Party hack. That is better than the Leader of the Nationals, who thinks that anyone who believes in action on climate change is a communist, as he said when I was responding to my question in parliament earlier today.

We know that you can always learn a lot about someone by the company they keep. That was something that I was taught as I was growing up. Tony Abbott, the Leader of the Opposition, will be there next week with Lord Monckton, associating himself yet again with these extreme views that someone is an econazi because they believe in climate change, because they believe that climate change is human induced—a complete joke. Meanwhile, we are getting on with our agenda—the agenda of the economy, the agenda that has created 700,000 jobs, the agenda that is bringing the budget back to surplus by 2012-13 and the agenda that today of all days has made such an important advance for the National Broadband Network. We are putting in place critical reform. We have brought in the legislation for the structural separation of Telstra, we have got it through the parliament and we have engaged in negotiations with Telstra and Optus in the interests of the nation. But those opposite cannot even bring themselves to support that.

In education we are engaged with the national curriculum, almost doubling investment. We are engaged in the trade training centres and the skills increases that are out there. We are engaged in national health reform with the GP superclinics and the mental health package that we made space for in the budget. In the work that we have done on infrastructure, we have doubled the roads budget. We have increased the annual rail budget by more than 10 times. We have committed more money to urban public rail than all the governments combined in the previous 107 years since Federation. That is what we have achieved since 2007.

But those opposite are captured by their relentless negativity. The Leader of the Opposition is to political discourse what the vuvuzela was to World Cup soccer. When you first hear him, he does get your attention. But once you realise there is only one note, once you realise he is a one-trick pony, it just becomes annoying, because all you hear is no, no, no, no. That is the only thing he has, because he has absolutely nothing positive to say about Australia's future.

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The time allotted for this debate has expired.

Question put:

That the motion (Mr Abbott's) be agreed to.

The House divided. [15:47]

(The Speaker—Mr Harry Jenkins)

Question negatived.

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper.