John Faulkner (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

What a poor effort we have seen in question time today from the government. First of all we had the spectacle of Senator Vanstone unable to provide a straight answer to a straight question about 457 visas. You have the usual bluff and the usual bluster from Senator Vanstone, but we all know what she is about here: driving down wages and working conditions of Australian workers. That is what it is all about, and her administration of this issue—in a badly administered department, of course—is a disgrace. Her administration of her portfolio responsibilities remains the greatest scandal in public administration in this country.

We had that; then of course we had Senator Santoro on his feet, trying to give a bit of gee-up for the Queensland election campaign—one of the great own goals in Senate history. First of all, he got the question from Senator Brandis, a joke in itself, because Senator Brandis is so jealous of the fact that Senator Santoro is on the front bench despite the fact that Senator Santoro has much less ability than Senator Brandis. It is true: Senator Brandis is much more able. But Senator Brandis is on the back bench; Senator Santoro is on the front bench—and every question he gets, he fluffs.

He managed to do that again today. He even forgot that Senator Boswell was a Queensland coalition representative in the Senate. Then, when he was reminded, he completely forgot about Senator Joyce’s existence. Anyway, he was reminded by this side of the chamber, his own team and a very red-faced Senator Joyce and Senator Boswell. Senator Santoro put in a shocker. We are used to that. Then of course we had Senator Abetz. He also tried to get into the Queensland election campaign to give a bit of a confidence builder to Senator Boswell by saying what a terrific job Senator Boswell had done at a public meeting—‘He’s not a bad bloke at all, he’s a patsy for the National Party, a patsy for the coalition, a patsy for the Liberal Party—a terrific bloke. We don’t like Senator Joyce, but Senator Boswell is a terrific patsy for the coalition and the Liberal Party in Queensland.’

It was an attempt to get a few votes in the Queensland election. It will backfire, it will boomerang and it will not work, as we know. Then we had Senator Ian Campbell, again, speaking on the orange-bellied parrot—another abysmal performance. One of the great fiascos of this parliament is Senator Campbell’s handling of the Bald Hills wind farm issue. He still cannot answer a question about how he has managed to balls this issue up so monstrously to have ended up with egg all over his face, worthy of what you would expect if you had thrown eggs in any propellers of any wind farm. What a performance, again, from Senator Campbell today. But this all pales into insignificance compared to what we saw from Senator Ellison.

Senator Ellison was asked a perfectly reasonable question by Senator Ray. Senator Ray asked: ‘Why are young Australian service men and women risking their lives in Afghanistan to protect a government that ignores poppy cultivation, which in turn has the effect of allowing heroin to be sent to Australia, with the resultant death of young Australians?’ Senator Ellison deliberately turned this round, suggesting that Senator Ray was suggesting that Australian troops were protecting poppy producers in Afghanistan. What a disgraceful, despicable and contemptible slur that was. Senator Ray will not say this, but I will say it: there is no person in this chamber who has given greater support to our defence forces and troops than Senator Ray. No-one has worked more closely with them, no-one has defended them more and there is no-one who has greater respect from them and there is no-one who less deserves that despicable attack from Senator Ellison. But how typical! Senator Ray called Senator Ellison a dog and withdrew it, but Senator Ellison is so gutless, so low, he would not withdraw that slur against Senator Ray. What a shocker, what an awful performance. (Time expired)