Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Electoral and Referendum Legislation Amendment Bill 2006. The Labor Party, as has been said in this place already, will support the bill because parts of it do allow a few more people to be able to vote and it does ensure, very importantly, that Australian Defence Force personnel serving overseas and sight-impaired people will find it easier to cast their votes. Giving Australian Defence Force personnel the ability to cast their vote electronically is a terrific idea and it is to be welcomed.

As has been noted elsewhere, the provisions in this package do have some deficiencies but, on balance, the whole package, as has been said previously, does take us forward at least a short distance compared to the draconian disenfranchising measures found in the last tranche of changes to this legislation that were considered in this place. The provisions around voting for the visually impaired are to be welcomed. I would note, though, that, sadly, these facilities will be limited to only 30 centres. The legislation does not follow the recommendation of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters that the facilities should be in each and every electorate, not just in 30. These measures are there to help people who are disadvantaged and who have particular problems. They are there to assist them to place their vote and, importantly, to get it right, unlike the previous amendments to the act.

Remote communities, including Indigenous communities, need to be assisted, and you do not get more remote than some of the communities I represent in the great state of Western Australia. I am talking about not only remote Indigenous communities but also remote mining communities where workers are often employed on a fly-in fly-out basis. Will their enrolment be up to date? Will they be disenfranchised by the earlier measures taken by the Howard government? The proof will emerge at election time, but already some noted experts on electoral matters have condemned this government for the measures already taken and what they will do to take the franchise away from what they predict will be a very large number of people.

I commend the government for the provisions in relation to Defence personnel and people who are visually impaired, but I wonder why this government is so paranoid about people voting in the first place. Closing the electoral roll for most new enrollees on the day the writs are issued for the election will prevent people from enrolling, and only giving existing voters three days to get their details up to date will knock people off the roll. I would suggest this government is worried that these people will vote Labor, and heaven forbid they vote Labor. Why might they vote Labor if this government gives them the opportunity to vote at all later this year? I can tell honourable senators opposite that there are plenty of reasons and the list gets longer every day. I will start with Iraq. When the Howard government committed troops to the invasion of Iraq, we were all promised that our military commitment would be for a matter of months, not years. I will repeat that for honourable senators opposite: a matter of months not years. How wrong was that?

Recent debate has shown only too clearly how confused the Howard government is in terms of the messages it is now conveying about our commitment to, sadly, that quagmire of five years. While the Prime Minister says that we shall stay until final victory, or words to that effect, the Minister for Defence is saying there can be no victory in Iraq. If it were not so deadly serious for the Iraqi people and coalition troops, it would be funny. Instead, it is an ever-growing tragedy. Rather than making this country safer in terms of the threat presented by international terrorism, the policies pursued by this government and this Prime Minister have done the opposite.

We also have the Vice President of the United States saying that withdrawing Australian troops from Iraq—which, I might add, is Labor’s policy—to better fight the war in terror in our region would not put at risk Australia’s relationship with our most powerful ally. Fancy him saying that—stealing Mr Rudd’s lines. Isn’t that amazing? He has obviously been reading the papers. Well done to Mr Cheney. It is a shame that the Prime Minister has not been reading the same papers. This further undermined the Prime Minister’s argument that redeploying our battle group in Iraq would somehow threaten that important relationship. The Vice President, figuratively speaking, blew the Prime Minister out of the water. It is no wonder this government does not want too many people on the electoral roll if their intention is to vote against our involvement in the war in Iraq.

Another reason this government has for worrying that there might be a lot of disgruntled voters on the rolls is housing affordability. In the capital city of the state I represent in this chamber, young people are finding it even harder to find the money to afford their own home. We have had four interest rate rises from the Pinocchio nose from Bennelong. You know the little Pinocchio from Bennelong—you have seen the ads. Every time there is an interest rate rise, zoonk, out goes the proboscis another inch. Yes, they are finding it very hard. We have had four interest rate rises since the last election, and yet the Reserve Bank of Australia warned only last week that it would not hesitate to adjust interest rates again, election year or not, and that the direction in which interest rates were likely to go at this stage was up—not down; up again. This is because, as my colleague the member for Lilley, Mr Swan, has said, the Howard government has failed to come to grips with inflation. In fact—honourable senators opposite, through you Mr Acting Deputy President, listen to what I am going to say—only last week we had the Treasurer refusing to deny that he had made statements to the effect that it would not be such a bad thing if the economy faltered so that voters become, listen to this, a bit more worried about future.

I would also like to remind honourable senators opposite that on 12 February Glenn Milne, once upon a time one of the government’s more sympathetic journalists, wrote in the Australian:

Peter Costello is telling anyone who will listen, behind the back of his hand, that it might not be such a bad thing if the economy hits a few bumps. In the Treasurer’s eyes such a scenario would put some voter apprehension back into the election mix ...

The Treasurer was twice asked directly if he had made any such statements and twice refused to deny making such statements. It is simply extraordinary that the Treasurer of Australia hopes that the Australian economy falters—