Annette Hurley (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

On a day when we have had a major announcement about the automotive industry in this country, on a day when we have committed billions of dollars to a manufacturing industry which is important to preserve and important across a number of states and all around our country, it is certainly a bit disappointing that the opposition is nitpicking about the details of a phone call and whether or not they were leaked. Today we have had the car industry announcement and the mid-year economic forecast. You would have thought that the opposition might take a bit of interest in how our country is faring, in the mid-year economic forecast and in the global economic situation—which is, as many people have said, a crisis in our financial industry such as we have not faced in the last 100 years. Yet we hear the opposition’s lead speaker talking about whether there was or was not a phone call and what was included in the phone call. It is clear from the instant response from all concerned that the article in the Australian was in error.

Senator Coonan, after decrying the foreign minister’s involvement in this, later asked for a statement directly from the Prime Minister’s office. After saying that she wanted a statement from the foreign minister, she then said that that would not be good enough and that she wanted one from the Prime Minister’s office. We have a very clear statement from the Prime Minister’s office. We have a very clear statement from the office of the President of the United States. US Ambassador McCallum, with his wonderful use of the English language, said in that typical American way: ‘I can simply say that it is clear that the Prime Minister accurately indicated that the article mischaracterised the conversation and mischaracterised the President’s involvement in it and that the White House has confirmed that.’ That seems pretty clear to me. The Prime Minister’s office has said that the article was inaccurate. The White House has said that the article was inaccurate. As far as I am concerned, it is a closed matter. The quote from US Ambassador McCallum is pretty clear to me.

The allegations have been very clearly refuted by both offices involved in the phone call. We understand that the explicit purpose of that phone call was to talk about the role of the G20 in responding to the global financial crisis. The odd politician may have made a couple of comments, but instead of accepting that and moving on, instead of concentrating on what the phone call was about—the G20 and the financial crisis—instead of having the coalition come in here and use the forum of the Senate to address those key issues and give us their thoughts about them as one might have expected, senior people in the opposition have been talking about a trivial matter and trying to beat up something which is not only old news but has been quite clearly and finally refuted by both offices concerned.

It is extraordinary, in any case, that the opposition would want to come in here and talk about rectitude and protocols and sensitive issues with key partners, when their record on matters such as the AWB is not as pristine as they might like. We have serious issues to discuss that affect the long-term health and wellbeing of this country and its inhabitants, but the opposition’s first question today in the Senate was on a trivial matter. This is extraordinary and it shows how unprepared the opposition are for any kind of a role in this parliament.