Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source

I indicate on behalf of the coalition that we will not be supporting the motion. To seek to curtail the time on this debate—I know it is not the usual thing to do—I would draw the attention of those who want to reflect on the reasons and rationale, to the speech I gave on Thursday, 11 March in the Senate Hansard, commencing on page 19, because that sets out a lot of the reasons. I once again put on the record that we accept that Senator Xenophon comes to this with sincerity and genuineness, but I would also ask him—and Senator Milne, without her getting too upset about these things—to understand that men and women of good will can approach a topic and come to different conclusions as to how a matter or an issue ought be dealt with. But we so often see the extreme nature of the Australian Greens in that it has to be their way or the highway. There is no shade of grey; it has to be completely their way.

I have been asked, in relation to a number of matters—I dare say rhetorically—that if this is not the way forward, what is? Interestingly enough, given that I have led the coalition in this debate, I have received a lot of emails for and against this inquiry. There is one former scientologist who has emailed me to say that they have reported a matter to the New South Wales Police and it is being investigated. I say to that person, ‘Well done. That’s the proper way to go.’

I thank Senator Xenophon for bringing three former scientologists to my office yesterday afternoon. I see them in the gallery and I thank them for the time that they spent with me. As a result of that discussion I simply say—and I will say this now publicly—that, in relation to the allegations made by Senator Xenophon about people working long hours and not being paid for them, I publicly call on the Fair Work Ombudsman to examine the records. We have a Fair Work Ombudsman in this country—formerly the Workplace Ombudsman, now with a different name—who has the power, on the basis of a complaint, to examine such things. Indeed, of his own volition the Ombudsman could undertake an examination. I make that public call today for the Fair Work Ombudsman to follow up, and I will also give him notice that at Senate estimates in May I will be asking the Fair Work Ombudsman what he has done in relation to this matter.

In relation to allegations of taxation I say they should be reported to the Australian Taxation Office. I remember on one occasion I had concerns about the way the Australian Greens were dealing with their situations financially in relation to the electoral laws. I did not seek a Senate inquiry into it. I reported the matter to the Australian Electoral Commission and they undoubtedly made a determination.

Similarly, I have very real problems and concerns about the way the Wilderness Society does business, which has now been highlighted. Let us remind ourselves that the Wilderness Society is the industrial arm of the Australian Greens. They have now descended into a fiasco, with court orders being issued against each other. An AGM was held here, which was declared illegal, and another AGM held. They are in absolute disarray. The temptation is sweet to have a Senate inquiry into the Wilderness Society. But would it be the right thing to do? I have to say that I think the answer is no. What I have done in the past in relation to the Wilderness Society is refer my concerns to the Australian Taxation Office. They have, I believe, according to law, dealt with those matters appropriately.

In this public debate about whether there should be such an inquiry I have heard raised all manner of arguments, including that we have had inquiries into Australia Post. Yes, we did; but, with respect, that is a government business enterprise, and I would say that that is different. Has the Senate had an inquiry into whether Tasmania ought to have an AFL team? Yes, we have. But, despite being a Tasmanian and passionately wanting a Tasmanian team in the ALF, I got some criticism in my home state of Tasmania for not supporting such a move—because I thought it was inappropriate.

I would like to think that I—and the coalition—come to this debate with absolutely clean hands and a consistency of purpose. I ask those in this place: do we have the power to have such an investigation? You betchya; absolutely. But the way individual freedoms are protected in this country is not by the government or the parliament using all the powers that are potentially available to it.

In relation to the motion dealing with unconscionable, misleading and deceptive conduct, I am reminded of a leader of a political party in this place, who claimed that if he had to pay his legal bills he would become bankrupt and would therefore have to forfeit his seat in the Senate. The bill was only about $200,000. He had assets and a capacity to mortgage and get a loan. Nevertheless, he put that out there—aided and abetted by a nearly compliant and sycophantic media in this country. He said, ‘I am opening an account or people can donate.’ And donate they did. He raised $200,000. But, when the required amount of money had been raised, did he put out a media release saying, ‘Stop donating please; that which I have called for has come in’? No. He allowed the fund to keep going—didn’t he, Senator Milne?—from $200,000 to $400,000 to $600,000 to $800,000 to $1 million and more. People were genuinely donating thinking they were saving Senator Bob Brown from bankruptcy and expulsion from the Senate when he already had more than $200,000—more than the money needed—in his own back pocket. I say ‘in his own back pocket’ because the money was paid into an account that only bore his signature—