Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Hansard source

I move:

That the motion circulated in the chamber may be moved immediately and have precedence over all other business today until determined.

Question agreed to.

I move:

That the Senate:

(1)

Notes the government’s refusal to produce the following documents relating to the National Broadband Network:

(a)

the National Broadband Network Business plan; and

(b)

the Government’s response to the McKinsey and Company and KPMG Implementation plan.

(2)

Resolves that consideration of any bill relating to the National Broadband Network, including the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Competition and Consumer Safeguards Bill) 2010, be postponed and made an order of the day for the next day of sitting after the documents described in paragraphs (1)(a) and (b) are laid on the table.

(3)

Resolves that, until the documents described in paragraphs (1)(a) and (b) are laid on the table:

(a)

a senator may, at the conclusion of question time on each and any day, ask the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy for an explanation of why the order of 17 November 2010 requiring the production of the documents has not been complied with; and

(b)

the senator may, at the conclusion of the explanation, move without notice—That the Senate take note of the explanation; or

(c)

in the event that the minister does not provide an explanation, the senator may, without notice, move a motion in relation to the minister’s failure to provide either an answer or an explanation.

(4)

Resolves that, until the documents described in paragraphs (1)(a) and (b) are laid on the table, the Senate shall not:

(a)

receive any statement related to the NBN by the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, or by any other minister, except in answer to questions asked of the minister at question time; or

(b)

consider any other business related to the NBN proposed by any minister.

(5)

Further resolves that, until the documents described in paragraphs (1)(a) and (b) are laid on the table, so much of the standing orders which provide for ministers to present documents be suspended, so that a minister may not present any other document related to the NBN, except by leave of the Senate.

The Senate has been treated with unparalleled contempt by Senator Conroy and the Labor-Green alliance in not allowing this documentation which we are seeking from being brought to our attention. What we are seeking with this motion is the National Broadband Network business plan and the government’s response to the McKinsey and Co. and KPMG implementation plan. If that is not provided to the Senate, as required by a motion from Senator Ludlam and Senator Birmingham, we as a Senate should be saying that we do not want to hear any further about the NBN until those foundation documents are provided to us.

On 7 September 2010 the Prime Minister said this:

So, let’s draw back the curtains and let the sun shine in; let our parliament be more open than it ever was before.

She said:

We will be held to higher standards of transparency and reform, and it’s in that spirit that I approach the task of forming a government.

Those words can come true today if Labor’s alliance partners, the Greens, support this particular motion.

The Labor Party, of course, have form on this; they are serial offenders. The Gillard government failed to release the key documentation and economic and financial modelling underpinning the recommendations of the Henry tax review. This government refuses to release the proceedings of its climate change committee. This government fails to be upfront about its plans to expand or open several onshore detention centres. This is a government that did a mining tax backdown followed by secret negotiations. This is a government that has failed to be upfront about its plans to introduce a carbon tax, despite an election promise not to introduce a carbon tax. This is a government that has refused to reveal the results of its home insulation safety checks. And now on top of all of that we have a government not prepared to release these foundational documents in relation to the NBN.

In relation to their motion to suspend standing orders, we had the hapless Senator Collins tell us that this legislation, which might not be allowed to be debated if this motion gets through, has nothing to do with the NBN. Well, as Senator Joyce pointed out, the bill in fact refers to the NBN 62 times. But what would have been even more instructive for Senator Collins and the even more hapless minister in charge would have been to read the second reading speech of Mr Albanese in the House of Representatives on 20 October. The very second paragraph of that second reading speech says:

The National Broadband Network will fundamentally transform the competitive dynamics of the communications sector in this country. NBN Co. is a wholesale only telecommunications provider with open access arrangements. The new network represents a nationally significant and long overdue micro-economic reform.

On that basis, why should Australian citizens all and, in particular, this representative chamber of the Australian people not be entitled to see the business plan which, if we are to adopt Mr Albanese’s language, is to ‘fundamentally transform the competitive dynamics’, something which is so ‘nationally significant’ and ‘long overdue’? Why are they not releasing these documents? We know they have got the documents, we know they have read the documents, we know they are going to release the documents, but they will only release them after the parliament has risen and after they have demanded that we vote on this legislation. What have they got to hide—or is this just hubris gone mad under this minister and this Prime Minister knowing, I suspect, that they have got the support of the Australian Greens? And that would be a matter of grave concern.

Senator Ludlum said the government’s refusal was a matter of grave concern and they might take this further in the Senate and my good friend Senator Xenophon said something similar. I simply say to those on the crossbench that the time for action is now. You can be the circuit breakers to require this documentation to be provided. Otherwise, you will allow the minister to come in here after question time and humiliate this place with his ministerial speech knowing that he is in contempt of the Senate. A motion was moved by an Australian Green, ably supported by a coalition senator, requiring the government to produce the documents. The minister is in contempt of that motion. We say that if that motion were to mean anything, if this Senate were to uphold that which it has voted on, it has to say to this arrogant minister and the arrogant government: ‘Enough is enough. We will not hear further from you until this documentation, which can so readily be made available, is provided to this chamber.’

Instead, if the numbers are not here in this place on this motion, we will have the arrogant minister coming in here making a ministerial speech without having the foundation and fundamental documents before us. That would be insulting to every individual senator in this place, especially those that have not been lobotomised. I can understand that Labor senators would not mind not having the document placed before them, but I would have thought that every other self-respecting senator in this place would need to have this fundamental documentation placed before them. Indeed, the legislation which we are saying should be held up until such time as this document is provided refers to the National Broadband Network 62 times. The minister in the other place, Minister Albanese, opened his second reading speech talking about the fundamental importance and national significance of the National Broadband Network and how everything would change under this legislation. But we still do not have the business plan, we still do not have the implementation plan, so how can we know that it is going to be so nationally significant? Unless, of course, the national significance is that the Australian people will be burdened with a $43,000 million debt for a white elephant—something which the Australian people are not to be told about until after the parliament rises.

I heard Senator Xenophon say to us that new information should be provided. Well, can I suggest to my good friend that new information is available and it is this: the reports are available and they will be released but not for us to consider before the legislation. If that is acceptable to the Independents and the crossbenchers then so be it but can I say with great respect that I fundamentally disagree. It would be a dereliction of our fundamental duty to the Australian people to vote on the legislation that is currently on the Notice Paper without having those foundation documents. To say to the Australian people that we are willing to go down the National Broadband Network road and start passing legislation for it to occur, without knowing that vital information, would be a fundamental dereliction of our duty. We as a coalition will not stand idly by.

Senator Brown told us that the NBN is highly popular. I say to Senator Brown and the Greens: be very careful. President Obama had a wonderful health program on which he won an election in 2008. But once people saw the actual plan unravel, when they saw the details of that health concept, the Democrats in the United States got a hiding like history has not seen for a long, long time. The same is starting to happen with the National Broadband Network. At the 2010 election it was highly popular as a concept, but now that people are starting to see what it actually means, they are starting to have doubts.