Julian McGauran (Victoria, National Party) Share this | Hansard source

What was missing out of this whole debate to this point—and those listening on broadcast ought to take note of this—is that all week in parliament a raging debate has been taking place in regard to the carbon tax. I think Senator Stephens spent about one minute on the issue and then wandered off into a whole lot of other stratospheres. In fact, I think she would have finished up earlier but I saw the whip put a note under her nose to say, ‘Stretch it.’ We all get those notes, and I saw the horror on Senator Stephens’s face when she had to stretch it, and it sure seemed like it in the last eight minutes. She spent about a minute on the carbon tax. I will consult with my colleagues, and Senator Macdonald comes in: did Senator O’Brien touch on the issue at all? The issue of the day that goes to the heart of the credibility of the Prime Minister and the very point of this general business notice of motion, and he did not even touch on it. I think that is telling in itself, that they will not come to the defence of their Prime Minister’s credibility at all.

The Prime Minister has laid down her own principles. If those opposite are not going to defend her, let us go to the Prime Minister’s own base principle of credibility—what this debate is all about, the Prime Minister’s credibility. As early as 20 March 2009 this was the foundation stone on which she based her credibility, that we can judge her on, and we do judge her on it. She said:

I think when you go to an election and you give a promise to the Australian people, you should do everything in your power to honour that promise. We are determined to do that. We gave our word to the Australian people in the election and this is a government that will pride itself on delivering election promises. We want Australians to be able to say, ‘Well, they’ve said this and they did this.’

So this is her number one criterion to be judged upon. But what could be a more stark display than last Thursday’s press conference of how willing she is to abandon that principle, how expendable is that principle she put out on the airwaves, than her backflip with regard to carbon tax. What could be more stark than that. What could be more clear than her comments, which have been quoted all week. You would think someone from the other side would come in to defend Prime Minister Gillard. On the Friday before the election, on 20 August 2010, Gillard stated categorically, post that foundation stone of principle that she laid down herself, ‘I rule out a carbon tax.’ That is black-and-white, that is pretty clear: ‘I rule out a carbon tax.’