John Faulkner (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

This afternoon the Senate debates a so-called matter of public importance. This is not a matter of public importance; it is a deliberately designed matter of political impediment. This is a device to waste the parliament's time, a device by an exclusively negative opposition to focus solely on politics, a device to enable more carping criticism of the government. Mr Abbott's strategy is clear for all to see. I will share it, with due apologies to Johnny Mercer, with the Senate: 'You've got to eliminate the positive, accentuate the negative, let go of the affirmative, don't mess with Mister In-Between.' As I said: due apologies to Johnny Mercer.

I have to acknowledge that this is the best tactic the opposition can adopt, because they do not have any policies themselves. Everybody knows what the opposition are against; no-one has a clue what they are for. How could they? No-one in the Liberal Party has a clue what their own party actually stands for, but they know they are against the minerals resource rent tax, they are against 12 per cent superannuation for workers, they are against tackling global warming by pricing carbon, they are against investing in the NBN, they are against any health reform, they are against a fair industrial relations system that has basic protections for workers, they are against the GFC stimulus that saved 200,000 jobs in Australia, they are against the banning of exit fees on home mortgages by banks and they are against the flood recovery packages for Queensland and Victoria. That is just a small sample of the things we know that the Liberals are against. While we do not know what they would actually do if they formed government, leaked internal coalition documents show the Liberal Party will have to make up $70 billion in cuts to the budget over four years to pay for not what they want to do but what they actually want to undo. That is what we know about the Liberal Party.

I acknowledge that the minority government faces particular challenges, certainly with ensuring the passage of its legislative program. So far in this 43rd Parliament 222 government bills have been passed by the House of Representatives. I actually think that the Prime Minister and the government have proved skilful negotiators with crossbenchers. In fact, I think the hung parliament has worked far better than most predicted it would. Major reforms have been passed, including the structural separation of Telstra, the NBN, national health reform, cyclone and flood reconstruction, plain packaging for tobacco, improvements to higher education and, of course, our budget measures. Perhaps it is now time for the opposition to accept that it did not form a government after the last election and perhaps it is time for it just to play a more constructive role into the future.