Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to take note of answers given today by Ministers Conroy and Evans. Today we hear a sorry tale of conflicting advice, conflicting interests and conflicting ambitions. The decision to overturn years of practice when the previous government had just renewed the ABC's contract for the Australia Network saw the current government move to a process of open tender and to reject previous government practice. This government actively sought to go to an open tender process, so you would think they would know what it was about and have it all set out. They actively sought to change practice despite recommendations from DFAT, one of the key stakeholders in a well-functioning Australia Network, and which was so well prosecuted today by Senator Crossin. So against this background, against the advice of DFAT, the ALP government chose a process of open tender, a process which has seen deadline after deadline pass, to get to the point where the whole process has been ditched. It is so typical. If you do not like an answer, scrap it and start again. What a surprise from this government!

It goes to two core aspects of this government and how they conduct themselves in terms of their legislative agenda and practice. The first is incompetence. We see it time and time again in how they manage transparent processes, in how they manage public money and in how they choose to manage the Greens' heart's desire. The Greens' heart's desire in this particular sorry tale may have something to do with the fact that Senator Johnston mentioned which two companies were involved in the tender process rather than the actual details of the tender applications themselves. Secondly, I think the tender process failed probably because of the indecision that is endemic in this government. They are indecisive about their policy and they are indecisive about how and when they should act. There are plenty of examples.

They put the decision off because of international events is one of the arguments that the government have prosecuted. The first time they put it off because the international climate had changed. To my way of thinking, that would mean that the advice of DFAT was more important, not less, to feeding into the decision—but not on this matter. I hate to be a conspiracy theorist, especially after some of the comments made by Senator Evans today, but maybe being a sceptic comes a little with the territory. Maybe it is less about the relevancy of DFAT as a key stakeholder in the Australia Network having input into the decision and more to do with who the minister in charge of that department is. I will leave that for other people to prosecute.

The second reason we rearranged the deckchairs on the Titanic and put off the decision again was leaks. So this government gets compromised by its own cabinet. The indecision and uncertainty continue with a Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy who shifts deadlines like deckchairs on the Titanic. It feeds into a general climate of uncertainty around this government—uncertainty with respect to financial management; uncertainty around how its climate change policy will actually affect climate change; uncertainty around jobs, particularly in regional areas; uncertainty of deadlines, of process and of advice. What this country needs is a cabinet that governs, a minister that has oversight and a government that makes decisions and takes action—a government that leads.

As my colleagues have prosecuted today, the answers given today during question time go to trust. It is crystal clear that trust is lacking in the political process in our nation. This entire debacle illustrates that cabinet does not trust itself, that those within the tender process have no reason to trust government deadlines and that the Australian people have every reason not to trust this government as they do not even trust themselves.

Question agreed to.