Scott Ryan (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Small Business and Fair Competition) Share this | Hansard source

Before I address the substantive motion of Senator Cash I cannot let some of the allegations of Senator Arbib and Senator Milne go past. Being lectured to by Senator Arbib about good behaviour in politics is like being lectured to about the respect for law by Chopper Read. New South Wales is a killing field of disgrace and Labor leaders due to his influence and that of people like him. Under his guidance the New South Wales ALP became as much a racket as it was a political party. And who were the caporegimes of that mob? They were the New South Wales state secretaries—the heads of the New South Wales right.

He asks for ideas, as Senator Milne has. We have been pushing these ideas for several years now. They are simple: stop the new taxes, cut red tape, cut spending, balance the budget and pay back debt. It is actually pretty simple, but it is so hard for Labor to do because they have never ever managed it. If you do not get the basics right, all the grand schemes, all the best endeavours and all the highest aspirations are nothing short of meaningless.

Senator Milne has talked about the use of time in this chamber, which just proves that the Greens have no sense of irony. Day after day we sit in this place amid meaningless divisions that serve no purpose other than to print new bumper stickers for bikes in Fitzroy, where the Greens can run around and claim to be morally superior, pitching themselves to the morally superior class who do not bear the cost of the policies they seek to implement. For Senator Milne to come in here and talk about the impact on farmers when the carbon tax is going to force up the costs of Australian dairy farmers, who make the milk that Senator Milne is talking about and who are going to see cost increases of 10 to 20 per cent in only a handful of years, is nothing short of complete hypocrisy. I have little doubt that Senator Milne would have opposed the repeal of the Corn Laws, because cheap food is apparently a bad thing.

What we saw yesterday in the comments by Senator Bob Brown with respect to the ruling of the President represented a new low. All the President did was not grant precedence to a motion moved by Senator Brown; nothing more and nothing less. This is entrusted to the responsibility of the President's judgment, granted by the Senate by virtue of his election to the office. Senator Brown illustrated his complaint by outlining that the ruling of the President in such matters is often adopted by the chamber, quoting a report from several decades ago. This does not strengthen his argument; it merely reinforces that his grievance was with the decision itself rather than with a substant­ive issue. It is not formally determinative and it merely illustrates that the judgment of the President, which was exercised in this place, is important.

Senator Brown confused the issue here. The fact that allegations are made does not necessarily warrant any particular outcome. That is a matter for consideration at another time. As Senator Brown did not get his way in his motion of dissent, he used extraordin­ary language. The key tactic of the militant left was again illustrated when they failed to get their desired outcome: sledge and impugn the decision, judgment, person and indeed the motives of those with whom you disagree. To Senator Bob Brown and the Greens civil disagreement is not possible. Senator Brown also filed notices of motion, which he then admitted should not have been granted precedence. That represents an abuse of the procedures in this place. It does him, the Greens in particular and this parliament no favours.