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

Minister, if what you are referring to is the booklet, my understanding of the operation of the referendum act is that, where there are people who vote against it in the parliament and a yes/no booklet is produced, as is normally the case in such a situation, the act—and I think it is section 11—outlines that the yes case is submitted by a majority of those who voted in favour of the constitutional amendment proposal and the no case is submitted by a majority of those who voted against the proposed constitutional amendment in the parliament. Then the AEC commissioner signs off on it and the AEC produces the particular booklet. That is the production of the yes/no booklet. No-one is questioning that. That is a longstanding practice. I note that some people seemed to devalue it in the earlier debate, but I think the processes around doing that are basically over a century old. There is not much doubt about that.

Minister, when you talked about the preparation of the yes and no cases there, you alluded to reflecting the debate in the parliament. As far as I am aware, that is the only mechanism that reflects the debate in the parliament. What we were presented with last night was an appropriation for the Department of Regional Australia, Local Government, Arts and Sport of $10.5 million, of which $9.5 million is administered expenses and just under $1 million is departmental expenses. What I am seeking clarification on is: is that, or any portion of that, going to be used for advocating a position? I got the impression, from what you said, that it will be—that we will be advocating, effectively, a yes position. I am assuming, and I am happy to be corrected, that the government has no intent of providing similar resources for people—whether they are in this place or elsewhere—who would have a different view. I am just seeking a factual response to that issue.