Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Hansard source

Our Constitution must be treated with respect. From the way the Gillard Labor government has handled this proposal to conduct a referendum on the recognition of local government in the Constitution, it is treating our Constitution with contempt. No government should initiate any change to our Constitution lightly. Any change to our Constitution should be based on broad community consensus; it should be based on strong bipartisan support; it should be conducted in a way that is consistent with one of our greatest democratic values, procedural fairness; and, where a proposed constitutional change has implications for the states, it should be based on a broad consensus with the state governments.

No government should try to buy a change to our Constitution or stack the decks in favour of one argument over another, using taxpayers' money to fund its side of the argument while effectively ignoring, deliberately disadvantaging and discriminating against the alternative case. Typically, and true to form, the Gillard Labor government has completely mismanaged the process leading to the proposal before the Senate today. Typically, its handling has been divisive, ham fisted and mostly focused on the pursuit of base political objectives in the lead-up to a difficult election for the government rather than on the genuine pursuit of the national interest and genuine constitutional reform. No change to our Constitution should be pursued on that basis. No change to our Constitution should be pursued like this.

This proposal for a change to our Constitution, to be put at the next election, has of course been put twice to the Australian people before over the past few decades. The Australian people have defeated this proposal twice before. The Gillard government, in the way it has approached this proposal for constitutional change, has not made a case to the Australian people that they should change their minds. In seeking to legislate this referendum at this late stage, as the Gillard government is seeking to do, and in seeking to favour the yes case at taxpayers' expense along the way, without having made the case for change, there is no doubt in my mind that the Australian people will return the same verdict as they have to such Labor proposals in the past.

There is no broad community consensus. There is no strong bipartisan support. There is no consensus with state governments. And, contrary to Senator Milne's inaccurate and misleading assertions earlier, there is not even consensus with the Labor-Greens state government in Tasmania. There is not even total support for this change across local government. The Gillard government, by pursuing this proposal now and in this way, is also ignoring the advice of its own Expert Panel on Constitutional Recognition of Local Government. The government's own panel made this referendum subject to two key conditions. No. 1 is:

… that the Commonwealth negotiate with the States to achieve their support …

The Gillard Labor government has not. No. 2 is:

… that the Commonwealth adopt steps … to achieve informed and positive public engagement with the issue …

The Gillard Labor government has not. Even those who strongly support this referendum, including the government's own expert panel, made the point that certain things should happen first. But they did not happen. That is of course why this referendum legislation should not be pursued at this time—certainly not now and certainly not in this way. On the best available interpretation, the Gillard government has left it too late to put the case for changing our Constitution to the Australian people properly and in time, because of its characteristic incompetence. It is more likely that the recommendations of the expert panel were deliberately and consciously ignored.

Even the Australian Electoral Commission, the objective and independent statutory arbiter when it comes to the proper conduct of contested elections and referenda, warned the Gillard government not to pursue a change to our Constitution at this election if it were initiated after 1 March this year. The Australian Electoral Commission pointed out that if it started referendum related preparations after 1 March, it would leave:

Of course, it is now 19 June 2013, more than three months after that date, and the election, on the current timetable, is less than three months away. The Australian Electoral Commission also pointed out that in rushing the process, by initiating it so late in the piece, the government has exposed itself to an elevated level of criticism from stakeholders of the way that voters have not been effectively informed that the advertising campaign is biased. Since then we have found out that the government is doing even more to inappropriately and unfairly stack the decks in favour of its own argument and against the alternative point of view.

Indeed, the Australian Electoral Commission said in its submission in relation to the expert panel inquiry that a truncated time frame like the one we have now will 'jeopardise the AEC election preparations'. That is pretty damning advice from the independent objective umpire, yet still the Gillard Labor government is pressing ahead—with a change to our Constitution no less—regardless. That is why the coalition's official position is that this referendum should not be proceeding at this time. It is too late to change the Constitution in an appropriate and respectable way. What we have said is that if, despite our objections, the government insists and persists with putting this legislation to a vote now, we will not oppose it, leaving the judgment and the merits and the question on changing the Constitution to the Australian people. But, of course, the government should not be pursuing a change to the Constitution in the way that they are doing now. It is not right.

We do support the principle of putting beyond doubt the capacity of the Commonwealth to provide direct financial assistance to local government. I am not convinced that this is the best way to do that. Importantly though, our position is that the next election should be a referendum on the world's largest carbon tax, Labor's failed mining tax and the incompetent Gillard Labor government—not on local government. We have made very clear that at this next election the coalition will be campaigning for a change of government, not for a change to the Constitution.

If this legislation passes, it will again be up to the Australian people to decide how they want to respond to the referendum question on local government, as they have before. I, along with my coalition colleagues, will be campaigning for a change of government that Australia so desperately needs, not for a change to the Constitution. As part of this second-reading debate the coalition is moving a very important amendment to force the government to provide equal funding for both the yes and the no cases. This should really be a no-brainer. There should not even be any argument about this. If the government does want to pursue this proposed change to our Constitution of course there should be equal funding for both the yes and the no cases. That is the established convention; that is the well-established precedent; that is what has happened in the past; that is what the Australian people would expect to happen.

If the Gillard government were truly interested in a genuine expression of the public will on this, that is what it would do. In fact, if our Prime Minister had any political judgment, even from her point of view, from the point of view of somebody who wants to achieve a successful yes vote, quite frankly the best thing she could have done would have been to ensure equal funding to both sides of the argument. In acting the way she has, the Prime Minister is offending Australians' highly developed sense of fair play. She is feeding people's natural distrust of government by pursuing change to the Constitution in this way. In acting the way she has, the Prime Minister has further undermined her own cause and, again, divided the nation.

As well as treating our Constitution with contempt by basing its decision on how much funding to allocate to each case only on the vote in the House of Representatives, the government is also treating the Senate with contempt. No senator in this chamber should allow themselves to be complicit in this. No self-respecting senator would allow themselves to be complicit in this.

To summarise, a change to our Constitution should not be pursued in the way the Gillard government is pursuing. We do not approve of the way the Gillard government has handled this. Given how late we are in the electoral cycle, this should not be happening. If the government insists on pressing ahead with this legislation, we have said that the coalition will not oppose it. However, we will be putting our trust in the Australian people to get this judgment right again, because at the next election we will not be campaigning for a change in our Constitution; we will be campaigning for a change of government. The next election should be a referendum not on a very bad government which has well and truly lost its way, but on local government.