Catryna Bilyk (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Minister, thank you for your not so complimentary comments about my questions! Even so, I think that they are very legitimate questions. The question was: where did the evidence come from? The argument was used by your side, so surely you can validate where the evidence came from that people could have a higher chance of being kidnapped if they were one of these businesses. Where does that evidence come from? In the inquiry the AFP, the ATO and the Attorney-General's Department could offer up no evidence, so you cannot come in here and make statements that are very dramatic—lots of amateur dramatics go on on that side—if you cannot back them up. I want to know: where did the evidence come from?

We see on that side, so often, that you can talk the talk but you do not walk the walk. We see it in every question time. There are people on your side who have to constantly prove which drama school they went to by their amateur dramatics. With all the puffing up of your chests and all the claims that it is a crackdown on multinational companies, just because it says it in the title of the bill does not mean that is what is happening. In this case, it is not happening. So where did the evidence come from in regard to kidnapping?