John Williams (NSW, National Party) Share this | Hansard source

I would like to contribute to this debate. I do not agree with this bill. Let me explain why. We do need to have a clean system. Unfortunately, there is a theory out there about politics, which is 'no money, no mission'. You, Mr Acting Deputy President Sterle, and everyone else in this chamber would know you need money to advertise at election time to get out your message, your policies, what you plan to do et cetera. There are no discounts come election time. There are no discounts for television advertising. You pay the full rate. There is none of this, 'If you pay for three ads, we will give you five.' It is likewise for radio and likewise in the print media.

Have a look at what this bill targets. The government could not support a bill—with respect, Senator Rhiannon—that targets property developers. When it comes to developing property, I thought that was under the total control of local and state governments. If you want to develop, first of all your local government has to agree with a subdivision. You put a plan forward and go through the expensive process of having the subdivision approved. Then you put your buildings up. Your plan has to be approved by local government because there are strict state government regulations. If your local government disagrees with what you are planning, you can go to the Land and Environment Court and challenge the local government's decision and that court will make a decision. So I fail to see what property developers—and I will stand corrected—have to do with this parliament here in Canberra. Under, I think, section 51 of the Constitution the land is controlled by the states. It is a simple as that. They have control. They do not have to pay compensation when they take your land and bring in regulations like the Native Vegetation Conservation Act.

On the tobacco industry, I have had many meetings in my office with people from the tobacco industry. They have come to the National Party conference. They pay their corporate fee to come to our conference. The biggest issue they raise is the illegal trafficking of tobacco coming in from overseas—from Indonesia or wherever. This is tobacco and cigarettes packaged up to be presented as the real McCoy here in Australia. They are out there selling a legal product.

Then there are the liquor business entities. The last time I had a beer—and it was not that long ago!—I thought it was a legal product. When we were shearing in the old days and it was 40-degree heat, we had more than one. Sometimes we had more than five at the end of a day's shearing! Having a beer is part of the old Aussie tradition. After a hard day's work, you have a beer with your mates when you are a single bloke. It is not uncommon for my wife and I to have a glass of wine of a night when we are having a meal. The liquor industry is legal, of course.

Gambling business entities should be banned, according to this bill. I have to confess my grandfather was a bookmaker. So was my father. I actually worked for my father the bookmaker. There is a photo in my office of me holding the bag at Jamestown races back in 1976. I remember my father saying to me once during the 1967 drought, which was a tough time for the wool industry, that if it had not been for the bookmaking I would not have got the education I did at Rostrevor College in Adelaide. So I actually owe a bit to the gambling industry for a good education. I thank them very much.

Then there is the mineral resources or mining business entities. Apparently they should be banned from making donations. Look at what the mining industry has done for our nation. We have had a boom for years. Sadly, that boom is now over. It has brought tremendous wealth to our country. The cars we drive are not made out of tree leaves or bark off the nearest gum tree. They are actually made out of metal coming from the mining industry. For the aeroplanes we fly around in, it is the same thing. That industry has to be banned, according to this bill.

The bill says:

There is one body missed out here in this bill. It is called the trade union movement. I wonder why the trade union movement has been excluded from this? Who in this parliament gets money from the trade union movement?

I remember a bloke speaking yesterday in this place. His name is Senator O'Sullivan. He is a very quiet sort of a fellow most of the time.