Carol Brown (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Disability and Carers) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to address this matter of public importance regarding the Turnbull government. Unfortunately, this is a matter of public importance that could have been presented to the chamber on virtually any of the 780 days since the previous federal election, yet the disunity and chaos of the Turnbull government was on display more prominently today than usual. Ramping up its war on coherent policy and legislative progress yesterday, Prime Minister Turnbull ditched his third iteration of the National Energy Guarantee in an attempt to shore up support from the hard right wing of his out-of-touch government, but, true to form, he abandoned policy at the first sign of difficulty. That was followed by a resounding declaration of dissent from more than 40 per cent of his party. That's right: 41 per cent of Prime Minister Turnbull's own party voted against him as leader, only a day after he, in order to win support, junked what was supposed to be his defining policy priority. So, he was in trouble, and, to win support, he decided that the only way to try to shore up the Right of his party was to junk what he had already claimed was a defining policy priority. We know what happened then. People moved quickly to support Mr Dutton.

Nothing could more completely embody an absence of coherent policy than this Prime Minister, the Prime Minister, who stated, 'I will not lead a party that is not as committed to climate change as I am'—then going on to decide that he no longer supported an emissions trading scheme. What an embarrassment. The 'climate change Prime Minister' first decided he no longer believed in an emissions trading scheme and then that he no longer supported a clean energy target. Now, this Prime Minister doesn't even support his own National Energy Guarantee.

Writing for Fairfax newspaper this week, Sean Kelly summed it up best:

That the Coalition might be about to tear itself apart over climate again is an indication of insanity.

Insanity is exactly what it is, because this is the self-defined issue for this Prime Minister, and to walk away from this issue, simply for political expediency, shows just how little this Prime Minister is willing to fight for.

So, what exactly does this government stand for? We know that it does stand for division. Not only has this Prime Minister come to lead the government by throwing his predecessor under a bus; but he's thrown himself under a bus. There is so much division inside this party that the Prime Minister decided to call a spill motion, just to pre-empt his own colleagues. The nation is going through an incredible period of drought during winter, but, instead of taking serious action on climate change, this out-of-touch government is self-obsessed and focused on infighting.

Nothing will change the problems of this government. This government's problems are of its own making. It comes from a lack of a policy agenda and a complete bankruptcy of vision. We've stood by and watched as the Prime Minister has sold out principle after principle, ideal after ideal, and now we're left with no action on climate change, because the Liberal Party is being governed by its hard right wing. What a case of the tail wagging the dog. Perhaps that's why the government continues to dive in the polls and, by the Prime Minister's own yardstick, it's time for a change of leader. It's no wonder that the member for Dickson decided today that it was time to challenge the Prime Minister. And what a choice we had. We have a Prime Minister who believes in nothing and we have an opponent in Mr Dutton who believes in all the wrong things.

By his own measure, this Prime Minister has failed. He's failed to change the course of his party after 38 successive Newspoll losses. That's eight more than the number that he decided was enough to challenge the previous Prime Minister. It's no wonder that Mr Dutton decided it was time for a challenge. I can see why Minister Dutton, as a member of a government that has continued to show no coherence in its policy development, a government that's shown no sensible legislative agenda, had, in a very short period of time, more than 40 per cent of his colleagues decide that this Prime Minister isn't right for the job.

Considering this challenge has been put to bed for today, we can only wonder—and Australians can only wonder—what we can look forward to tomorrow. We can look forward to a government united in its commitment to give away money to big banks and big business. But where is the legislative agenda to deal with runaway climate change? Where is the legislation that's now been junked despite the Prime Minister's supposed commitment to climate action? It seems that all we have from this government is a commitment to infighting and rewarding its mates in the banks and big business. Perhaps that's why, aside from ditching its own energy policy and fighting amongst itself, what this government is best known for is it's $440 million gift to the Great Barrier Reef Foundation and its gift to big business and the banks—gifts so unanticipated that the very recipient of the $440 million grant, the Great Barrier Reef Foundation, described it as 'like winning lotto'. One really has to wonder where the priorities for this government have gone.

It's not just the Prime Minister's federal colleagues who are asking this question. His own Liberal Party colleagues in my home state of Tasmania have been left wondering. As little as 11 days ago, when the Hodgman Liberal government signed up to what was the energy policy of the federal government at the time, energy minister, Mr Guy Barnett, proudly stated:

The NEG is good for Tasmanian jobs and puts more downward pressure on power prices—

and—

This important step continues to build the case for increased interconnection and Tasmania's position as the Battery of the Nation delivering clean, reliable and affordable electricity to Tasmanians and the nation.

What a slap in the face. When Minister Barnett signed up to the NEG publicly, little did he know that, less than two weeks later, the Prime Minister would ditch the very policy he'd signed up to. Unfortunately, he should have known. This government has stood for nothing other than political expedience. It throws out policies at the first sign of a challenge and focuses on nothing other than itself. This is a government that cut funding to schools and hospitals. It's a government focused on cutting funding to the ABC. But when it comes to an actual agenda, an actual set of principles that it's likely to achieve, we're left wondering. Why is it that this government insists on cutting funds to these essential services when it doesn't even have a coherent agenda that it wishes to fund as an alternative? What does this government stand for other than tax cuts to banks and billionaires and handing out money to foundations without a public tender process or any explanation? That's why Minister Dutton managed to garner over 40 per cent support in his own party, and it's why I'm sure we haven't seen the last of him.

When there's no vision to rally behind, what else are Prime Minister Turnbull's colleagues to do but look for an alternative leadership candidate? This matter of public importance couldn't have come at a more appropriate time. This is a matter that needs addressing immediately. As another former colleague of this Prime Minister put it recently:

If Peter Dutton is the answer, you have to ask yourself what the hell is the question.