Jordon Steele-John (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

This is stunning! We have interjections from Liberal and National senators in this place, outraged that a political party would use its judgement as to what is and isn't in the public good! If they would like to rise during the course of this debate and make the argument that the development of the Beetaloo basin is in the public good, well, they're more than welcome to do so. But they cannot, because there is no evidence to support that proposition. The only people who would make that argument are coal-powered goons bought and paid for by the gas and coal industries. If anyone would like to rise and identify themselves as such, I will most certainly give them leave to do so.

Let's get to the substance of what is actually happening here, because I'm not going to go into the space of trying to sink myself into the minds of the people who put this piece of legislation together and whether or not they were seeking to incite some kind of fear campaign in their community based upon religion or any other attribute of a community member. What I do feel that I'm safe to say is that the motivation behind the putting together of this piece of legislation was, quite clearly, an attempt by the Liberal Party in this place to fill the howling void where an actual agenda of reform and positive change for the ACT should be when it comes to the ACT Liberal Party—a hollow, moribund organisation which has consistently failed to win the support of the territory and which has been told consistently at the ballot box, time and time again, that it does not have the community's support.

So the ACT Liberal Party, working together with their mates in here, are trying to make this into an issue. They tried to run this campaign to try to give them something to talk about. It was absolutely nonsense! I'm proud to be here as a member of a party that is willing to call it out, and I will attempt to drag this conversation back to the substance of what is actually occurring in the ACT. What is occurring in the ACT is that the Greens-Labor government of that territory, elected at a previous election, is seeking to build a public health system that works for the community—a public health system that delivers what the community needs. It is totally right and reasonable, given that the ACT government is looking to continue to spend a significant amount of public funds in building their health service, that they would want to own the infrastructure of that health service.

It is within the right and power of any executive government in Australia to cancel a contract with a private organisation. That is a standard established process, and if members in this place want to complain about that then they also open up a conversation for themselves about the right of executive government to do things like seize farmlands when farmers want to deny entry and operation of gas operations across Australia. Yet I don't hear LNP members of this place making the argument that companies should be prevented from doing that or, indeed, that governments should be prevented from backing them up in that action. In fact, what we've seen in this place is the LNP coming into these chambers and repeatedly arguing for the right of state and federal governments to override the wishes of farmers and First Nations communities when it comes to the exploration and extraction of gas, nuclear materials or other products on their lands. That's what we actually see, time and time again, in this chamber.

Again, I want to emphasise that the Greens want to support the decision that has been made by the ACT government, composed as it is of members of the Greens and of the Labor Party, and we support them in their broader push to build a connected, integrated and effective public health system. I celebrate them for the work they have done in building that system. We are sitting in the territory which has one of the highest rates of COVID-19 vaccination in the world. It was 98 per cent the last time I checked. That is an incredible achievement. It was a product of good deep work between different ministers within the government and community members. They were able to do that because of the way they work their public health system. After that demonstration of success I'm really excited to see what the future of an integrated, effective and efficient public health system in Canberra and the entire territory is, because they've demonstrated that they are very good at doing their job.

Finally I want to tackle the question of whether it is ever appropriate for one legislature to inquire into or to draft legislation in relation to the actions of another legislature. There have been various contributions on that topic of principle during this debate. My view on this is really simple. There are circumstances in which it is reasonable for a legislature to put forward a piece of legislation or to inquire into the activities of another legislature. They are, firstly, when it can be demonstrated a systemic failure by that legislature is impacting the members of the community served by that legislature who are also represented in the relevant chamber or the executive position of power and, secondly, when it can be demonstrated that there has been a systemic attempt to cover up said failure by a legislature or executive body. In those circumstances it is appropriate for a legislature, within the bounds of the Constitution, to draft and pass legislation in relation to that legislature. Those thresholds have not been met in this circumstance and no reasonable case can be made that they have been. In the absence of evidence otherwise there should be no course for this chamber other than to reject a bill such as the one we are discussing today.