Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of answers given by ministers to questions without notice asked by opposition senators today.

If anything demonstrates what an arrogant, out-of-touch government this is, hung over on the excesses of its partying last night, it was there to be witnessed today in question time.

Barnaby Joyce (Queensland, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It wasn’t that good!

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Oh dear! Senator Joyce, I am sorry that you did not have as good a time. Wouldn’t they let you sit at a table with anybody? Did they make you sit by yourself, Senator Joyce? What we saw today reminded me of Animal Farm. It was Orwellian in its approach to the English language. Today we rejoiced: Senator Coonan was able to explain to the Australian public how good it was for pensioners to get a $60 increase in their fees. How good it was for them! It was unbelievable. They were better off under this government because they had to pay $60 extra! It is Orwellian. You belong in Animal Farm. We have a 43 per cent increase in the cost of putting on a phone, and the Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts wants to tell us that we are better off under this government. We have a $60 increase for pensioners and we are better off under the government’s USO, CSG and price caps! Well, we saw today, yesterday and last week that Australia Post and Telstra are driving a truck through the regulations that this government touts as consumer protections. It is a farce that a minister in this chamber stands up and tries to tell people they are better off because they are paying more.

Australia Post is going to reap $5.7 million from pensioners and veterans. Australia Post is going to be better off by $5.7 million. Yet last year the reported profit of Australia Post was $374 million. And they need to rip out of the pockets of pensioners and veterans an extra $5.7 million! Yet again we saw the mock outrage; yet again we saw the minister crying crocodile tears. It is just like last week, when she stood up and said, ‘This is terrible; I haven’t been consulted’—about all these 5,000 payphones that are to be ripped out. We saw crocodile tears last week and crocodile tears this week.

This minister is continually rolled by Telstra. She called them in to give them a piece of her mind last week, and what happened? She came out and said, ‘Well, actually, they can if they want.’ It was pathetic to watch. But what was truly pathetic was watching the minister put on the mock indignation. She held a press conference before I did, to express her outrage. She had the first breath; she beat Barnaby out the door.

Barnaby Joyce (Queensland, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That’s hard!

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That is hard, Barnaby, you are dead right. She beat you and me out the door on this one, and then she beat the retreat even faster. That is the hypocrisy of this government—

Alan Ferguson (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Just turn it down a little bit.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I know you all have hangovers—you especially, Fergie; I hear it was a big night for you!

John Hogg (Queensland, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator—

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Sorry, I am being provoked, Mr Deputy President.

John Hogg (Queensland, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That should be withdrawn.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Sorry, which part?

John Hogg (Queensland, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The comment you made. Just withdraw it.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That they are hung over?

John Hogg (Queensland, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I withdraw it. But I make the point that I am not going to speak quieter or tone it down simply because there are a few headaches on the other side of the chamber. Let us be clear—

Barnaby Joyce (Queensland, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy President, I rise on a point of order. I think Senator Conroy’s statement is impinging on the character of the people on the government benches. To suggest that they did not have control of themselves is completely out of order.

John Hogg (Queensland, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is no point of order. Senator Conroy, continue your contribution. You have 32 seconds left.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

So what has happened here is that, for the third time in five days, the Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts, Senator Helen Coonan, has been rolled. She was rolled by Sol Trujillo last week. We saw the kissing and cuddling exercise from Senator Ronaldson and Senator Joyce. There was all of the tough talk and then they just rolled over and Sol tickled their tummies. That is what happened last week. He made a laughing stock out of Senator Joyce and Senator Ronaldson. He is playing them on a break. (Time expired)

Alan Eggleston (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Conroy is right—the coalition did have a big celebration last night. They had a big celebration for very big reasons. The coalition after 10 years in government have achieved an awful lot for Australia and changed things for the better for this country in many areas. If you quickly look through what has been done, you will see that we have record low interest rates. I remember buying a house in south Perth in 1989 under the Hawke and Keating government and paying 19 per cent interest rates. Nobody would even think about that sort of thing now. Now they are down to five per cent. We have record low unemployment. Under the Hawke and Keating government, unemployment was around 10 per cent. Under the Howard government it is down to five per cent. We have record growth rates. In fact, the demand for people with skills is so great in places like the Pilbara and Queensland that we have a skills shortage. That is again a reflection, if you like, of the size of the Australian economy and the way it has grown under the Howard government. Most importantly—and Senator Conroy should not be leaving the chamber so quickly—we have paid off the Commonwealth government’s debt of something like $96 billion left by the Hawke and Keating government. So, yes, the coalition did have a lot to celebrate last night. We are very pleased to have been able to do that.

When it comes to telecommunications, which is really what Senator Conroy was focusing on, the government’s deregulation of the telecommunications industry has been enormously beneficial to the Australian population. If you go back 10 years and think about the prices which applied then and the limited range of services and if you look today at the deregulated telecommunications market, where there are over 100 different telecommunications companies, you will see that prices have dropped and the range of services has greatly increased. In particular, telecommunications services in regional Australia are certainly a lot better than they were 10 years ago. In the most remote areas of Australia this government had a special contract of something like $150 million, I think it was, for services to 40,000 people living in the most remote areas of Australia. That was a competitive contract. Telstra and Optus competed for it and Telstra won. These people in the most remote areas of Australia are now getting access to the internet and to much improved telecommunications services compared to where they were 10 years ago.

This government has a wonderful record which we are very proud of and which has brought great benefit across many fronts to the people of Australia. Today Labor has plucked out one individual example of a price increase in telecommunications, but Senator Conroy just ignored all of the examples of price decreases over the past 10 years. The reality is that, overall, telecommunications prices have dropped by some 20 per cent since the Howard government was elected in 1996. That is an enormous drop. I think we all remember quite well how expensive telecommunications services were under the previous Labor government and how long it took to have phone services connected under Labor when there was no universal service obligation or community service guarantee. Labor come in here today and complain about a single price increase. They are really trying to divert people’s attention from their own dismal record. To talk about the great party that the coalition had last night surely must be envy at its most poignant.

Kate Lundy (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Sport and Recreation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

How interesting it is that the government tries to point to minuscule issues such as the changes that Senator Eggleston pointed out that have somehow been of benefit to consumers when the whole character of the treatment of Telstra under the Howard government for the last 10 years has been completely and utterly dictated by the privatisation agenda. In fact, the proposal back in 1996 to sell Telstra in tranches eventually, when they could not get the full sale through the Senate, has resulted in the privatisation agenda ensuring that Australian customers and telecommunications users have been put at a perpetual disadvantage. This is because the primary political and policy interest of the Howard government has always been to maximise the return on the Telstra asset when they sell it.

With that in mind, the Howard government had no interest in doing anything other than making sure Telstra made a lot of money. What is the obvious and direct impact of that? The obvious and direct impact of that is that customers of Telstra would be delivered a short straw. They would be ripped off. They would be delivered substandard services. There would be cost savings made on Telstra’s services, in the effort to maintain the fattest bottom line in profits as was possible for the company. If that profit margin were not maintained and grown, the share price would not prove to be satisfactory to entice people to buy the shares upon the next tranche sale.

Let us have a look at how this has manifested itself over the last 10 years. I and many other Labor senators have participated in endless inquiries, which have shown up a number of very salient facts, like the existing Telstra copper network being, as described by their own people, ‘five minutes to midnight’ in terms of it being obsolete. So over the last 10 years—and one of these inquiries was only a few years ago—the government and Telstra have admitted that they have underinvested in the network to the point of its obsolescence almost. That is an absolute disgrace, particularly in the context that we all know, that every local government in this country knows and that every state government knows that it is through broadband that we will maximise economic growth particularly in our regions. Yet all these policies have worked in the opposite direction.

Let me make a point about broadband. Up until a few short years ago, the Howard government was talking down the need for broadband in this country. I saw the minister in this place, at world forums around this country and in other places saying, ‘We don’t need broadband.’ This is absolutely true. It was only a few years ago under immense pressure not just from the Labor opposition but from businesses, local councils and community organisations demanding that this government wrap its small mind around the fact that this country needs broadband did we start to see some policy attention, as opposed to permission by the Howard government to allow Telstra to continually underinvest in the network. It is quite rich for this arrogant government to come in here and say, ‘Look what we’ve delivered to Australian consumers.’ It has not delivered anything in terms of improvements.

There is a raft of statistics showing what has worsened in a period of a telecommunications boom in the world, a dot com era which saw a massive increase in the use of the internet. What has happened here? The character of this privatisation driven agenda in telecommunications policy has resulted in minimal investment in the network. Telstra are doing everything they can to prevent other companies investing in broadband networks. The ACCC has experienced incredible frustration regarding the regulations surrounding accessing Telstra’s network, as though that would somehow help, given the blockages to broadband within that network anyway. I will not even go into the pricing of access. You need only to look at the retention of the monopoly of the fixed line and how that has been singularly exploited by Telstra with price increases all the way through. Every time that goes up, everyone has to pay— (Time expired)

Julian McGauran (Victoria, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I too rise on this matter of taking note of answers. As has been mentioned by several other speakers, last night the government had its celebration of 10 years in government. It should be noted too that that would also be 10 years in opposition for the Labor Party. As far as our Great Hall dinner went, it was a modest affair. It acknowledged the absolute privilege of being in government and how grateful we are to the Australian people that at four elections they have given us their confidence. We have, in many respects, been proud to live up to their confidence.

The Prime Minister in his address to the hall said many things about politics. I recommend that the other side get copies of the speech. He spoke of the unpredictability of politics, the ever-changing nature of politics. He finished his address by saying—and I think it was a line out of Gone with the Wind‘There is still much to do and tomorrow is another day.’ The Prime Minister, I should add, was in this chamber to listen to Senator Hill’s address—a rare visit by the Prime Minister. If he had also been in here at question time, I think he would change that line by saying, ‘Tomorrow is not another day; what we’ve experienced today is Groundhog Day.’ For the 10 years we have been in government, you have been bleating and complaining about a policy that has gone to the people of Australia on three occasions. This government’s policy to sell Telstra has gone to three elections and has been endorsed at three elections. Yet, just like Groundhog Day, you whip up the same old arguments and complaints, and it boils down to one thing: you do not support the privatisation of Telstra at all.

This issue of Telstra epitomises our 10 years in government and your 10 years in opposition. In our 10 years in government, on each occasion we have tested this policy with the Australian people. It has a philosophical and policy base to it, and that is competition and choice. We have been transparent, honest and driven by the benefits of privatisation, none less, of course, than the economic benefits of being able to reduce the government debt to zero. And the Australian people know where we have always stood. It also epitomises your 10 years of opposition to this issue, and you are still raising it. After T1, T2 and T3, you still get up here and whip up the same old arguments. You will not accept the judgment of the Australian people, just as you have not accepted the judgment of the Australian people with regard to the government gaining the majority here in the Senate.

Also, the one thing the Australian people know about us is that we are a reformist government—we believe in our reforms and we stick to what we mean; we say what we mean and we do what we mean—whereas they know only too well that you are confused, inconsistent or downright opportunistic when it comes to the policy of privatisation. They have very keen memories of what you did in government. Of course, when you were in government you privatised everything that you could get your hands on, with, I might add, our opposition support. There were Qantas and the Commonwealth Bank just to name a few. And you squandered the funds on top of it. You had no plan and no philosophical base in regard to privatisation; it was just a grab for money to try to fill that deficit gap in your budget, in contrast to this government’s plan of privatisation to reduce debt and to spend the money wisely. So, in many respects, with this issue 10 years on, there are still the same old arguments and the same old basic policy differences. But it epitomises our 10 years of reform government and your 10 years of no policy and picking the wrong issues.

Helen Polley (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to take note of the answers, or lack of, given by Senator Coonan with regard to Australia Post’s intention to charge pensioners and veterans fees for the use of mail redirection and holding services. I have to say that today it was a gold medal performance by the senator of not answering any questions, as were the comments of Senator Eggleston in trying to defend the indefensible. And what can I say about Senator McGauran? It was obviously a very late night last night.

As Mr Howard celebrates 10 long years as Prime Minister, our pensioners and veterans will be commiserating on 10 long years of an arrogant government that has continued to attack the most disadvantaged in our community. On a daily basis, I hear of pensioners and veterans who are struggling—I repeat: struggling—to make ends meet. And yet we hear that the Howard government is quite happy for Australia Post to slug an impost on 400,000 Australians. Australia Post believe they are striking a balance by offering a 50 per cent reduction of fees to eligible concession card holders. With a dividend of over $286 million, they are not so much striking a balance as ensuring that the pockets of the Howard government will continue to be overflowing.

This government is more interested in self-congratulations than it is in the average Australian. This government continues to ignore the cries of pensioners and veterans as they struggle to make ends meet. This government has turned a blind eye to Australia Post’s decision and is quite happy to skirt around the issue and advise us in this chamber that Australia Post are an independent corporation and, basically, can do what they darn well please.

Australia is daily becoming a profit driven nation rather than one that looks after its own. Isn’t Australia Post making enough money? Last year, Australia Post reported a record net profit in excess of $374 million, and yet they still find it reasonable to target our pensioners as cash cows. I challenge Australia Post to really be serious about what they call ‘striking a balance’. Did they bother to consider other options? Or did they only bother to think of the easiest and most selfish option, which is the option that benefits only Australia Post and the Howard government?

Australia Post has suggested that if people prefer not to pay—or, to add my own words to that statement, cannot afford to pay—for mail redirection or holding services these people could, to quote from an article in the Australian:

... simply update their address details with all their correspondents before they move, arrange to have their mail picked up or have it sent on by the new occupants of their old address.

Be fair! In other words, if people do not want to pay the fee for a service that was free, they should go ahead and make many expensive telephone calls, pay postage for additional letters of advice or, worse still, inconvenience the occupants of their old address. That does not sound like a solution to me. That sounds like a major inconvenience and expense—an impost, again, on those who can least afford it.

If the Howard government are serious about congratulating themselves on what they describe as ‘a great 10 years’, then perhaps today, yesterday and right now they could take the time to make a difference to the disadvantaged in our community and tell Australia Post that the new policy for mail redirection and holding services stinks. Do not hide behind the excuse of Australia Post being a government business enterprise. The Howard government have a responsibility to protect and enhance the quality of life enjoyed by pensioners and veterans through minimising policy that is an impost on the trivial fortnightly pension.

The Howard government are focused on bottom-line profit, espousing good financial management and gloating about a buoyant economy at the expense of the people who can least afford it. They should demonstrate some strength and compassion and stand up for those who cannot defend themselves. Do not rob our pensioners—reward them. Stick up for the people who elected you and trusted that you would do the right thing by them. The right thing is to tell Australia Post to go back to the drawing board with their fee policy, to have a good hard look at their profits and to think about operating smarter, but not at the expense of 400,000 Australians who struggle each week just to get by.

We have had Welfare to Work and Work Choices, and now we have more complacency. In fact, this one takes the cake because there is no way that the government can stand up here, hold their hands over their hearts and confirm that this fee from Australia Post will not—and I repeat, will not—affect our pensioners and our veterans. And our veterans, despite the many years of commitment— (Time expired)

Question agreed to.