John Faulkner (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

One of the most important supports of Australia’s political system is the ability of elected officials to make the distinction between their responsibilities as members of a government and their role as party politicians seeking re-election, to draw a line between the privileges, powers and entitlements provided to them to discharge the duties of office and the activities they may undertake in pursuit of partisan political outcomes. Over the past few weeks we have seen mounting evidence that Mr Howard and his ministers are no longer able to draw that line. We have seen Mr Howard’s appalling use of properties like Kirribilli House and the Lodge for Liberal Party functions and Liberal Party fundraising, letting the taxpayer foot the bill for party political activities. We have seen an ever-increasing allotment of advantages to incumbents with staff, printing allowances and entitlements as just the tip of the iceberg of the Howard government’s rigging of the system.

But the single greatest example is the outrageous use of taxpayer-funded advertising by Mr Howard’s government to push a partisan political agenda. Hundreds of millions of hard-earned taxpayers’ dollars have been spent by Mr Howard simply to save his political skin. This abuse of power is corrupting and undermining the proper working of Australia’s democratic heritage.

Let me put this into some perspective. The flagrantly political advertising—before the legislation was even introduced into parliament—of the government’s Work Choices policy cost taxpayers more than $50 million. That is more than half the entire advertising spend of the Keating government in the four years to 1995-96. In the nine months to March 2007, the Howard government has spent $40 million more than the Keating government did in four years. The Howard government has spent in a week of Work Choices advertising as much as it will spend in a year on national security advertising. The ‘Don’t mention the Work Choices’ advertising campaign for the week of 20-26 May this year cost $4.1 million, or $25,000 an hour. This does not include the full-page newspaper IR ads in all daily newspapers for 5-6 May 2007, which the department classified as non-campaign advertising. It cost the taxpayer $472,195 for just two days.

In May 2007 there were 18 active government advertising campaigns. The media spend for these 18 campaigns will be $111.2 million. This figure does not include the cost of focus group testing, market research, creative or production costs, public relations and consultants. These campaigns included: simpler super, $15.8 million, from May to June this year and private health insurance, $14.5 million, from 29 April to 30 June this year. Climate change ads have been delayed but the campaign is still due to start before election. The budget is for $52 million including a mail-out to all households. Since 1996 Mr Howard’s Liberal government has spent $1.85 billion on taxpayer-funded advertising campaigns including the $69 million superannuation campaign, $55 million on the Work Choices campaign in 2005, $65 million on the ‘Unchain my heart’ GST campaign and $26.9 million on the ‘Strengthening Medicare’ campaign in 2004.

The vast bulk of the Howard government’s advertising is full of blatant political propaganda. The banner headline for its early May 2007 advertising blitz notifying Mr Howard’s backflip on the Work Choices safety net said: ‘A stronger safety net for working Australians’. No information about the legislation—which had not even been introduced into parliament—just bogus claims about the benefits of the original Work Choices legislation and vague implications about the proposed changes. That is not providing information; it is deceptive propaganda, pure and simple.

It has been reported that the government will spend $69 million promoting the superannuation changes introduced in last year’s budget. In this case the banner headline of the press advertisement said ‘The biggest reform to Australian superannuation ever’. That is not only political propaganda; it is just not true. The brief for a $23 million climate change advertising blitz to begin in the next few weeks, we expect, specifies the need to ‘increase awareness of the Australian Government’s leadership role’ and to ‘position the government as the primary balanced voice on climate change’. That is to say, this $23 million splurge is about political spin, making the Howard government look good on climate change. If Mr Howard thinks that immense amounts of taxpayer-funded political propaganda will work to his advantage, Mr Howard will do it.

But I say: enough is enough. As the Leader of the Opposition, Mr Rudd, has made clear, a Labor government under Mr Rudd’s leadership would not use public funds for advertising of a party political nature. A Rudd government would enforce that undertaking by requiring the Auditor-General to verify that any government advertising met a genuine need for the provision of factual information or legitimate educational purposes, and a Rudd Labor government would work with state governments to see that similar arrangements applied in their jurisdictions. I would say that the citizens of this country deserve nothing less, but they will get nothing, of course—they will just not get this—from the Howard government.

The federal government of Australia should not be spending the public’s money in an effort to, in the sleaziest way, buy its way back into office. The federal government in this country should not be using public funds to lie to the Australian public. And the federal government in Australia should not be using—

Helen Coonan (NSW, Liberal Party, Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Coonan interjecting—

Paul Calvert (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, I think that is a very good point of order, Senator. Order! I think your accusation there may be unparliamentary, Senator Faulkner; I ask you to withdraw it.

John Faulkner (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I do not believe it is, Mr President, but I will withdraw it. I am just talking about the federal government.

Paul Calvert (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I ask you to withdraw it.

John Faulkner (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I withdraw it. I want to say this, though: the federal government should not be using the powers of office for partisan party political benefit. After 11 long years, Mr Howard’s Liberals don’t get it. They don’t know the difference between their money and the taxpayers’ money. They just cannot make that distinction anymore; Mr Howard just doesn’t know the difference.

Helen Coonan (NSW, Liberal Party, Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I repeat that Senator Faulkner is getting very close to a personal imputation against the Prime Minister.

Paul Calvert (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, not on this occasion; I will listen carefully.

John Faulkner (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What I am saying is about the government, Mr President. Let me be absolutely clear. Listen to this, Senator Coonan. This federal government is the most dishonest federal government in Australian history. It is the most dishonest government in the history of the Commonwealth of Australia, and you ought to be ashamed to be part of it. I say: Australians deserve better and, under a Rudd Labor government, they will get better.