Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the answers given by the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy (Senator Conroy) to questions without notice asked by the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate (Senator Minchin) and Senator Abetz today relating to the national broadband network and to the luxury car tax surcharge exemption.

The humiliating need by Labor to introduce a luxury car tax amendment bill—or, more correctly, the ‘Labor Incompetence Correction Bill’—highlights how Labor handles public policy issues. The luxury car tax surcharge was born out of old-fashioned class warfare. But the simple fact is that it has not deterred and will not deter to any great extent those people that can afford to buy the genuine luxury cars. It will do what we the opposition predicted it would do—hurt Australian farmers, Australian tourism operators and Australian car workers. Of course, now the Labor Party have rushed back into this place with the tax law amendment bill dealing with their faults in the luxury car tax. Senator Conroy tells us that he as a minister cannot speculate on legislation that is about to be introduced into this place, completely oblivious to the fact that his colleague that he represents in the other place had, in fact, not only introduced the bill but also given the second reading speech before lunchtime.

This is the disconnect that exists within this Labor government. The minister in this place, who should have been aware that the legislation was being introduced, was completely and utterly oblivious. When you do point it out to him, all you get is abuse hurled back at you. This is Labor public policy for all to see, and it does not reflect well on them. The car industry in this country is going through a massive problem. What do we have? The first thing Labor does is introduce a luxury car tax. Then it introduces regulations to ensure, just in case four-wheel drives are exempted in certain categories, that the four-wheel drive Ford Territory will not be a beneficiary of the exemption. This is Labor incompetence shown and disclosed to the world at large. This is undermining the confidence of investors and purchasers of Australian motor vehicles.

On top of that, we now have the bungled bank guarantee legislation which has seen the flight of capital from the non-guaranteed institutions to the guaranteed institutions. Guess who the first casualties are: the car dealers and the consumers that rely on finance—in relation to their floor plans and their purchases of motor vehicles respectively. That has been another whammy to the Australian car industry. And what do Senator Carr and Mr Rudd do? They bring in their $6.2 billion plan—so called—to save the car industry. But what they are providing is a long-term diet for a car industry that is haemorrhaging as we speak. The $6.2 billion is of no assistance to the car dealers. If we do not have car dealers and people purchasing from car dealers, it obviates the need for Australian car manufacturers to make cars. I invite the government to take a holistic approach to the Australian car industry and address all of the needs.

I also make this plea to the Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research, Senator Carr, who is allegedly in charge of the car industry: do not dabble in foreign affairs; it is way beyond your capacity and comprehension. His silly partisan commentary in relation to the United States and the US congress not passing certain legislation and his trying to blame the conservative side of politics, the Republicans, has now exploded in his face because President-elect Obama has said that the congress was right to refuse the passing of the legislation. So here we have the accident-prone Senator Carr condemning the United States Republicans only to have Democrat President-elect Obama confirming that the congress in fact did the right thing. I suggest, Senator Carr, that you stop playing in foreign affairs and deal with the issues facing the car industry today. The fundamental issue is the finance package so desperately required for the car dealers of this country.

Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is always a pleasure to follow on from Senator Abetz so that I can put some sense into the debate. I also rise to take note of questions and answers given today. You would have to have been living in a cocoon to not understand that the world is facing the worst global financial crisis since the depression in the early part of last century. It just baffles me to hear some of the tripe that comes from those opposite. If they were fair dinkum about improving Australia’s lot and securing us for the future, you would think that they would not have spent all that time blocking budget bills as they did earlier on this year.

The Rudd government is acting now for Australia’s long-term future. This may come as a shock to those opposite: we on the Labor side of politics, in the Rudd Labor government, do not make decisions to get us through from poll to poll like the previous Howard government. At the beginning of every month they lived for the Newspoll to come out so they could see how they were travelling and what they could invent for a new issue and how to avoid major issues like workplace relations, emissions and global warming. It really does alarm me that this is the intelligentsia in charge of questions on the other side of the chamber.

I want to talk more about the car industry, as Senator Abetz started the ball rolling. Yesterday I noted with glee that, in this chamber, Senator Carr announced the saving of some 1,300 jobs in the fine Victorian city of Geelong. I would have thought that we would have been congratulated and patted on the back for taking that initiative—unlike those opposite, who in their 12 years hid under the guise of productivity and flexibility and could not wait to see jobs disappear.

While I am at it, I will congratulate the Rudd Labor government on its announcement today of the Fair Work Bill. This really is a wonderful day, yet I have to stand up here and defend our initiatives in saving the car industry and listen to some of the rubbish coming out of Senator Abetz’s mouth about what we are not doing. For goodness sake—$6.2 billion to prop our car industry. Whether the other side of politics likes it or not, I think we should be congratulated for doing everything we can to save jobs and, very importantly, save manufacturing jobs in this country. One thousand three hundred jobs were saved yesterday.

I want to talk a bit more about our $6.2 billion plan to make the automotive industry more economically and environmentally sustainable by 2020. It would help if those opposite actually realised that this government was given a mandate at the last election. Whether they like it or not, the people of Australia voted with their feet. One of the major issues that resoundingly tipped the scales in favour of the Rudd Labor government was climate change. There are no ifs or buts about that. We make no apologies on this side of the chamber for doing everything we can not only to secure Australia’s future prosperity but to tackle climate change. If that means putting $6.2 billion into a plan to save Australia’s automotive industry, then congratulations to us—well done. This is what we should be doing; we should be planning for the future and not going from Newspoll to Newspoll like that lot opposite.

I will take the opportunity to talk about those opposite, because it is great to see Senator Abetz leading the argument. I was flicking through the papers early this morning and I noticed an article by Christian Kerr in the Australian talking about the ‘Libs’ growing hunger’. There are a couple of lines that I want to quote of Mr Kerr’s interviews. I think that he was talking to a number of anonymous frontbenchers from the opposition. One of his quotes is:

Although they will not say so directly—

‘they’ being those opposite—

many Liberals were relieved John Howard lost his seat in last year’s election.

There are a lot of good, hardworking members of parliament who unfortunately lose their seats through no fault of their own. But I have to be fair to the unnamed frontbencher or those who would not own up: I was quite happy that Mr Howard lost his seat at the last election too.

But another quote that was used, and no-one put a name to it, was:

‘We’ve—

being the Liberals, I assume—

got rid of the biggest problem, which was the leadership …’

Great! One would think you get rid of the biggest problem, the leadership, and everything works out fine. But it goes on:

‘When Nelson’s leadership terminated, the influence of a lot of the old Howard brigade—

I hope those opposite are listening—

was terminated too.

(Time expired)

Scott Ryan (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This is the first time that it has been my privilege to follow Senator Sterle. It is quite amusing to do so, because what we have just heard from Senator Sterle is the standard mantra that we hear from government speakers—members of a government that has been in search of a narrative and a purpose since it got elected just over a year ago. If it was the inflation genie 10 or 12 months ago, it is now about the global financial crisis. It is a government that is stunt driven and poll driven.

It is interesting that Senator Sterle referred to his concerns about unemployment, because the one thing that I will stand here and be very happy to have compared is the previous government measured against the current government on unemployment. If this government ever sees an unemployment figure with a three in front of it, I will not be the only one who will be amazed. I will be one of several hundred thousand Australians who will have a job despite this government having predicted, before it started talking about the global financial crisis, that jobs would be lost. The government talks about its mandate. It does have a mandate. It promised fiscal conservatism. It promised to keep a surplus. It promised to keep the economy growing strongly. I look forward to the government continuing to deliver on those promises over the coming 12 months.

I have risen this afternoon, in this take note debate, to particularly note the answer given by the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, Senator Conroy, to the question asked by Senator Minchin. In a very simple question, Senator Minchin asked the minister if he would commit to releasing the details of the tender for the National Broadband Network after the tenders close tomorrow. I note that is actually four months later than originally promised. Senator Conroy, through sophistry, tried to avoid answering this question by saying he would not make a statement. I want to refer to the words used by the Deputy Prime Minister in the other place yesterday:

We will go through that process, which is obviously subject to considerable legal requirements and considerable probity requirements, even if those things are not understood …

There were a few other comments which included:

The outcome of the tender round will be available and will be transparent for all members of the House later in the week.

Senator Minchin specifically referred to that. Senator Conroy said he would not make a statement. Senator Conroy also referred to probity advice. Senator Conroy did not outline what the probity advice said. I have not heard of probity advice that would actually say, as the minister said, that the tenderers themselves, the bidders, can make the announcement but the government, in receipt of the tenders after the tenders are closed—after the tenders have been finalised—cannot make that announcement. It is unheard of that we can say several billions of dollars of Australian taxpayers’ money can be spent while the people spending it, the government, refuse to commit to releasing the details of those tenders.

The Deputy Prime Minister said it was good enough, but today the minister said that it was not when he said he would not make a statement. That is clearly what the Deputy Prime Minister was referring to yesterday. If the minister actually has probity advice that says these details should not be released, I challenge the minister to table that probity advice to outline exactly what is said about the details of tenders not being able to be released.

This is only one step removed from that lame excuse used by state Labor governments—whose members have filled the ranks of this government—of ‘commercial-in-confidence’ when millions and millions of dollars of taxpayers’ money are being spent but the government will not release the information. The Deputy Prime Minister said that the information would be released but today the minister said it would not be and he relied on probity advice. So he should come forward and say what that probity advice said and why he cannot release it.

The truth is we know why this information will not be released, and it is the failure of this government’s broadband policy. The tenders are closing four months late. We do not have a regulatory framework. We do not have a pricing regime and we do not have a commitment that Australian consumers and homeowners, the users of residential broadband services, will not pay more to access this. Now they are telling us we cannot know the bidders. Well, this is a fine way to spend several billion dollars of taxpayers’ money! Despite this delay, which they announced themselves, and despite the commitment to start building this by the end of the year, they still scrapped the previous government’s OPEL program using WiMax technology that would have seen 750,000 households actually be able to access wireless broadband services. Those 750,000 households are still waiting. They would probably like to know where the billions of dollars are going to go if they ever get spent, so they can find out exactly when they are going to be able to access broadband services. It was interesting that the minister also referred to Baldrick and his cunning plans. If there ever were a successful cunning plan by Baldrick, it is like this minister’s broadband program, because, as we all know, its plans have come to nothing. This secret plan that the minister described is so secret that it does not exist. It is actually time to christen this ‘Broadband Watch’.

Louise Pratt (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Having risen in this take note of answers debate, I note it is a spectacular week in which to be able to reflect on the government’s narrative. Here we are, a year after the election of the Rudd Labor government, being able to reflect very proudly, I think, on our achievements. This week we have delivered and brought into the public arena our Fair Work Australia legislation. Look at the mandate that we received from the people on this issue. Here we are in this parliament with the legislation having been introduced into the other place, legislation that delivers fairness for working families, fairness for the underpaid and fairness in the bargaining process. What else have we got to say about our narrative? Well, here we are tackling climate change—

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise on a point of order, Mr Deputy President. It goes to relevance as to the topic. We are discussing and debating the motion to take note of the answers given by Senator Conroy, not the performance of the government over the last 12 months.

Alan Ferguson (SA, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We do usually allow fairly broad discussion in taking note of answers, but I would remind Senator Pratt that the motion was to take note of the answers given by Senator Conroy today.

Louise Pratt (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr Deputy President. After talking about climate change, I would now like to acknowledge the economy. It was going to be my next topic, but one of the achievements that I think the government can look to is its substantial progress on delivering on the broadband agenda. All of the issues that I have highlighted were key issues at the last election: Work Choices, moving towards Fair Work Australia; climate change and the lack of progress of the previous government on an emissions trading scheme; high inflation, high interest rates and mismanagement of the economy, on which Labor is now delivering stable financial management in this time of crisis; and progress towards the kind of telecommunication and information infrastructure that this country so desperately needs. I would like to congratulate and commend Minister Conroy on the way he has managed this very large and substantial process. A lot of money is being put through this tender process. These are substantial and weighty matters, and I would like to compliment him on the way in which he has conducted himself. It is very important that he listens to important probity advice.

The Deputy Prime Minister said yesterday that there will be full public knowledge of the bids because it is up to the bidders themselves to announce the bids. The Deputy Prime Minister did not indicate that the government would be making a statement on the number of bids. Our government’s process is consistent with the probity advice received. I do not think we should be making ongoing comments on the number of bids, who the bidder is or what is contained in the bidding process because, frankly, they do not add any value to the process. We have significant, weighty issues before us, and they are far more substantial than that.

In 11½ years those opposite stood by and did nothing while our international peers started to roll out high-speed fibre based networks. You were too slow. In its election commitments, the Rudd government recognised the need for a long-term approach to nation building. Indeed, it is part of ensuring our nation’s prosperity. So we put together a $4.7 billion plan to facilitate the rollout of the national broadband network. As we all know, broadband is critical infrastructure today. Frankly, the electorate of Australia judged the opposition’s plans in this regard as simply not good enough. They could see through them.

I understand the frustrations of my constituents in not being able to receive the level of service that they require. Businesses and individuals need to do business more efficiently, and so completely new technology is required. People did not anticipate the significant demands that would be placed on our system—the opposition certainly did not. But the Rudd Labor government did. It put together these very substantial changes. We are looking at the necessary regulatory changes. We have also said that the network needs to foster the kind of competition that we require through— (Time expired)

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

May I just comment on Senator Pratt’s remarks in this take note of answers debate. She said that substantial progress has been made by the Rudd Labor government in the rollout of the national broadband network.

Louise Pratt (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Eleven and a half years you had.

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

The echo on the sideline said 11½ years. Let us look at the promises that the Rudd Labor government made before the election. I will take you to the first promise. Before the last election, Labor promised that within six months it would have chosen a tenderer for the national broadband network and that construction would commence before the end of 2008. Six months from 24 November last year would take us to around May. Tomorrow we are expected to hear something from the tenderers, and let us hope that they include several, especially Telstra.

The bids are due tomorrow. Telstra, which is one of the two key potential bidders, is unsure as to whether it will lodge a proposal because of a lack of clarity and because of a concern about the type of partnership arrangements and conditions the government will impose on it. Telstra says that it would be virtually impossible to build a national broadband network in the five years that Labor claim—another broken promise from their election promises last year.  Senator Conroy told the Age on 2 March 2008:

I expect to be able to give final Government approval by the end of August or early September, and hope construction will commence before the end of the year.

How are these time bands and promises from the government looking? Where are they taking us in terms of the rollout of a national broadband network? It is looking very sick. Senator Pratt talks here of ‘substantial progress’, and we are almost to the end of the year when the rollout is supposed to commence. We have not closed down the tendering business yet. We have not appointed a tenderer. How can we start in the next four weeks? Is Santa Claus going to start the rollout on his travels around the nation on Christmas Eve? That is about the only hope we have got for a start on it.

I make the point that the coalition’s policy, when in government, was to work in partnership with the private sector to deliver a competitive, state-of-the-art broadband network to increase availability of high-speed services to 99 per cent of premises by the end of 2009. Telstra’s words are: ‘It cannot be done and it is very unlikely that it will be done within five years.’ This takes us to 2013-14. My worry is: by the time the $4.7 billion is spent and the technology has been rolled out, will it be old hat technology? Is new technology going to come along and wind it out? Will we see $4.7 billion wasted? Minister Conroy says that the technology will go to 98 per cent of Australians. I wonder where the two per cent will be? Will it be in Pitt Street, Sydney? Perhaps Rundle Mall in Adelaide? I do not think so. I know where the two per cent will be: it will be people out in the rural and remote areas who will be missing out again.

This is where the government ought to sharpen its act, have a look at what it is doing to the very people who earn our export dollars and see that they get a fair go. All we have had is talk, political spin and the promise of spending $4.7 billion on a rollout, which up till now has delivered absolutely nothing. It is like many of the promises we got last year: the government was going to be fiscally responsible, and now the money tin is empty. Labor is very good at emptying the tin of money. We have seen that for decades. No doubt the first thing the coalition will have to do when they get back into government is clean up the finances again.

Question agreed to.