Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have received the following letter from Senator Gallagher.

Dear Mr President

Pursuant to standing order 75, I propose that the following matter of public importance be submitted to the Senate for discussion:

The Turnbull Government's lack of achievement in the 100 days since the election.

Is the proposal supported?

More than the number of senators required by the standing orders having risen in their places—

The PRESIDENT:I understand that informal arrangements have been made to allocate specific times to each of the speakers in today’s debate. With the concurrence of the Senate, I shall ask the clerks to set the clock accordingly.

Doug Cameron (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have 15 minutes, but I think it will take me a lot longer than 15 minutes to get through the lack of achievement of this rabble of a government that we have here now. What do the general public see of this government? They see 100 days of disappointment. The great new Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull was going to change everything. He was going to deliver all these great things for the Australian public, but what has he delivered? Absolutely nothing. He has delivered nothing. There have been 100 days of disappointment in Malcolm Turnbull. There have been 100 days of political cowardice from the Prime Minister. He will not stand up to the National Party. The National Party were the doormats in this place. The Liberal Party used to walk all over them.

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

Not anymore.

Doug Cameron (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Now you have got Senator Williams out talking about the National Party government. It is the National Party that is running the show, according to the Nationals. It is the Joyce-Turnbull government that they are now talking about. Then somebody got onto him. Senator Williams was talking about it the day before, and the next day he was talking about the Turnbull-Joyce government.

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

That's it.

Doug Cameron (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Then it was the Turnbull government. Senator Joyce was flicked off the planet altogether. We know that after 100 days of disappointment, 100 days of political cowardice by the Prime Minister and 100 days of backflips by this Prime Minister that all this Prime Minister is doing is thinking about self-preservation. That is the big thing this Prime Minister is looking at: self-preservation. He wakes up in the morning and goes: 'How am I going to survive this day?' It is one day at a time for this weak, jelly-backed Prime Minister. It is one day at a time for the Prime Minister. It has been 100 days of a Prime Minister with no backbone, no ticker and absolutely no authority. That is the problem for this Prime Minister—no ticker, no backbone, no authority and no capacity to be a real Prime Minister.

When I heard I was going to be talking on this matter of public importance, I thought I will look at the dictionary and see what 'achievement' means in the context of Malcolm Turnbull. The definition of achievement is a thing done successfully, with effort, skill and courage. Well, isn't it an oxymoron then to put Turnbull and achievement in the same sentence? He has absolutely no skill. You have only got to look at his political judgement to see his lack of political judgement. He has no skill at all. Courage? Well, I do not think anyone in this country thinks the Prime Minister has either political courage or personal courage. He has absolutely no courage whatsoever. He has certainly got no courage of his own convictions. He has no courage for the things that he thought he would tell people that he stood for. He has absolutely no courage of his convictions. The days of the smart little leather jacket on Q&A are long gone. Those days are long gone for this Prime Minister. He has to get the stetson on, he has to get the R.M. Williams on and he has got to walk to New England and say, 'Barnaby, what next?' That is what he has to do. We know that the National Party will cave in eventually, but they have got a bit going for them at the moment.

We have got a Prime Minister who is a hostage of the extreme right in this country, a hostage of the National Party, and a hostage of people like George Christensen in the lower house. Mr Christensen seems to be calling the shots in the lower house. The Prime Minister is an absolute hostage of the extreme right—a wholly owned subsidiary of the right wing and the extremists in the Liberal-National Party. He has no conviction. He has given up on marriage equality. He has given up on climate change. He has given up on tax. He has given up on the backpacker tax. He has given up on health. He has given up on education.

Let us understand what has really happened here. The policies have not changed. We had this great big knifing of the former Prime Minister Tony Abbott. Tony Abbott got knifed by Malcolm Turnbull, but I am not sure how he got the courage to do it. He must have had lots of support to do it. I bet he was at the back of the queue when the knives were going in. Other people were doing it. Anyway, the former Prime Minister got knifed, and now the only problem is that former Prime Minister Abbott's policies still reign supreme. The policies are still the same. They are the same policies, which means that all of those opinion polls that showed the Liberal-National Party were all on the nose—those policies are still there, and those opinion polls are still there, because the Liberal-National Party have not changed one jot. Former Prime Minister Tony Abbott's policies are still the policies that are reigning.

When you look at the Prime Minister you see this defeated person. You see this husk of a politician, who was so devastated on election night he did not have any dignity at all. After the election campaign he got up and, because his ego was so battered, his ego was so bruised, his ego was so diminished, he gave the worst speech ever of anyone on election night in the country. It was the worst we have ever seen!

If I watch him now—this diminished Prime Minister, this husk of a politician with nothing left inside—I think of the Stockholm syndrome. He is hostage to the right wing—under absolute, complete control of the worst elements in the National Party and the Liberal Party. Stockholm syndrome is where whoever is held hostage ends up being sympathetic with their captors. Prime Minster Turnbull: the Patty Hearst of the 45th Parliament. That is what he is. Prime Minister Turnbull is the highest profile hostage since Patty Hearst. He is just a hostage of the worst elements in this parliament.

Go and look at the term 'Stockholm syndrome', because that is what is affecting Malcolm Turnbull. He is an absolute captive of the Stockholm syndrome. Patty Hearst's defence lawyer said she suffered from the Stockholm syndrome. So whenever you hear 'Patty Hearst' think of Malcolm Turnbull. Stockholm syndrome was:

… a term that had been recently coined to explain the apparently irrational feelings of some captives for their captors.

Prime Minister Turnbull has said some weird things about some of the right wingers that have got him under complete control. He has said some weird things, so that fits in with the Stockholm syndrome term.

There are a number of criteria established by psychiatrist Dr Frank Ochberg. He has advised both Scotland Yard and the FBI about the Stockholm syndrome. If you listen to what this is, you just think: 'This is Malcolm Turnbull. This is the Prime Minister.' Criteria No. 1:

… people would experience something terrifying that just comes at them out of the blue. They are certain they are going to die.

Malcolm Turnbull was certain he was going to die on election night, or he would not have behaved in the base fashion that he did. It then goes on to say:

… they experience a type of infantilisation—where, like a child, they are unable to eat, speak or go to the toilet without permission.

Well, that is exactly where this Prime Minister is. He has got to go to George Christensen and say: 'Please can I go to the toilet? Please can I get this policy through? Please can I do anything that might even be the semblance of a progressive policy?' And George Christensen says, 'No.' Mr Joyce says, 'No, you can't.' The Prime Minister cannot do anything without getting approval from the worst elements in this parliament. Then it says:

Small acts of kindness—such as being given food—prompts a "primitive gratitude for the gift of life" …

Well, every day the Prime Minister has to go cap in hand to the right wing of the Liberal-National Party just to get the gift of life, to survive as the Prime Minister. What a weak, hollow husk of a politician this man is.

It says:

… hostages—

and think Prime Minister Turnbull—

experience a powerful primitive positive feeling towards their captors.

So he goes up to say, 'I might even try and like George Christensen today'. So they get this primitive positive feeling towards their captor. They are in denial that this is the person that put them in that situation. In their mind they think this is the person who is going to let them live: 'George Christensen, please let me live.'

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

Point of order.

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

Senator Cameron, resume your seat. Senator Williams?

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

During this presentation by Senator Cameron several times now he has referred to those in the other place just by their Christian name and surname. Will you please ask him to refer to those in the other place by their correct titles.

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

Thank you, Senator Williams. I will remind you, Senator Cameron, to refer to those in the other place by their correct titles.

Doug Cameron (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I accept the admonishment from the National Party—

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

No, no—Senator Cameron.

Doug Cameron (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

but I certainly will not accept any instructions, like the Prime Minister does. I accept the admonishment but will not be accepting instructions. It goes on, 'They are in denial'. And this is the person who put them in that situation. In their mind they think this is the person who is going to let them live. So Mr Christensen is the guy who lets the Prime Minister live.

Senator Joyce, now the Deputy Prime Minister—the Deputy Prime Minister of this country! I never thought I would see the day. But that is how bad things get in politics from time to time. So they go, 'Please, let me live.' Day by day, this husk, this empty vessel of a Prime Minister gets up every day. Then it goes on to say that Kristin Ehnmark, one of the hostages, said:

It's some kind of a context you get into when all your values, the morals you have change in some way.

It is clear that this Prime Minister has got no morals. This Prime Minister has got no values. They are all gone because Stockholm syndrome has got this guy holus bolus. There is nothing left. There is absolutely no way that he can develop any progressive policies. The leather jacket is on the back of the door, never to be seen again. He will never be a Prime Minister of this country with any standing.

We talk about the gains. We talk about 100 values or 100 things that this guy has done. He has done nothing in the first 100 days. He has done absolutely nothing except capitulate to the worst elements in this country. He does not stand up for his values on marriage equality. He does not stand up for his values on climate change. He does not stand up for his values on the republic. He has absolutely capitulated; a weak, jelly-backed, no backbone Prime Minister, absolutely stood-over by the National Party and the right wing. It is a disgrace. (Time expired)

Barry O'Sullivan (Queensland, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Let me open by telling you what I have been doing for the last 100 days. I have been bunkered down in my office, on my knees, praying—praying, Doug—that you would ask this question. That is what I have done. You have given me all my Christmases and birthdays in one day. Even Ripley would not believe the work we have done. Do not go, Doug. Loosen your tie, kick your shoes off, put your feet on the desk and have a listen.

We have put $3 billion—we have committed it through the Agricultural Competitiveness White Paper. Every Labor supporter in this country and every member of the CFMEU and every tofu-sucking Green can take their shoes and socks off and count their fingers and toes and they would not even know what $3 billion was. That is an enormous investment in agriculture in this country. We have put $7 million into the rural financial counselling service. So it will come as no surprise to my colleagues on the other side that I am going to concentrate on what we have done in 100 days in this Turnbull government for agriculture around the country.

We listened to that. He talked about a husk. We listened to that hollow presentation then by Senator Cameron. It sounded like—do you remember the Proclaimers from back in the seventies? 'I will walk 100 days' —a repeat. It was one song that just had the one verse that just went round and round and round. All he talked about was Patty Hearst the Stockholm syndrome and husks. He sounded like an old aluminium boat that was washed up. You know: that wave hits it, you sit there quietly and listen, and the wave hits it again. It is the same sound. But when you walk over and you look in it, it is an empty vessel. There is nothing in it. That is Senator Cameron and his contribution.

We extended $35 million to the Drought Communities Program. I can take you—if you have five minutes, come up to my home state of Queensland. I will take you out to Charleville and I will take you to Quilpie and I will take you to Longreach and Chinchilla, and they will tell you what an enormous benefit that was that the Turnbull government provided to them and their communities.

We put $18.6 million into drought community project proposals; $1.5 billion on water infrastructure modernisation. We put $15 billion into water reform agenda across Australia. Just yell out when you have had enough. Put your hand up, just yell out, and I will pull up. We brought in the Water Amendment Act. We put $2 billion into the National Water Infrastructure Loan Facility that provides loans for growers and producers all across the country. We put another $13 million shared between 25 projects into the irrigation industry improvement scheme. All of these are designed to improve the performance of the Murray-Darling Basin, having very high regard to the environmental issues, making sure that we got the balance right—the sustainability with agricultural production.

So we had $13 million shared with the irrigation industry in the improvement program. We brought in the Water Amendment (Review Implementation and Other Measures) Bill. We put $103 million into Sunraysia, a modernisation project, to keep manufacturing in one of Australia's iconic agricultural companies alive.

You talk over there about the fact that we have not supported particular industries. These are all support measures for industries.

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

They just banned the live exports.

Barry O'Sullivan (Queensland, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They banned live export, cutting a billion dollars. Now, what have we done in the last 100 days? We have reinstated the live cattle job. We have now got nearly—help me out; I think it is a million head exported in the 12-month period to about seven destinations around the world. We have created an environment for agriculture, particularly beef producers—listen carefully—their income has gone up by 500 per cent under this government. And we have done that because we have promoted the live export trade. We have done that because we are introducing reforms right across the sector. We have done that because we have continued to support Meat and Livestock Australia. We continue to support all of R&D in agriculture to the tune of hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of million dollars every year, particularly in the last 100 days. Do you know what? I hope one of you is taking notes. I do not want to have to come back in here and do this again, so someone needs to take some notes over there.

We made $50 million available to irrigators in South Australia. Of course, the irrigators have a problem now because they cannot get power to run their pumps, but I am sure that over the next 30 years the Labor government there will make changes. We put $1.7 million into the New South Wales government for projects under phase 4 of the Great Artesian Basin Sustainability Initiative—what a great initiative. We did phase 3 in my home state of Queensland and phase 4 in New South Wales, where we have capped off millions and millions of litres of water that each day were running down bore drains all across agricultural enterprises. We talk about it, and we get challenged on our sustainability and environmental credentials, but no-one makes mention of that when it happens. We put $53 million worth of funding into the Queensland irrigators. We provided $18 million to upgrade and augment the Chaffey Dam, $59.5 million to funding the National Water Infrastructure Development Fund and $12½ million into the Hay Private Irrigation District. Some of these areas are supported by some of the senators here in this chamber. We made $238 million available for Murrumbidgee Irrigation Limited and $25 million in funding for irrigators across the Murrumbidgee. Through you, Acting Deputy Chair Ketter: Senator Williams, please pay attention. You need to get ready to get up and move an extension because I have about 10 pages of achievements here—

Chris Ketter (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I do remind senators to address their remarks to the chair.

Barry O'Sullivan (Queensland, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I apologise. We put $15 million into the National Carp Control Plan—another great environmental measure in our waterways in country Australia. Three million dollars was provided for pest and weed management in New South Wales in this 100 days. We put in place the Australian Pest Animal Strategy to improve and create the environment for increased productivity across agriculture in the country. In 100 days, we have put a total of $50 million over the period to establish pest, animal and weed control right across the country. Through you, Mr Acting Deputy President: Senator Sterle, a million dollars went into Western Australia and $12 million to Queensland—there is a bit of parity issue there, but I think it is a reflection of the standards. There has been $1.5 million to combat pest animals and weeds and $1 million to the Victorian government in this space; we have provided $6 million to assist landowners in the Balonne Shire to build cluster fencing.

This list goes on and on and on—in fact, my printer got overheated and I could not get all of the pages out of the printer and bring them here today. I am having the printer fixed and, if I get another opportunity, I would ask my colleagues on the other side to ask this question again tomorrow and the next day and the next day. I promise you will give up by the end of the sittings.

We have invested $330,000 under the Agricultural Trade and Market Access Cooperation program.

Colleagues, we listened to Senator Cameron. We listened to his presentation. He had 15 minutes. It was a hollow presentation. He did not put one fact on the table. He did not address one issue of policy. He did not recognise one thing that this government has done and, in fact, more importantly—and this is a feature of the Australian Labor Party in this place and in the other place—he had nothing to offer. There were no alternatives for us to sit and consider that perhaps there was a better way. We listened in question time, and there was not one question on the economy, not one question on education, not one question on health, not one question on agriculture and not one question on Aboriginal and islander affairs. Through you, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker: the Australian Labor Party is a hollow vessel. It has nothing to offer. It poses the question and leaves the answer open because it cannot make the case and it cannot make the pitch.

If I ever find myself in trouble and before a court, I honestly hope—I will beg for it; it will be the other thing that I ask for—that Senator Cameron is qualified to prosecute me, because I will walk out of there a free and proud man! Thank you.

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister Assisting the Leader for Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The proposition before the chamber today is to reflect upon the first hundred days of the new Turnbull government since the last election.

This is an interesting concept for us to consider given the government's fortunes have fallen so dramatically even after their crushing electoral fiasco that we saw in July. We know that this is a Prime Minister who has been very keen to tell us ad nauseam that we live in the 'most exciting times'. Do you remember that? These are the 'most exciting times' this country has ever seen. These are the most agile times this country has ever seen—times in which we should be brimming with confidence. The unfortunate fact of life is that the electorate, the public, the Australian people do not feel very excited about this government. They do not feel that is a very agile government. They do not think that this is a government that has many opportunities before it. What we have seen is that this is a government that is weak, it is directionless and it is in fact captive of the most extreme right-wing elements of the coalition in this country.

We know that a coalition of town and country capital in this parliament over the years has enjoyed quite a wide range of opinions and differences, as you would expect in a great political organisation like the coalition has been since Menzies created it in the late forties. But never have we seen a period of government dominated by the IPA and the allies of the most extreme right-wing, quasi-fascist organisations in this country. Even the once great National Party has fallen into this. They are now pandering to One Nation. Isn't that an extraordinary proposition? Do you remember Ron Boswell? He used to stand up to One Nation because he understood the consequences of pandering to these extreme right-wing, racist and xenophobic views, but what we see, of course, under this coalition is that anything goes. Why has that happened? It is because this is a government that has lost its authority. It has lost its legitimacy. It has lost its sense of direction. This is a Prime Minister who just over a year ago was elected by the Liberal Party 54 votes to—was it 44? Remember, in the polls at that time, there was the sense that they could roll all before them. Now what has happened? There has been a disastrous election result and a disastrous political strategy to adopt changes to the Senate, aided and abetted by the Greens—I accept that. This is a reasonable criticism to make. We have seen an election result in which this government effectively lost its majority, a Senate transformed and a government now obliged to follow a much more conservative direction. Some people might think that is great. But that is not what this Prime Minister made his name for, is it? Throughout his time in public life—and this is why I think so many people had such hopes for him last year—he has presented himself as a progressive, a person who is actually interested in the Enlightenment! For many people on the other side of this chamber, the Enlightenment is a very dangerous thing. In fact, they are having a lot of trouble even catching up with the very principle of it. We have met many of them in the past for whom the reading of books, for instance, was something they frowned upon! But now we have circumstances where those from the Dark Ages have come to dominate this government.

James Paterson (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Just your books, Kim!

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister Assisting the Leader for Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You would learn something from my books, I must say. In fact, you might learn a great deal. What I would suggest is this: the Prime Minister has mortgaged himself to the extreme right wing of the Liberal Party and, worse still, the extreme right wing of the National Party to get the keys to the Lodge. This is a mortgage that he now finds crippling. And that is now showing up in the public's attitude to this government. The people of this country, who had such high hopes and high expectations about what Mr Turnbull would bring to the job, have now been thoroughly disappointed. In fact, I think they are quite horrified. He is a man who has presented himself as being an ideas person. In the past, he was interested in an Australian republic, for instance. He has abandoned that. He is a person who said he was interested in equality before the law in terms of same-sex marriage and the like. He has abandoned that. Remember that he said they could never tolerate Tony Abbott's climate change policies—because they were fraudulent. Many years ago now, he made the point that it was a policy position that would not produce the changes we actually need to protect this country. But now, of course, he adopts it holus bolus. We have seen this in so many areas—a government divided, a government weak, a government directionless, a government that has no central commitment to the welfare of the Australian people—because the government's only obsession now is survival.

We have talked a lot about how they recovered from the disaster of the election result. What we know is that, in two years time, we will be at it again—because they cannot sustain the internal contradictions of this government. Given this Prime Minister's position in terms of popular attitudes he will either be rolled or he will be obliged to go to an early election. We know the circumstances in terms of when a writ is supposed to be issued for this chamber. We know that that circumstance means we have to have another election by 2019. If we are to maintain the joint proposition of House elections being held at the same time as Senate elections, an election for the Parliament of Australia will occur again in the early part of 2019 at the very latest. But, of course, we know that there is a New South Wales election at that time, so it is unlikely that the election will be occurring at the same time. It is very unlikely, though technically possible, that we will have an election over the summer period, in January. We could have it just before Christmas. That is possible but unlikely.

Jenny McAllister (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

And unpopular.

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister Assisting the Leader for Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It has never worked before. We could have it in November, but there is a Victorian election then. So we get pushed back a little further. We know we cannot hold an election for the Senate until 4 August. And we cannot let the football finals get in the way of any serious discussion with the Australian people. So sometime between August 4 and maybe the second week of the finals we will have another election. On the very best calculation, this government has less than two years to run. This government is so badly divided it may be possible for it to find a way to resolve this contradiction by having a House election only. Just think of the chaos that would bring with it—the idea of Senate elections being held on their own! I do not see that as a likelihood. So it is likely that around Spring 2018 we will be off to an election again.

The Australian people will get a chance to assess the performance of the government in that time. We will see a Prime Minister who promised much deliver very little. With a government so badly divided, so directionless, so lacking in authority and legitimacy, we are likely to see the return of a Labor government. The Labor Party will be called upon to deal with problems that you will be unable to deal with, that you are incapable of dealing with, because of the divisions within your own ranks, your lack of commitment to principle and your failure to understand the needs of the Australian people. While we are committed to serving the Australian people, you are committed to trying to work out the conflicts within your own house—and a house divided will inevitably fall.

Christopher Back (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I spent a good deal of my professional career in the horseracing industry. Do you know what I see when I look opposite at the Labor senators and others? I see owners who could not buy a horse but could win a race, trainers who cannot train a vine up a toilet wall and jockeys who do not know where the finishing line is. The fact of the matter is that this mob over here cannot win. They resent bitterly the fact that they cannot win. They resent the fact that we are a winning team on a winning horse that is kicking on over the next three years, the three years after that and, following that, the three years after that. We will have all of that victory. That is where the coalition finds itself.

I can tell you: we will continue to whip home the winners, so let me get started. The omnibus bill saves $6 billion, with support from the Labor Party, I must admit. But just remember: Mr Ken Henry, the then secretary of the Treasury, now the head of the National Bank, said, 'Don't get too proud of yourselves, boys, because you've actually got $350 billion to wind back.' And whose debt was it that we are winding back, through you, Mr Acting Deputy President, to Senator Williams? You know, Senator Williams; you know, Senator Paterson. It is the $350 billion that Labor squandered in raising debt in this country.

Only today—talk about success; I need nine hours, not nine minutes—have we made a major tax saving for 3.1 million taxpayers in Australia by changing the rate at which they get to the maximum tax rate. There are 3.1 million people better off today as a result of the hundred days of this government. We go then to Medicare. I will not today explain in any great detail what a losing jockey does when he is that far behind the field in getting towards the finishing line. He comes up with every scare campaign he can. In the case of the election, it was called 'Mediscare'. And, of course, with 'Mediscare' we were going to end up selling Medicare. There was going to be no financial support for the aged people of Australia. How that party over there could have got to the finishing line, well behind, of course, as they were, and then go to chairman of stewards and say to him, 'We were honest in this campaign'! They should have been rubbed out for five years.

Speaking of Senator Carr going on about how we did, Senator Carr did not tell you, in the gallery, through you, Acting Deputy President, that the Labor Party had its second-lowest performance in its history in the 2016 election. So do not get too worried about the performance of the Turnbull government. But let's talk a little bit about Medicare and bulk-billing. Under this government, led by Mr Abbott and now Mr Turnbull—the last hundred days we are talking about in detail—85 per cent of bulk-billing is undertaken. What was the figure under Labor—the mob who reckoned that we were engaging in 'Mediscare'? Seventy-nine per cent. Isn't it amazing? Less than 85 per cent. More importantly, under this government, with the confidence that we have of being owned and trained and ridden by our excellent leadership, we have 17 million more people using bulk-billing. Isn't that an incredible thing for what is apparently called 'Mediscare'?

Pharmaceutical benefits—what have we done with the excellent minister, Minister Susan Ley? We have more than three times the number of pharmaceuticals now registered in the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. If that is failure, I will own it. I will own that failure every time. As of 1 October 2016—I think that fits within the hundred-day envelope, doesn't it, Senator Paterson, through you, Acting Deputy President; I think 1 October fits in—another 2,000 medicines have been included in the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, reducing the cost by millions of dollars to the Australian taxpayers, who I hope are listening to this presentation this afternoon.

Our defence industry plan brings defence manufacturing back to Australia. Excellent work will go on in Western Australia. And, if ever the South Australians get rid of their Labor government, get rid of their nonsensical attitude to their renewable energy electricity, which sends their state into darkness, they will have some chance of spending $50 billion on new submarines. Most likely, they will end up being built also in Western Australia. I could go on for the entire nine minutes about what we are doing in defence industry: new submarines, new air warfare destroyers, new offshore platform vessels et cetera.

I could speak about the free trade agreements which we are negotiating at the moment with 11 other countries—the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Forty per cent of the world's economy is tied up in those 12 countries. This, of course, is after the apparent failure—I would call it the immense success—of then trade minister Andrew Robb, now being undertaken in this hundred days by Minister Steve Ciobo, the trade minister. Free trade agreements with a few miserly little countries: China, Korea, Japan. Do not know much about them.

Senator Lambie interjecting—

I will talk to you one day, Senator Lambie, about free trade agreements. You understand nothing about the investor dispute-state service. I will explain it to you one day in simple terms so you too can understand it.

We come now to the work of Senator Birmingham and what he has been doing in reversing the shocking Labor failure under VET FEE-HELP. I sat—Acting Deputy President Ketter, before you were in the Senate—in the Education, Employment and Workplace Relations Committee and I said at that time in those committees, 'You will set up another pink batts disaster. You will set up another Gillard memorial halls disaster.' And we have seen the wastage of billions of taxpayers' dollars on VET FEE-HELP, which of course Senator Birmingham—in the hundred days that was the subject of this question from Senator Gallagher—is now trying to wind back. He is winding back that corrupt loss. When I talk about people who cannot buy a horse, train a horse or ride a horse, the Labor opposition fits right into that analogy.

In my own industry, that associated with livestock, I look at the strength of livestock prices—beef prices, sheepmeat prices, live animal prices—as a result of this coalition government. Remember, we came off a pretty low base, I must admit. That was after Labor in government banned the live export trade and destroyed the live export of sheep and cattle out of this country. So I do admit we are coming off a low base. There is tremendous confidence now in the agricultural industries of this country as a result of the decisions of our coalition government. There is employment in Australia through processing, through live exports, through production. Senator Williams knows as well as I do the tremendous investment that is now going back into agriculture.

I will talk about another industry with which I am wonderfully familiar, and that is LNG. We have failed so badly that in 2018-19 we will go past Qatar as the biggest exporter of LNG in the world. I was in the country of Azerbaijan only two weeks ago and they were saying to us, 'Look at what you in Australia have done.' Chevron and their partners—US$100 billion of investment. Is that some failure? You call it failure; I do not. Only yesterday, we had the first cargo of liquefied natural gas from the second of the two 4½ million tonnes per annum projects out of Gladstone. What wonderful performance we have had in that industry! Again, in only the last couple of days, Senator Paterson—through you, Acting Deputy President—there has been a whole stack of new interest in the sale of and increased pricing for coking coal. And for those who get concerned about coal: no, it is not the thermal coal that produces electricity; it is the best quality coal in the world, which is used for steel production. I hope that even those who are opposed to the generation of electricity from hydrocarbons at least recognise that we do need steel.

It has been 800 days without a single person coming to Australia through that shocking trade of people smuggling. How much longer can I go on for? I am proud to be on the horse that is going to win the Melbourne Cup year after year after year.

Jacqui Lambie (Tasmania, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Well, I have to say I am divided; I have mixed emotions. Part of me would like to side with Labor and condemn the Turnbull government for their lack of achievement. There have been some achievements for Tasmania, which I will speak to shortly, but there is still a bad taste in my mouth over the dishonest way the Liberals conducted their election campaign.

Everyone will remember that the Liberals were complaining about the lies and unfair comments being made about their health policy, but the reality is that they deserved every bit of that criticism. In Tasmania right now the public health system is in utter chaos and near failure, not because of the great efforts of our nurses, doctors and paramedics but because of the negligent management provided by state Liberal ministers and their senior bureaucrats.

While the Liberals were complaining about so-called Labor lies, the Tasmanian Liberal Party director, Sam McQuestin, told barefaced lies in newspapers about JLN voting preferences. During the election campaign I had—I state again—an open ticket. Despite what the Tasmanian Liberal Party director, Sam McQuestin, said during the election campaign, at no stage did the JLN ever preference any political party on its how-to-vote cards. But it is not unusual for Liberal Party state directors to be dishonest, is it? Who could forget the performance of former Tasmanian Liberal Party executive Damien Mantach, a proven liar and close colleague of Sam McQuestin, who, as the state director for Victoria, was found guilty of theft after he embezzled $1.5 million in party funds. Mr Mantach was also found guilty of deception to gain political advantage. According to an ABC report:

Mr Mantach was forced to resign after using a party credit card for $48,000 worth of personal expenses.

The report also said:

Tasmanian Liberal Party state director Sam McQuestin will not resign over the handling of former director Damien Mantach's resignation in 2008.

The Sam McQuestin mentioned in this ABC news report of 28 August 2015 is the same Sam McQuestin and Tasmanian Liberal Party director who told blatant lies to the media and Tasmanians about my voting preferences.

The fact that this man has been allowed to remain the Tasmanian Liberal Party state director just goes to show what sort of leadership controls the Liberal Party in Tasmania has. It also shows why we need a federal anti-corruption body established as soon as possible. Mr McQuestin, like all high-ranking Liberals and Prime Minister Turnbull, opposes a federal ICAC. I will let Tasmanians draw their own conclusions on that. In the first 100 days since the election a federal ICAC should have been established.

For Tasmania, the Liberal government made 21 election promises totalling $3.138 billion, including $2 billion in funding for Tasmanian hospitals over the next four years and $150 million for the relocation and northern expansion of the University of Tasmania campus. The key question that I have put to the PM and his ministers is: when will these promises be delivered?

I am happy to say that my strong opposition to the Liberals' university deregulation plans—and, of course, Labor's—was vindicated when Prime Minister Turnbull signed an MOU with the Vice-Chancellor of the University of Tasmania for $150 million. Many people will recall that I received the blame from Liberal Party members for Tasmania missing out on university funding or investment after I voted down the former government's plan to deregulate our unis. With the formal signing of the MOU, my stance has been formally vindicated. Tasmania now has an extra $150 million in uni investment without our uni students facing the prospect of $100,000 degrees.

Tasmania's St Helens community has been working for three years to win the right to have HMAS Tobruk relocated to its waters and scuppered.    Tasmania is the only state that does not have an ex-naval ship as a dive site. Three states have been gifted, on average, $5.3 million to relocate and scupper former naval ships. Tasmania wants the same deal as those other states. The project would deliver a positive economic impact of at least $5 million per year extra and up to 16 new jobs in the dive tourism industry on the east coast. That equates to $50 million over a decade. I would like to hear that Tasmania has been successful in its application. That is about the only thing I am waiting for, and it would be a real morale boost for Tasmanians to have, for the first time, a former naval ship, HMAS Tobruk, sunk in Tasmanian waters.

James Paterson (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to contribute to this debate with great sympathy for those opposite. I imagine that when their Senate tactics team sat down and devised the MPI question for today it would have seemed quite a good idea at the time. It might have been when Senator Dastyari was still a member of the tactics team and they thought, 'We'd better make sure, on the hundredth day of the Turnbull government, that we have a motion to debate their failure in their first 100 days.' Unfortunately, timing is everything in politics. Who could have imagined that the day on which they brought a motion to the chamber to debate our failures would be the same day that we had a great success in this chamber—that is, passing a tax cut for 500,000 Australians.

I do not want to appear ungrateful. I love it when the parliament passes tax cuts, but I do have one small complaint to make, one quibble, which is that on this occasion, with this tax cut, we did not go to a division. I was looking forward to sitting on this side of the chamber to vote in favour of a tax cut. But I am sure there will be many more to come in the parliament in years ahead.

Unfortunately for the Labor Party, this has also been a very good week for the Turnbull government, because that was not the only momentous bill we passed this week. We also passed a bill to protect CFA volunteers, something very important to people in my home state of Victoria and something very important to the 60,000 people who volunteer for that service. It of course follows our great success in the previous sitting week, when we were able to pass, thanks to those opposite—thanks for your support—$6 billion of savings in the omnibus bill. Again, that is another great achievement of this government in this parliament, something I very much enjoyed participating in and hope to participate in many times to come.

I realise as the chamber is filling that it is not to hear my scintillating contribution to this MPI debate, although I am flattered. I might yield the rest of my time so that we can get to maiden speeches.