Tony Abbott (Warringah, Liberal Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Hansard source

Now we have this confected hilarity and manufactured conversation—the kind of organised discourtesy which has come to characterise this opposition, and there were some grotesque examples of it today with gross discourtesy and juvenile behaviour. Members opposite really should be ashamed of themselves for the sort of behaviour we have seen from them in the parliament this week. The idea that these people, with this constant caterwauling, are capable of being credible ministers and providing a responsible government for this country is really bizarre.

The member for Lalor keeps saying to me: ‘Can you guarantee that premiums will not rise if Medibank Private is privatised?’ Let me put this to her: can she guarantee that premiums will not rise if Medibank Private is not privatised? Can she guarantee that a government owned Medibank Private will never raise its premiums? Of course she cannot give that guarantee. It is a ludicrous guarantee to seek—and, if it is ludicrous to seek such a guarantee about a government owned Medibank Private, it is equally ludicrous to seek a guarantee about a privatised Medibank Private. This is typical of the kind of cheap, gutless populism which we are increasingly getting from members opposite.

There are certainly some instances where privatisation does not make sense. If we are talking about a quasi-monopoly or, in fact, a monopoly of an essential service, privatisation does not make sense, which is why this government did not go ahead with the privatisation of the Snowy Hydro even though Labor governments in Victoria and New South Wales wanted to pursue it. So this government certainly is not an obsessive privatiser; but where you have a government owned business enterprise operating in a competitive market it makes sense to privatise it. That is why the former government privatised Qantas—and that has been good for Qantas and good for the airline industry. That is why the former government privatised the Commonwealth Bank—and that has been good for the Commonwealth Bank and good for the customers of banks. All we are doing is simply following the kind of responsible economic approach which members opposite used to follow in the days when they had some decent leaders like Bob Hawke and Paul Keating. We believe in privatisation not as a universal rule but as something which generally makes sense when you are talking about government owned enterprises engaging in business in competitive markets.

I will not read onto the record again the quotes from people like Mark Fitzgibbon, the head of NIB, the fourth largest private health insurer. I will not read onto the record again quotes from Francis Sullivan, the head of Catholic Health Australia—and the real author of Medicare Gold, I suspect—which the member for Lalor was happy to plagiarise. If he was good enough to write Labor’s policy for the last election, why isn’t he good enough to be taken seriously now on the subject of Medibank Private?

If anyone is under any doubt about the ability of a health fund in private ownership to give decent premiums and decent services, the second or third biggest fund is BUPA, a for-profit fund. No serious examination of the products, services and premiums offered by BUPA in its various guises would not confirm that it is operating just as well as the other funds.

What we have really seen from the opposition in this instance is entirely true to form. What we know is that, since 1996, this opposition have been almost chronically incapable of adopting any policy that is unpopular or that seriously offends any of their constituents. If it offends anyone, they are against it. In all of this, we have further confirmation of the judgement on the current Leader of the Opposition by the former Leader of the Opposition. Let us not forget that the current Leader of the Opposition has never won a contested ballot inside the Australian Labor Party. The last time members opposite had a choice between Beazley and Latham, they chose Latham. Whatever faults the former Leader of the Opposition might have had—and he sure did have a few—he had the current Leader of the Opposition to rights. I quote the former Leader of the Opposition:

The Beazley culture is scab-lifting—see an issue, a public sore, and try to lift the scab without offering your own remedy.

…            …            …

Under Beazley, opportunism always knocks—milking the issue in the media, maximising the public’s angst and then moving on to the next opportunity.

What we have seen today is more political and policy bankruptcy from an opposition utterly wedded to cheap, gutless populism. It is unworthy of this chamber and it is proof positive that members opposite do not deserve to transfer to this side of the House. (Time expired)

See this speech in context