House debates

Wednesday, 16 February 2022

Bills

Security Legislation Amendment (Critical Infrastructure Protection) Bill 2022; Second Reading

4:42 pm

Photo of Jason FalinskiJason Falinski (Mackellar, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker, I will seek to keep my voice at a lower tempo so you can hear the interruptions. I understand that the member for Isaacs has a perennial fear. He goes on ad nauseam about integrity, but Eddie Obeid sat in his party for years. Now we find that he was granted, according to the Independent Commission Against Corruption in New South Wales, an unlawful coalmine where the processes were illegal. At that point, he then used those profits to hand it off to a donor who then sold that mine and used those proceeds to fund crossbench MPs whose votes those opposite now accept. It is incredibly difficult to understand why the member for Isaacs doesn't want to investigate this process. He has referred something like 10 or 11 items to the Federal Police. I wonder if he has referred this incident to the Federal Police, or is it really that he's just not interested in the policy, that he's not actually interested in improving integrity in Australian politics, but is more interested in the politics of it and accepting votes from people who receive tainted donations.

We've heard the explanations, by the way: first, it didn't happen. Then it did happen, but it wasn't serious. Then it did happen, but it was a rookie mistake. And, now, it did happen, but I didn't know about it. Then it did happen, but it was a rookie mistake, I didn't know about it and the person who did it has now resigned. But the problem we have is that this person is the shareholder of the Climate 200 fund that Simon Holmes a Court is using to fund all these fake Independents. I just wonder why they are laughing at the fact that our democracy is being undermined by things like the open foundation, and that's why they move these wide-ranging second reading amendments—so they can talk on anything and they can criticise anyone they like. But they don't like it when the tables are turned on them.

What I might suggest to those opposite is that they come in here and they deal with the substance of bills in front of us. I know this works at the Bond University student representative council. I know that this was probably a very clever tactic back in the nineties. But the fact of the matter is we are trying to run a country here, and when people take donations from coalmine executives whose donation is tainted, for whom there was an adverse finding at the New South Wales Independent Commission Against Corruption, you have to wonder why those opposite are not more curious. I'm curious why suddenly their integrity on the policy of integrity doesn't seem to have much integrity, and maybe the member for Isaacs could stand up and explain that, because, under his second reading amendment, he could pretty much talk on whatever he likes. So he should do that, and often does, I might add, on many different bills.

What we could actually talk about is the Security Legislation Amendment (Critical Infrastructure Protection) Bill 2022. We could talk about that, but those opposite would rather move smart alec amendments so they can just have a go, while at the same time then referring all of this to their mates at the open foundation that run a website designed to misinform the Australian people. I can only assume that those opposite have concluded that the Australian people aren't smart enough to see through their tactics and, further to all of that, that the only way they can get elected is by misinforming people, by saying that they're in favour of climate action while accepting money from a coalmine investor, who—I don't know if I've mentioned this yet—invested in a coalmine that used to be owned by Eddie Obeid.

All these things really do matter when it comes to integrity. All these things really do matter when it comes to running a government and the parliament of this nation. If those opposite us are sincere, which I somehow doubt—but I hope that I am wrong—they will, instead of actually moving all of these second reading amendments, actually come in and have a debate around ideas and policies that really matter and stop accepting tainted money and votes from people whose money it was— (Time expired)

Comments

No comments