Senate debates

Thursday, 22 June 2006

Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2006-2007; Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2006-2007; Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 2006-2007; Appropriation Bill (No. 5) 2005-2006; Appropriation Bill (No. 6) 2005-2006

In Committee

1:22 am

Photo of Chris EvansChris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source

I rise briefly to support Senator Murray in this request for amendment. I pay tribute to Senator Murray’s persistence in these matters. It has been a long and so far fruitless campaign, but I am sure, Senator Murray, that you will win in the end. Labor is happy to support the propositions because I think, as Senator Murray rightly said, this is a very important issue of accountability, supports the reports of the Auditor-General and seeks to highlight the misuse of taxpayers’ funds for promotion of the government rather than information of use to the population in accessing government services.

Increasingly, this abuse has become a cause of concern in the community and an issue of public notoriety. When at estimates committees we examine the processes for the approval of these campaigns and the use of advertising, it is absolutely clear that the government advertising projects and approval processes are now an arm of the political party. The committees are staffed by people of my ilk—former party officials. They employ advertising agencies with clear links to the government parties. They employ consultants with clear links to the government parties. The links between the Liberal-National Party campaign and advertising teams and the campaign and advertising teams of the government for these programs is so close as to be almost indistinguishable.

It is a rort. It is an absolute abuse of taxpayers’ funds. People say in response to these critiques, ‘State governments are just as bad.’ If they are, they ought to be criticised and they ought to be held to account as well. This has got well beyond a joke. It is actually used by governments now to protect their position. These campaigns have gone well beyond any sense of providing any information and assistance to taxpayers. We saw another terrible example with the recent industrial relations campaign, where money was thrown at trying to convince the Australian public that something that was clearly bad for them was in fact in their interests. There was of course an enormous waste of taxpayers’ money in that campaign.

I do not want to delay the Senate tonight other than to say that I think this would be a very worthwhile improvement to the accountability of the government. As I say, we have been debating accountability a fair bit in the last 48 hours. This is a really important issue. It will not go away. We have had Senate inquiries, we have had a whole range of activities that have sought to shine light on these issues. Every time a light is shone on them it becomes clearer and clearer that these campaigns are being used as an arm of the political party in power. I think we have to question whether or not this should be tolerated or regarded as legal. It seems to me that this is, as Senator Murray said, corrupt. I have much pleasure in supporting the resolution—knowing again that it will be defeated. But I am sure that, when the next outrage becomes public, there will such a demand for change that change will eventuate.

Comments

No comments