Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Is that what it was? I thought he was a truck driver; he was pretty big in the truckies union. That is what he should stick to and he should stay away from the things that he quite clearly does not understand. His contribution quite dramatically demonstrated a complete lack of understanding—indeed, an ignorance—of the financial markets and the share markets. In fact, Senator Conroy’s speech and contribution was downright insulting to the investors in Telstra and those who are considering investing in Telstra.

If there is a problem with the price of Telstra at the moment—and I emphasise ‘if there is’—you can lay the blame directly at the feet of people like Senator Conroy and Mr Wayne Swan, who have been consistently running down the company and raising issues that are not real issues and doing whatever they can to reduce the value of the company. You have heard from Senator Conroy this afternoon and about Mr Swan saying that he would not recommend these shares to his mother or to the people of Australia. Having said that, Mr Swan wants all the Australian public, through the Future Fund, to be kept as owners of the shares. The arguments are just so illogical and contradictory that it is difficult to fathom which angle the Labor Party is coming from.

It would appear from the argument the Labor Party are proposing that, every time they talk about their three mines uranium policy, that may have an impact on those mum and dad investors who invest in shares of uranium exploration companies. Perhaps every time the Democrats and the Greens get up and attack the forestry industry they might be having an impact on those mums and dads who have quite wisely—in my view, although I am not a financial adviser—acquired shares in any number of the forestry companies around the place.

There was some suggestion that comments by the Prime Minister might have affected the sale price of T2. I do not think that is right. I want to quote this paragraph from a letter from the then Minister for Finance and Administration, John Fahey, that came with the prospectus for T2. I want to quote it in full because it clearly identifies the government’s position and it is an appropriate statement from the government:

Investors should be aware that the value of instalment receipts and shares can go down as well as up, and that an investment in Telstra is not guaranteed by the Commonwealth. You should read this offer document carefully, and the separate Appendices if you wish, before you make any investment decision. You should consult a Stockbroker or financial adviser if you are unsure about whether to invest in Telstra.

You cannot get anything clearer than that and that is, of course, the way everyone enters into investments in the share market. In recent times, I have bought and sold a few shares—not always successfully—but if they go down, I do not turn around and blame the government. I do not even blame the Labor Party or the Greens. These are decisions that I, as an investor, make and I suggest they are decisions that every investor will make. As I say, I think that Senator Conroy is downright insulting to investors to suggest that they enter into share investments without properly considering what is happening.

The hypocrisy of the Labor Party is identified and highlighted again by what is almost their passion for stopping the sale of Telstra, I might add while the coalition is in government. We all know that Mr Beazley, when he was the Minister for Finance, actually got his department to put up a submission for the privatisation and sale of Telstra. Every time the debate about privatisation and sale of government assets comes up, it amazes me that the Labor Party cannot remember the days when, having promised before an election not to privatise the Commonwealth Bank, immediately they won government after that promise, practically the first thing they did was to privatise the Commonwealth Bank. That was supported, I might say, at that time by the opposition because it was the right decision. But the Labor Party made it.

Not only did they privatise the Commonwealth Bank; they privatised Qantas, CSL and ADI—all, I would suggest, appropriate things to do in an economy like Australia’s, which was undergoing economic reform. That was the right thing to do, they were right to consider it and, had they remained in government, I will guarantee you that they would have sold Telstra long before this. They would have been able to do it perhaps at a share price of $7.40 because the opposition, had we then been in opposition, would have supported it because we know that it is good for Australia and good for our economy. But the Labor Party continue to play this charade here that, having privatised just about everything else that was left standing, they would not privatise Telstra. I have said this many a time: if the Labor Party had won any of the last few elections or if they happen to win one in the future and Telstra is not by then privatised—and it will be—the first thing they would do would be to sell Telstra. We know from experience just what their comments mean when it comes to selling or not selling.

Senator Conroy then, as part of his scattergun approach, started talking about the services of Telstra not being up to scratch. I remember the days when the Labor Party used to run the government instrumentality of Telstra or whatever it was then called. The services in those days before privatisation were just appalling. Instead of leading the world, as Australia now does in telecommunications, we were dragging along well at the end of the chain. As someone who lives in country Australia and who travels very regularly in remote parts of this country I can say to you that the telecommunications service we have here is brilliant and it is better than most others anywhere else in the world.

I know that this is not always a popular argument to take to the country. There is some concern, I acknowledge, in places about Telstra not being privatised but, when you sit down and discuss the issue with those who have that view and ask them how services have been improved in recent years, most will grudgingly agree that Telstra have done a magnificent job in the recent past. They can always do better, and they will, but it should not be left up to a private commercial company to provide services that perhaps are not profitable. That is a job for government to do by subsidy and it is a job that this government will continue to do. It should not be a matter for a commercial operation to have to fund. Our government will continue to do that, but you can be assured from Labor’s approach to rural and regional Australia that, were Labor ever again to attain government, the first thing they would do would be to cut the subsidies to rural and regional Australia in telecommunications and other areas. Labor’s matter of public importance today is really a mishmash of ideas. It has not been well argued and it is not an argument that I think the Senate should take much more notice of. (Time expired)