Barnaby Joyce (Queensland, National Party) Share this | Hansard source

I ask that the question be put separately on the amendments relating to the transfer of the Communications Fund; namely, amendments (3), (4), (5), (8), (10), (11), (12) and (13). This goes to one of the most contentious and divisive times that I and the Nationals have been part of in this parliament. When I entered this parliament in 2005, the Telstra debate was front and centre. The Nationals went to the people of Australia and asked for their trust that, on the sale of Telstra, their interests would be protected. Through that process, funds were negotiated. There was the $1.1 billion Connect Australia fund and a $2 billion trust fund. I can remember every part of that debate. I can remember negotiating for the lifting of the Natural Heritage Trust of Australia Act for the assessment of how those funds would be delivered. I remember negotiations where they wanted it to be in shares and we made sure that we got it in cash at the 30-day bank bill rate. It was something that was fought up hill and down dale. The Australian people, especially the people of regional Australia, were extremely sceptical about whether or not they could trust us. This issue was one of trust, and we entered into a contract with the Australian people that we could be trusted.

The Labor Party pilloried us, especially the National Party, and said that we could not be trusted and that Telstra should remain a publicly owned entity. It is therefore surprising that tonight the Labor Party are moving to take away any semblance of protection of regional Australia, to move the funds that were there to protect those who want some form of parity. The funds were a life vest for people in regional Australia who had said, ‘We take on board that you have put aside the money, the returns on which can deal with the issues that come before us.’ We had quite substantial amounts, in the hundreds of millions, that were going to drop down for everything from mobile phone towers to broadband that would go out to the regions and deal with the issues that these people had so vehemently and rightly put forward to us.

These issues brought about a contract not just with the National Party but with the coalition, and the coalition have reflected that trust in the way they voted in the Senate only a matter of hours ago and in the lower house only a matter of an hour ago. And now this issue comes back to us. I believe the same trust, the same purpose and the same philosophy that were behind the earlier votes should stand now; that there is nothing to differentiate what happened at 10.22 from what will happen at around half past 11. It is the same issue and it raises the same concerns. The people of Australia, particularly people of regional Australia, would rightly pillory us, especially those of us in the National Party, if we were to have a different view. We would prove ourselves untrustworthy, and that is the decimation of any political force. This issue comes into a clearer light when we hear Telstra talk about providing a service some time way into the future to 80 per cent of Australia. That means the regional areas plus some and plus some again get left out.

It is unfortunate if at times there is a division. No-one wants a division. Everybody wants the capacity to go forward in a constructive way. But when the issue arises you cannot run away from it. You cannot say, ‘This is too close to another issue of the same concern; therefore it must be ignored.’ The honour that you have of sitting in this chamber means that you must call it the way you see it. I do not think for one moment that anybody reading a paper tomorrow—and this will be a big issue; this will be a monstrous issue—will expect anything less from this chamber, as part of this parliament, than to represent the people of Australia on the issues that you went into a contract with them on at the last election. You entered into a contract. You said that you would stand by your words. I know absolutely that, should a different opinion be reflected, people will pull out every speech that everyone has made and say, ‘This is what you said then and this is what you say now. How do you explain to us that there has been some sort of epiphany, a change of mood?’ There is no explanation.

I know that the Labor Party will say, ‘If the $2 billion is to be removed from this fund and remain quarantined for regional telecommunications, the infrastructure fund will fall over.’ That is a load of rubbish. We have checked this out. We have had it from the Clerk of the Senate that this bill can go forward without that $2 billion in it and they can start spending the money as soon as they like. So there is not one reason why this $2 billion should not be quarantined and why the contract between the people of Australia and the people of this chamber should not be honoured.

The National Party stand here tonight to make sure that that contract is honoured and that that position is maintained. We say to the Australian people in all states that our intention tonight is not to play politics but to play the card of trust and to ensure that those funds remain in the capacity for which they were originally designed. We understand the circumspection that people had when they initially gave us that trust to go forward with this issue. We felt that. We saw the emails and the correspondence that came in. I hope that this in some way says that you could trust us then and you can still trust us now. We will stand by you and we will make sure that this thing is quarantined. We will make sure that people, no matter where they live in this great nation, have some sense of parity on the issue of communications. We will make sure that that parity is spread throughout our nation and not tucked up in little corners here and there.

The moment we start dividing our nation into the haves and the have-nots, into corners where the services are and corners where the services are not, and as soon as we start making excuses for that, then the only people we fool are ourselves. And we do something worse than that: we take away the respect that the Australian people have for this chamber. So it is absolutely crucial tonight that the vote that we passed here earlier on today be respected, that the vote that the lower house passed only an hour ago is respected and that there is consistency. What underpins trust is consistency of purpose and consistency of actions.

The Labor Party have moved away from consistency and have completely denigrated the debate. We are seeing all the rhetoric and rubbish that we saw in the Telstra debate. They are doing that tonight in the way they vote. Without a shadow of a doubt, everything that they espoused about looking after regional Australia is rubbish. They are saying that clearly in the way they act tonight. They are moving that money away. They are going to use it for another purpose. They are cutting the people of regional Australia loose. We are not going to cut the people of regional Australia loose. I hope that there will be consistency and trust involved in the way that this chamber delivers an outcome.

To all those who had concerns about the sale of Telstra: you must vote to make sure that this $2 billion remains quarantined. To all those who believe the message that they sent to regional Australia through their papers and their speeches: it is important that that remains consistent and that you vote to make sure that this $2 billion is quarantined. You can only vote for the things you can actually deliver. You cannot vote for the delivery of a promise on the never-never—a promise that at some time in the future things will be better. People will say, ‘When you had the power and the capacity to make a difference, you did not act according to the contract and the warrant that we gave you, so how can we possibly trust you when you haven’t got the power?’

Chair, this is a crucial issue. I believe strongly that a coalition is the best form of government this nation has. I believe absolutely that the only way that a coalition can win an election—and that is what I will be aiming for—is to make sure that that warrant, that trust, those articles in the paper, those speeches, those telephone conversations and those public meetings are all honoured on such an absolutely iconic matter.