Senate debates

Thursday, 11 March 2010

Food Importation (Bovine Meat Standards) Bill 2010

Second Reading

4:41 pm

Photo of Glenn SterleGlenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Thank you, Madam Acting Deputy President. I retract ‘boofhead’. It should probably have been ‘thickheads’! I am not going to call Senator Heffernan a boofhead because that would be the nicest thing anybody has said about him all week! I apologise to Senator Nash.

As I was saying, the government has listened and the government has made the desired changes. The government should be congratulated. I got a bit confused listening to Senator Nash’s contribution where firstly she attacked the industry, then attacked the government, then congratulated the government. But I want to make it very clear for those who are listening out there and are not sure that the government consulted with industry that the government consulted with the Red Meat Advisory Council. The government consulted with the Cattle Council of Australia. The government took guidance from the industry. There are other industry players who are absolutely minute and, as I said, unfortunately in their contribution to this discussion here earlier this week all of a sudden those opposite wanted to grab some lines and some figures from people who purport to represent industry but who represent five-eighths of not very much. I will defend the industry. I will defend the government. I think it has been a fantastic outcome. It has been a consultative outcome all the way through, and congratulations once again to the minister for implementing the IRA.

Let us get some other facts and figures on the table while we are at it. No country has made any application to export beef to Australia. As has been clearly stated by senators opposite, the IRA will be at least two years. Senator O’Brien has even mentioned that fact—at least two years. But I will bet London to a brick that that scare campaign will still continue, and I bet London to a brick that at the so-called grower or producer meetings out in the bush the protagonists will throw in a host of other issues around agriculture. It is very easy to whip up fear in the bush.

I also want to discuss a statement by Senator Williams. His words were that this bill is very important. I would not insult the good people in the bush by saying this bill is not important. It is a mess and it is very ambiguous, but this issue is very important to the people of the bush, absolutely no argument about that, as it is to all Australians. But what we have seen in this chamber in the last two years, but particularly since the new Leader of the Opposition, Mr Abbott, has taken over the reins after his one-vote win over the previous leader, has been nothing short of obstructionism. As this issue is very important, so are the previous 41 pieces of legislation that we have seen tipped out in this chamber, not through an argument over what is good for Australia and Australians but through pure obstructionist politics from that lot over there. They are still suffering from relevance deprivation syndrome. They still do not get it that in November 2007 the Australian people spoke. There are numerous issues we took to the election. There was none of this core promise stuff that we got from the previous Howard government. We took a number of clearly defined policies to the electorate and people voted. Forty-one pieces of legislation. They should be absolutely ashamed of themselves; their carry-on has been disgraceful.

When you start looking at some of the very important bills, you can talk about the CPRS, for example. I take note that my esteemed colleague Senator O’Brien mentioned that there were no less than 29 opposition speakers. I know it was a busy fortnight but it was also a crazy fortnight, and you would not find 29 opposition senators in this chamber contributing to any bill unless they wanted to filibuster. And they were making that very clear at the time. I was very confused, mind you, with so much going on, trying to work out some form of consistent conversation around the CPRS from that lot over there. They had so many mixed messages: they wanted to do it in May, some wanted to do it there and then, and some did not even know what the heck it was all about. Some have still got their heads stuck in the sand. But it was very difficult because they were all out there fighting their leader. I know how hard it is. I can understand. I could see the pain in their faces every day when they came in and said, ‘Who will I vote for today, because I really do not like either of them.’ I could see it, or I assume that is what they were saying. It was absolutely incredible. In fact, it was so scary during the CPRS debate that I was too scared to walk through Aussie’s in case any of them had a plastic knife in their hand. It was unbelievable: swords at dawn.

Comments

No comments