John Williams (NSW, National Party) Share this | Hansard source

I certainly will, Mr Acting Deputy President. I normally do. I apologise for sliding off course there for a brief second. So we have a tax that needs to be rushed through this parliament that the Transport Workers Union described as a death tax. Mr Sheldon described it as a death tax because he said, 'Put those extra cost on our truckies it will sweat the drivers and sweat the trucks.' He is saying they will have to work longer hours to make a living, especially owner-drivers, and that will mean more neglect of the truck, of the rig. It could be, 'Hang on, the tyre is almost bald. It's all right, times are tough, I will get another trip out of this tyre.' Brake linings might be worn. 'No, it's all right, I can squeeze another trip out of them before I replace the brake linings.' That is what Mr Sheldon meant when he described this tax as a death tax.

But back to the argument we are debating. Why should we extend the hours, why should we rush when these are the concerns the Australian people have about what is being proposed? The situation is that we are going to impose this amount of money on the 500 biggest emitters of carbon dioxide in Australia, and we really do not know who they are. We have not seen the list. We hear figures that if they happen to be responsible for more than 25,000 cubic tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions a year then they are in, but if it is 24,999 you are out. We know the cement industry is a big emitter, and they cannot afford any of this tax, especially the way the current Australian dollar is, allowing imports to be so cheap because of our high exchange rate, which is obviously brought about by high interest rates in this country, which is obviously brought about by government policy. But that is an argument for another day.

So we should not support the extension of hours here. We should not just kowtow to the Greens, who want this crazy legislation that was guaranteed to the Australian people by the Prime Minister, Ms Gillard, prior to the election would not be introduced. In fact, it should be delayed until after the next election. That would be true democracy, to allow the Australian people to have a say on it. We have the member for New England, Mr Windsor, who proudly says, 'I will survey my electorate. I am the people's representative.' Mr Windsor did that recently on whether we should have changes to our tax system—not the carbon tax—and whether we should support same-sex marriage. But he did not survey his electorate on the carbon tax. If he will not do his job, I am glad to say that I am doing it for him. Last Monday I sent out 57,000 survey forms into the electorate of New England and also to the electorate of Lyne, where Mr Oakeshott MP is the sitting member. He will not do a survey in his electorate as well. Mr Windsor said at the last election in TV adverts, and I saw them in my own lounge room, 'Vote 1 Tony Windsor, the people's representative.' If he is the people's representative, why doesn't he survey his electorate before there is any proceeding of this legislation in the House of Representatives or here? That is another reason why this should not be rushed through the parliament. That is another reason why we should not extend working hours here to have more sitting hours to rush through a policy simply because the Greens are running this government.

I will wind up by saying I do not support the motion being put forward. There is no cause for extension of working hours. We have seen the amount of legislation that has gone through this parliament this week. In fact, on Monday we almost ran out of legislation as bills were passing through so quickly. Now it is drop everything, extend hours, let us do the legislation for the Greens, the ones who are complicit in the Prime Minister breaking her guarantee to the Australian people prior to the election. The Australian people will not forget this. They will not forget many things this Prime Minister has done and this government has done to our nation. They will not forget the debt, the waste, the interest-rate rises and the commitment by the Prime Minister on Perth radio in July last year that she would never consider sending asylum seekers to countries which are not signatories to the refugee convention. But what is the argument in the House of Representatives today? It is over an issue where the government wishes to send asylum seekers to a country which is not a signatory to the refugee convention. Hence, the government has put up a bad argument for extending the hours for this particular reason. I urge my colleagues all around the chamber, perhaps some on the other side, to oppose this. But, no, if they were to do that they would be kicked out of their party and their future would be guillotined.

There is no argument for this. This is an important piece of legislation and it should run its normal course. It should be allowed to go up to Senate committees, as well as to the joint committee that has been established, so that the Senate can do its job properly and scrutinise the legislation that has come into this parliament and not simply have it rushed through to appease the Greens so that they can beat their chests and say, 'Look at me. Look at me,' when they get to Durban, South Africa, this December.