Deborah O'Neill (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister representing the Minister for Small Business (Senator Abetz) to a question without notice asked by Senator O'Neill today relating to competition policy.

Again, we have another question time that reveals issues that are tearing this coalition government apart. Those who watched closely when this government was elected might remember that on arrival they actually did not do much. There was this long delay before they actually started to do things. But one of the first things they did do—in an effort to respond to supporters, I expect—was to ask for a review of competition policy. That was one of the first things they implemented, on 4 December 2013. They gave ample time to Mr Harper to undertake his review, and in fact it returned in March 2015. That is when this government got the review: March 2015. On 14 April 2015 Mr Harper himself gave a speech to CEDA. This has been out and under discussion in the public for that whole time—for six months. I also want to put on the record that Mr Harper, perhaps anticipating the incompetence of the government, decided to give them a bit of a hand and attached at the end of his report a draft piece of legislation for the implementation of what he suggested. But even with that big leg-up from the man they picked to do the job of the competition review they still have not settled on a position. In fact, there were reports in the paper, after the coalition party room meeting this week, in which the cabinet is supposed to have deferred a decision on the matter indefinitely.

It is an issue that is tearing this government apart—Liberal from Liberal, National from National. Indeed, there is a list of members of the coalition and the government who are at each other's throats. I will just go through it, as reported in the Australian Financial Review article of 8 September. The article reported that nine members and senators, including Bert van Manen, Matt Canavan, Matt Williams, Andrew Southcott and our own senator Ian Macdonald, argued for the cabinet to approve the proposed changes to section 46 but were met by an attack from the other side of their own party. This goes to the certainty that the Treasurer, Mr Hockey, is doing a terrible, terrible job. His own party does not trust him with anything to do with this competition policy, let alone other economic policy.

This Prime Minister, who has made an unbelievable set of terrible captain's calls, cannot seem to put his foot down on this effects test. Rather, he is just allowing this unrest and division and uncertainty to linger long over those opposite.

There is the sort of commentary that we are hearing from participants in this debate. Particularly the commentary of Minister Billson is worthy of comment. In recent times, he declared that section 46 was a dud. He said straight out that it does not work; it is like 'a hunting dog that won't not leave the porch.' He is out there drumming up business amongst his colleagues in opposition to the uncertain position, or seemingly uncertain position, of the leader at this time.

Let's contrast this with Labor's position. In opposition we made it clear that we do not support this effects test. We do not think it is good policy. We think it would hurt competition. We think it would stand in the way of enterprise. We think it would have a disastrous impact on business investment decisions. We do not agree with it. But the other side cannot even make up their mind about it. In Senator Abetz's answer what we heard was, 'We will consider the Harper review.' They have already been considering it for more than six months. This was a high-order issue. They commissioned this report immediately. It was one of the very first things they did, and they are not advancing at all. Cabinet is all over the place.

Senator Bushby interjecting—