Dean Smith (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to make a contribution to this debate on the address-in-reply, which plays such an important part in affirming our longstanding parliamentary traditions in this country. This address-in-reply debate comes about because the Governor-General, as the representative of Her Majesty the Queen, comes to this Senate chamber and officially opens parliament after each election. During those formalities we are joined by our colleagues from the other chamber and all of us, no matter what our political colour, join together in this chamber and hear the Governor-General speak. That in itself is a powerful symbol of the Crown being above partisan politics. Moreover, it is a powerful way to acknowledge the traditions upon which our parliamentary democracy rests. The office of Governor-General holds a sacred place at the heart of our democratic system. The Governor-General in Australia is a symbol of the continuity and permanence of the Crown, and I sincerely hope that that forever remains the case.

May I also say what a privilege it is to have been returned as a senator for Western Australia. The federal election held on 2 July this year was the first occasion on which my own name was on the ballot paper. I came to this place first in May 2012 to fill the vacancy left by the passing of my predecessor, Senator Judith Adams. It is worth noting that no matter where I travel across regional Western Australia people still talk in the most glowing and gracious of terms about the contribution Senator Adams made in her time here in the Australian Senate, representing the hopes and aspirations of regional Western Australians.

So as I begin my first term as a senator elected in my own right I would like to thank the people of Western Australia for the faith and trust they have placed in me. I would also like to thank the members of the Western Australian Liberal Party for their continued support and trust. I am a proud Liberal, and I am acutely conscious that I could not do this job without the support of my own political party. I will strive at all times to defend those values that bind Western Australians together: the pursuit of lower taxes, creating job opportunities for others; a strong commitment to federalism; and a belief that, to the fullest extent possible, Western Australians should make their own decisions about what is best for their state and for their futures.

I remain optimistic that what once seemed to be inevitable drift towards centralism can be resisted. That is why defending the integrity of our Constitution and of our parliamentary institutions is of the utmost importance to me. Of course, these are not just Liberal values. I believe they are Western Australian values, and I believe that is why the 2016 federal election campaign again saw such strong levels of support for the Liberal Party in my home state. There was a lot of procrastination about Western Australia in the lead-up to the federal election. Much of this, it has to be said, emanated from commentators on the east coast, some of whom were very bolshie in their predictions of the electoral outcomes in July—almost as bolshie as senior figures in the Labor Party. We kept hearing in Western Australia about the Labor Party briefing that they were on track to gain four or five seats in Western Australia at the election. We were told that there would likely be a statewide swing against the Liberal Party in the order of eight to nine per cent. We even had Senator Dastyari riding shotgun across the Nullarbor in Bill Shorten's campaign bus to lend his star power to the Labor campaign in the seat of Swan.

Well, I am happy to report that none of it came to pass, not even closely. Once again, the WA Liberal Party proved that it is the best grassroots campaigning outfit in the country. This election was one fought in challenging circumstances for the WA Liberal Party, unlike those in which recent campaigns have occurred. In 2001, 2004, 2007, 2010 and 2013 we were aware that a swing to the Liberal Party was occurring across Western Australia. In politics, historically high levels of support will last only for so long, and WA Liberals knew that this time we were fighting to maintain our ground. Our campaigning team in WA did not disappoint. The national swing against the Liberal Party on primary votes on 2 July was just 3.3 per cent. In Western Australia the swing against the Liberal Party was recorded at 1.6 per cent—about half the rate of the national swing. Western Australia again returned the highest Liberal primary vote share in the nation, with a statewide primary vote of 45.7 per cent. In the end, the Labor Party was able to defeat only one incumbent Liberal MP, in the seat of Cowan. In that instance, the count went right down to the wire, and Luke Simpkins was very much in the hunt for a couple of weeks after polling day as postal votes were counted.

Given the circumstances we faced, this is a remarkably strong result and a tribute to the focused campaigning efforts of Western Australian Liberals and our supporters across the state. Special congratulations are due to our new state director, Andrew Cox, who is fighting his first campaign in that role, having succeeded our former state director, Ben Morton, who is now with us in this building as the member for Tangney. In very challenging circumstances, Andrew Cox proved that he was a very worthy successor to Mr Morton and has set the gold standard for state directors in Western Australia. The WA Liberal Party is fortunate to have such a consummate professional leading our campaign efforts.

I want to focus on two aspects of the WA election result in particular. The first is in the seat of Perth, for which I was patron senator, along with my Senate colleague Senator Cormann, the Minister for Finance. For the first time since 1980, the Liberal Party has beaten Labor on primary votes in the seat of Perth, with our first-preference tally around four per cent higher than that of the Australian Labor Party. In an election where the overall national and statewide swings were to the Labor Party, this is a significant result. For the Liberal Party to achieved a swing on primary votes is a momentous and historical occasion, and it was good to be part of the campaigning with the former federal member for Perth, Mr Ross McLean.

This did not occur through accident or by chance. The strong result for the Liberal Party is a result of having preselected an outstanding candidate in Jeremy Quinn and having run a strong, focused and consistent campaign over the eight weeks leading to polling day. Our local campaign was fortunate to have had the support of key ministers in the Turnbull government, several of whom visited the electorate during the campaign. I was particularly pleased that the Prime Minister, Mr Turnbull, could find time in his busy campaign schedule in Western Australia to meet personally with Jeremy Quinn to hear about projects that were important to the electors of Perth. Indeed, I am reminded that the Minister for Communications, my colleague Senator Fifield, came to the campaign on a number of occasions to lend his enthusiastic support, which no doubt was among the winning ingredients.

The Perth campaign's strong grassroots approach to campaigning clearly wrong-footed our Labor opponents, and a recurring theme across the federal electorate of Perth during that long election campaign was how ordinary electors in Perth had felt neglected, first by Stephen Smith and subsequently by Alannah MacTiernan. Mr Tim Hammond does have a very strong job ahead of him, if he is to be a successful member for the federal electorate of Perth.

It is telling that at the pre-poll centre in the days leading up to the election Labor was forced to deploy Alannah MacTiernan, forced to deploy the former member Stephen Smith and the state Labor leader, Mark McGowan, in the Perth electorate to shore up Labor's candidates and Labor's failing support. Bear in mind that this is the party that at the start of the campaign had Mark McGowan in Swan and at the end of the campaign had Mark McGowan in Perth. I think that says much about the strength of the WA Liberal Party's efforts across the federal electorate of Perth.

As a party, our challenge now is to continue the work in the Perth electorate so that the gains made in this campaign become the foundation for further success next time. Above all, the Liberal Party in Western Australia owes enormous debt to Jeremy Quinn and his family and his team of supporters. Jeremy Quinn is one of the most outstanding candidates we have had in our party for a long time.

But, moving beyond the federal electorate of Perth, I think it is also worth looking at what occurred across regional Western Australia, especially in the federal electorates of Durack and O'Connor. The election campaign in regional WA was characterised by the WA Nationals making big promises but failing to back them up with any specific details of exactly how they would go about getting a better deal for regional Western Australians in Canberra. For the second federal election in a row, the WA Nationals' hollow and opportunistic approach has been soundly rejected by voters across regional WA. It is a tribute to the effective representation being provided by both Rick Wilson, the member for O'Connor, and Melissa Price, the member for Durack, that both of them achieved significant increases in their primary votes on election day, exposing the hollowness of the WA Nationals' claims about regional WA being ignored by the Liberal Party. Moreover, the WA Nationals' bizarre decision to preselect a serial Greens candidate to head its Senate ticket indeed backfired. The WA Nationals' Senate vote has fallen significantly and it is now at its lowest level in six years. As we prepare for next year's WA state election the very clear message here is that the WA Nationals can no longer take regional Western Australians for granted. The Liberal Party can absolutely take ground from the WA Nationals by running focused local campaigns that properly address the concerns of regional communities. And the way we do that is by demonstrating that, while other political parties talk, the Liberals can actually deliver.

In that connection I would like to say a few words about some of the commentary that has abounded over the past few days regarding the Turnbull government. The latest 'gotcha' game in politics, it seems, is to ask people to name the Turnbull government's achievements, as it is just 12 months this week since the Prime Minister came to the leadership of the Liberal Party. The thing is, this is not new. I will recall the same sorts of games being played after Mr Abbott had been in office, and Labor and the Greens had spent that entire time blocking the government's agenda in this chamber. I recall the same thing being said about Julia Gillard a year after she took over as Prime Minister. The only thing people could point to was having lost Labor's parliamentary majority and having introduced a carbon tax that she swore she would not introduce. I recall the same complaint about Kevin Rudd—that aside from the 2020 Summit meeting, and having spent a lot of money, there was not much to show for his first year in office.

I think it is worth sharing with the Senate a couple of other observations I found in preparing for this contribution over the weekend: 'There is more to political honesty than living up to a raft of focus group driven election promises. It includes following up on election promises to repair the key structural weaknesses in Canberra's economic management, explaining to voters along the way the longer-term costs of not doing so.' And then there is this quote: 'The federal government is a far cry from what many of its supporters expected. The business community, for example, complains about the slow pace of reform.'

The first of those quotes is from TheAustralian Financial Review of 3 March 1997, and the second is from the NT NewsI do not often quote the NT Newsin this place, but on this occasion I will—of 1 March 1997. Both are about the Howard government, which was marking its first year in office. You are beginning to sense the pattern I am trying to paint. It seems that using the first anniversary of a government to goad it about its lack of achievement has become a national sport. That is not a complaint; it is just how things are. But it does not make the charge accurate.

Indeed, the Turnbull government does have some significant achievements. If you are a Western Australian, the Prime Minister's announcement that this government is going to implement a floor below which no state or territory's level of GST can fall is significant, is an achievement. No other Prime Minister has done it previously. If you are a South Australian worker, this government's investment in your state in steel, in defence industries, which are also important to Western Australian workers, is significant. It is an achievement. If you own and operate a small business in our country, the government's changes in relation to section 46 of the Competition and Consumer Act are significant, are welcome, are an achievement. We know that this reform will help Australian businesses to flourish, enable new and innovative firms to get started and help new technologies to be introduced, and it will ensure that consumers can receive the best-quality products and services at the lowest price.

In November last year the government announced its response to the competition policy review, known as the Harper review. The government's response set out a competition agenda that will boost innovation, open up new markets and ultimately lead to increased choice and better services for consumers. Better prices for consumers, more choice, more growth opportunities for small businesses: these are not minor considerations. And the government is continuing to tackle the task of budget repair—something on which those opposite remain spectacularly unhelpful. But reality is starting to catch up with them. The Australian people are beginning to accept that this task cannot be delayed any longer, and the attempts by the Leader of the Opposition at misdirection—banging on about banks and the evil of the big end of town—are ringing more hollow than ever.

So, as we reflect this week on the anniversary of Mr Turnbull's ascension to the leader of the Liberal Party and to the Prime Minister of this country, I think it is important to be circumspect when discussing success so far and achievements to date. It is true that in this country at the moment it is very hard to please everybody all the time. But the government has been able to meet the needs, challenges and demands of particular parts of the Australian economy. As I said, support for section 46 reforms, supported by the small business community, as well as GST distribution reform and the establishment of the principle of a floor in the GST distribution arrangements, are very welcome initiatives—achievements—that are important to the Western Australian community, and support for Australia's defence industries and for workers in those industries in South Australia is very important for South Australians.

When you scratch the surface, there are indeed reasons to be positive about what the Turnbull government has been able to achieve thus far, in the first 12 months of his tenure. It is important to note too that in previous governments, under previous prime ministers, it has been commonplace—it has become a national sport—to try to decry those achievements over just one 12-month period. We must remember that governing is difficult. But if we are to reflect on what achievements might be possible, on what we might be able to foresee into the future, then this Senate chamber will have a very important role to play in making sure that it does its bit, primarily on the issue of budget repair. As Glenn Stevens remarked as he came to the end of his tenure as Governor of the Reserve Bank, and as Mr Costello, the former Treasurer, has remarked, the challenge facing this country is real. The challenge facing this country is stark, and it is very important that we as a Senate chamber put our mind to finding the consensus that is going to move this country forward so that we are able to tackle the task of budget repair and to repair the financial position of this country—not for ourselves, and perhaps not even for our children, but for their children—and the consensus that this country cannot continue to afford the largesse that it has enjoyed over such a long period of time, that the challenge of fiscal repair is stark, that the challenge of fiscal repair is real.

Even if we do not want to wake up to that claim in this Senate chamber, we cannot ignore the fact that out there in the community more and more people—whether they be in the small business community, whether they be commentators, whether they be the Governor of the Reserve Bank or the former Treasurer—are now coming to the conclusion that fiscal repair for this nation is demanded. And that is a responsibility that we have in this Senate chamber: that in 12 months time, when we come to reflect on the success or otherwise of the Turnbull government, part of that responsibility, part of that success, could be attributed to an opportunity in this Senate chamber to find consensus. It has been done before. It is worth noting that the success that is often remarked in relation to Paul Keating and Bob Hawke was a success to which John Howard, as shadow Treasurer, contributed, putting the opportunity of partisanship aside to support some of the important reform initiatives that both Mr Hawke and Mr Keating were able to deliver that have ensured that our country has continued to enjoy high levels of prosperity over the past 20 or so years. But those high levels of prosperity cannot be taken for granted. The onus is on all of us to do what we can— (Time expired)