Nick McKim (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

Firstly, I want to be very clear that the Australian Greens will be supporting this disallowance moved by One Nation. It's fair to say that we don't often agree with One Nation, but, on this very narrow circumstance, we absolutely agree with One Nation. We agree on this because cash is absolutely critical in our society and in our economy. Cash matters, and it matters because so many different people rely on cash for inclusion. They rely on cash for choice. They rely on cash to purchase the essentials of life. Cash is necessary to ensure basic resilience in our society and our economy when digital systems fail as they inevitably do from time to time.

Let's just rewind to when Labor put out the consultation paper on cash. That proposed a far broader cash mandate than the one Labor actually bought into the parliament with the instrument that this debate seeks to disallow. So Labor watered down their own original proposal. As a result they've presented to this parliament a cash mandate that is extremely narrow in scope.

The Greens will vote to disallow this instrument because it would have forced the government back to the table to introduce a cash mandate that was more broad and that provided greater protections and a broader mandate for the use of cash in our society. It would have done except for one thing, and that is the speech we just heard from the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate.

I don't know who wrote that rubbish for Senator Cash, but let me be very clear: everyone in this chamber knew the Liberals were supporting this disallowance last week. My first question is how did you get bought off? What did the government buy you off with to make you change your position from last week?