George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of answers given by the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy (Senator Conroy) to questions without notice asked by Opposition senators today.

On 13 November 1991 Mr Eddie Obeid gave his maiden speech in the New South Wales parliament and in that speech Mr Obeid thanked his many friends in the New South Wales branch of the Australian Labor Party. Among the many friends that Mr Obeid thanked in the New South Wales branch of the Australian Labor Party were one John Della Bosca, one Graham Richardson and one Bob Carr—now Senator Bob Carr, Australia's very disappointing foreign minister. As we have learned though in recent days, Mr Obeid's network of friendships extends far wider than the New South Wales branch of the Labor Party. It extends down the generations because, as we have learned in recent days, so friendly is Mr Tony Burke, a senior member of the cabinet of Julia Gillard, with Mr Obeid that Mr Burke was afforded the hospitality of Mr Obeid's ski lodge by Mr Obeid. Lo and behold, we also learned that Senator Stephen Conroy, now the third most senior minister in the Commonwealth of Australia—chilling, isn't it, Senator Wong, to think that Senator Conroy is the third most senior minister in the Commonwealth of Australia—was also the beneficiary of Mr Obeid's hospitality.

We in the opposition do not assert any particular wrongdoing against Senator Conroy but there is a deeper question here and the deeper question goes to the networks of influence and patronage and mateship and favours which define the culture of the New South Wales branch of the Labor Party and in particular the right faction of the New South Wales branch of the Labor Party, of which Mr Burke is a member, and its sister faction in Victoria, the Victorian Right, of which Senator Conroy is the leader and which faction holds in office this discredited Prime Minister, Ms Julia Gillard. That network of undue influence, favours, friendships and protection defines the culture of the Labor Party.

On occasions I have been known for some flights of rhetorical fantasy when it comes to the inequity of the Australian Labor Party, its culture of criminality and corruption but I could not do better than what its own federal vice-president Mr Tony Sheldon had to say in a speech which Mr Sheldon gave last weekend. Mr Sheldon said:

Our crisis—

speaking of the Labor Party—

is more than just a crisis of trust brought on by the corrupt behaviour of property scammers and lobbyists. It's a crisis of belief brought on by a lack of moral and political purpose.

Mr Sheldon went on to say that 'there must be no underestimating of the gravity of the crisis here and in New South Wales, no blame shifting and no dodging of the responsibility to set things right'. Very significantly, Mr Sheldon went on to say that what he had to say about the New South Wales Labor Right had 'strong relevance to every state branch and every faction in the country'. So this is not just a problem for New South Wales and it is not just a problem for the right wing of the Australian Labor Party. It is, according to their own federal vice-president, part of a culture endemic in every faction in every state across the Australian Labor Party. No wonder that people in each of the states have got wise and successively tossed the Labor Party from office in four states and no doubt will do the same in the Commonwealth this year.

Louise Pratt (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am delighted to be able to take note of answers given in a wide-ranging question time today by Minister Conroy. I note in doing so, that we know from what is going on in New South Wales at the moment that we would expect accountability to flow. We do not yet know what the outcomes will be from that but I am concerned and worried like anybody else. But what was contained in one question to Senator Conroy was in fact whether Senator Conroy and Mr Burke should have disclosed that they spent the weekend together. To be honest, I would like to ask if that is actually what the opposition is asking. Are we actually asking for disclosure as to when any in this chamber or in the other chamber go on holiday together, or perhaps should I say spend the night together under any other circumstance?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I don't want to go there! I really don't want to go there!

Louise Pratt (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I don't want to know either. So when they ask the question whether Senator Conroy and Mr Burke should have made a disclosure about the social time they spent together that weekend, I would challenge whether that is actually the standard that the opposition is looking for or one that they would like to uphold themselves.

Cory Bernardi (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

So disclosure on my spousal interest form!

Louise Pratt (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Exactly. I know the appropriate accountability should be there in terms of disclosing what accommodation you use and where that has come from, and that has been done in this case. But as for the question to be asked whether Senator Conroy and Mr Burke should have disclosed that they were there together, please know I do not want that to be a new standard for parliament. Heavens above that we should have to all make such disclosures. I would be happy to myself, but I do not want to ask that of all my colleagues.

One of the other topics that was debated in this question time was the question of superannuation. Senator Cormann asked if the Labor government does think that those who can afford to put $25,000 a year into their superannuation are rich. Personally, I would not necessarily say that such people are rich but under some circumstances they may be and under other circumstances they may not be. Whether you have got $25,000 that you have the capacity to invest says nothing about the rest of your overall wealth and whether you are rich or not. But I do know that we in the Labor government have been focused on making sure we have good, progressive superannuation policies, which means we have been right to be focused on helping people on lower incomes make savings and contributions to their superannuation. That is exactly what we have been getting on and doing.

We also debated in question time electricity prices and how the carbon price has been passed through in increased electricity prices. You see in both of these questions the absolute shallowness of the opposition on this. If you remove the carbon price and if you remove the tax on mining, then things like the increase in superannuation from nine per cent to 12 per cent and the compensation that has been passed on to households for increased electricity prices will not exist anymore. They will be simply gone. There is a complete policy vacuum from the opposition on these questions.

Our ministers were asked by senators opposite about the impact of electricity price increases on the dairy industry. We have compensated households, in particular needy households, for any price increases that are passed on. It is expected that some sectors of the economy will have to pass on electricity price increases, but that is in very stark contrast to states like Western Australia where we have seen a 60 per cent increase in electricity prices. (Time expired)

Cory Bernardi (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I note Senator Pratt in her far-ranging contribution touched on what Senator Brandis suggested was endemic, systematic corruption in segments of the Labor Party in New South Wales. Senator Pratt said she was concerned and worried about what was going on in ICAC. Well, she should be worried and concerned. Senator Pratt has good knowledge of it because she hails from the great state that is the home of WA Inc., Brian Burke and Carmen Lawrence—all those luminaries she is so proud they have put into the political system. Well may Senator Pratt be worried about what other skeletons will turn up as this festering boil has been lanced in New South Wales and will spread across the country, as we are seeing with our declaration of interests.

I rise today in response to Senator Conroy's response and cavalier lack of concern about the diminishing confidence of business in my state of South Australia. The telltale sign that Senator Conroy gave not a jot nor a tittle about South Australia was the ponderous delivery of his response. It was so slow and static. It was difficult for him to talk about it because he has not got a clue. It is easy for those on this side to talk about small business because, unlike the one, two or maybe three on the other side who have actually employed someone from their own purse, members on this side of the chamber have employed people and depended on their successful businesses to pay their bills and their mortgages.

I myself struggled in small business under a Labor government. But never under the awful detrimental time of Paul Keating and the recession we had to have did I have to struggle quite as severely as businesses are doing under this government. It is the lack of certainty that is causing them distress and concern. It is the green tape, the red tape, the increased bureaucracy and the workplace employment laws that really provide a disincentive for business people to employ people. It is too hard. I can speak of dozens of business people who have said, 'I can't afford to put anyone else on because if it doesn't work this government is going to hunt me down.' They complain about the union coercion and the standover tactics. I could tell you about small business operators who have reduced their workforce because of the impact of unions on their workforce. These are innovative, technologically advanced industries that have been impeded because of the actions and the encouragement of this government.

The frustration for many of them is that they are expected to pay all their bills on time, make their budgets balance and provide secure employment for dozens, hundreds or in some cases families, yet this government does not expect to hold itself to the same account. If you cannot manage your budget, you cannot manage your business. If you cannot manage your budget, you cannot manage the economy. This government is incapable of managing the economy. It is incapable of empathising or understanding the genuine concerns of small business because it has no affinity for small business. Small business or business in general is simply an obstacle to be overcome, something to be raided to prop up the coffers and something to blame when things go wrong. Yet the small business men and women of this country are the engine room, the driving force, behind the growth here. Unfortunately, that engine has only two cylinders firing.

Every day that this government stays in power and every day the Treasurer, the finance minister and the Prime Minister mismanage the Australian budget, deceive businesses about what to expect and tinker with all of the things where businesses need certainty, is adding to the lack of force that is going to propel this economy forward. We should all be concerned about it because if we remove the government from the employment sector then small business is the thing that is driving this country. It is keeping families employed. It is the one thing that we need to do well because it is innovation, technology, the enthusiasm and the spirit of entrepreneurialism that will provide us with that springboard to future growth. It is not government borrowing; it is not government debt; it is not government spending—they are all mortgages on the future. We do not want to rob from the future. We want to live for today and build upon our great strengths.

Mark Furner (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I also rise today to contribute to answers provided by Senator Conroy in today's question time. What surprises me a little bit is where the opposition are going. They started the week claiming that they were going to be the alternative government, and they were going to step out of the dark as the opposition and all of a sudden become this alternative government. But not once have we heard anything from them during question time on policy. What we have heard today, and consistently throughout this week, is attacks on scurrilous claims against Senator Conroy about some involvement of a previous minister through the New South Wales government about some chalet he owned. There is nothing in it, yet they come along here with these scurrilous gutter-raking claims that there was something involved in that.

I put it to the opposition to start acting like an alternative government. Do not come in here and produce this nonsense. Let us get over this fact about the carbon price. The carbon price does not even get a mention out there in voter land. Go out there and talk to people about it, like I do, and you will find that people do not even mention it, because it has no impact. It has not had any impact whatsoever. People are still buying their legs of lamb, and they are not having to pay $100 like the coalition indicated. A $100 leg of lamb—where do you really come from when you come up with those scare campaigns about the effects of the carbon price? No wonder people do not believe your leader when they are coming up with this sort of nonsense. Once again, come up with some policy. Today, have you heard the grandstand policy? The 'Tony troppo tax' and we are going to shift all the people out from South Australia, Victoria, Brisbane and New South Wales, and put them up in northern Australia: Karratha, Cairns, Townsville, up in Darwin. The 'Tony troppo tax'. This is your policy. When challenged today in question time by Senator Carr, you stepped back from it and said: 'No, that has got nothing to do with us. We never suggested that'. Unbelievable.

One of the other questions provided today was on superannuation. I stand proud, as a previous union official and a union secretary, of course, that we were part of a government—

Sue Boyce (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You wouldn’t be here if you hadn't been in the union.

Mark Furner (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That is irrelevant, Senator Boyce.

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Ignore the interjections.

Mark Furner (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We know where you are going after this Senate, anyhow. As a union official, I was very proud to see the introduction of compulsory superannuation contributions, to see workers have an entitlement starting at three per cent, and now those low-income workers—and everyone in the workforce—are receiving nine per cent. Our program to lift that to 12 per cent is an excellent sign of where we as a Labor government see the need for investment, the need for creation of wealth and the need for people to be sustainable with some dignity when they retire. I think people should take note of the fact that the Labor government is the only government that has been the backbone of workers in this country to assist them through the life of their retirement.

We know where the member for Warringah, Mr Tony Abbott, stands on this. He should really explain to the Australian people that he wants to increase taxes on superannuation for low-income earners by nearly $1 billion a year to fill that $70 billion black hole that has been created. It has certainly been announced by Mr Abbott on breakfast radio as well. Unfortunately, it is just another example of what we will be up for if we end up in a situation where we have a coalition government in this place. We see examples of that in Queensland—and I know Senator Boyce will support me here—where we are seeing over 14,000 public servants and ancillary staff sacked by a Liberal National Party government in Queensland.

Sue Boyce (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

How much did you cut out of the Queensland Health budget?

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order on my left!

Mark Furner (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This is just another example of how they will treat public servants, trying to get them up in northern Australia. They do not take any consideration when it comes to workers in our country. They do not take into consideration any matters of importance like superannuation. We know where we stand for entitlements, we know where we stand for obligations and the rights of genuine working people in this country.

Sue Boyce (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I also seek to take note of the remarks made by Senator Conroy following questions from the opposition. I must say that it is always a pleasure to follow Senator Furner in this chamber in terms of taking note. Firstly, I would like to point out to him that question time is actually not for the opposition to detail their policy to the government, it is for the government to be held accountable. I would also like to follow up briefly on his comment in relation to superannuation and about how he was a union secretary, of course. I think in that one brief little comment he has nailed one of the biggest problems we have with this government: of course he was a union secretary. Most of the government were union secretaries or presidents in their past life. Most of them have never worked in a business where their assets were on the line in their lives. They have not got a clue. And this goes on and on.

I quite deliberately referred to Senator Conroy 's remarks rather than Senator Conroy's answers to questions put by opposition senators around superannuation and the small business situation, because they were not answers. Asked about the effect of the carbon tax on business, all Senator Conroy could do was rabbit on about household costs and what Treasury modelling about household costs had said. I would suggest that it is not the opposition that needs to get out and talk to people—we are already doing that. What we bring to this place is based on what they tell us. It is the government that is so bound up in its own little philosophies and ideologies that it is not getting out to talk to people.

As the shadow minister for small business, Mr Bruce Billson, has pointed out in a media release, small business does not need the current financial situation which has been set up by this government and its actions, or should I say, lack of actions. Business conditions were considerably weaker in the December quarter as the NAB survey points out, deteriorating to their lowest level since the June quarter 2009—the lowest they have been in three years. There has been a deterioration in mining conditions and yet all this government can do is try to pitch its survival on a mining tax which is apparently not raising anything.

In my home state of Queensland—and the home state of Senator Furner, where would you think he would have some idea of what was going on—conditions were very poor according to this NAB survey. Business confidence edged lower and remained lacklustre. The poor old Reserve Bank is trying to do what it can. Recent interest rate reductions have done little to alleviate business worries about the currently soft state of our economy. We have Senator Furner claiming that people are out there spending on legs of lamb and the like and yet the NAB quarterly survey points out that sales were the most constraining factor on output in the quarter. I quote:

… with almost two-thirds of firms reporting lack of sales and orders as their biggest constraint.

Their biggest constraint was the lack of orders and the lack of sales. Yet this government tries to find yet another way to attack small business.

We already have them needing to do their own administration on maternity leave. We have the BAS payments being required monthly, not quarterly. We have example after example of this government attacking and putting on small imposts that are incremental in their own right but come on top of the carbon tax. The price of diesel has gone up 2.5c per litre in the recent 12 months. The costs for business and the labour relations that this union dominated government has developed are all adding up to a disaster, including the superannuation cuts that they are now proposing.

Question agreed to.