Page 2269 - Week 08 - Thursday, 7 June 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
to the issue that he has raised. He is giving them the opportunity to raise a whole series of totally irrelevant issues. I think Mr Stevenson really had not thought this through before he brought this thing forward.
Mr Stevenson's lack of consistency pales into insignificance compared with that of Mr Connolly, who spoke earlier today about the position of the ALP. Mr Connolly indicated that the ALP would be supporting this motion because it saw the situation as being one of some hypocrisy and lack of integrity on the part of the Government, and therefore the ALP saw there was good ground to support this motion. I do not think that the ALP really has any ground to gloat over that. I think the Australian Labor Party is guilty of its own instances of hypocrisy and inconsistency. The most glaring instance of this hypocrisy and inconsistency was its decision on Tuesday night this week to abstain on the very issue that it has constantly recommended to this Government for the last two months that it pick up and run with; that is, the taxing of X-rated videos. The ALP has come into this place time and again and has gone to the media time and again, saying, "You people should be taxing X-rated videos. You people should be getting your due share from X-rated videos".
What did these paragons of good advice and virtue do when the issue was actually brought forward by the Attorney-General, or by the Minister of Finance, or whoever it was? They slunk for cover. They ran away. They hid. They said, "We do not want to be seen supporting these X-rated videos. We do not want to be seen supporting this tax".
Ms Maher: They have just left the house. They cannot face it.
MR HUMPHRIES: What a pack of hypocrites! Well, there we see it - running for cover when the heat goes on. So much for the consistency of which Mr Connolly spoke. Clearly there was none of it. Obviously, they realised that they could not possibly oppose the tax because that was what they themselves went to such pains to try to introduce while they were in government. They could not possibly oppose the tax, but then again they could not possibly support it either, because supporting the tax would effectively undercut their basis for supporting Mr Stevenson's no-confidence motion today. So what did they do? They did the only honourable thing that any person would do in the circumstances. They ran away and they hid. I think they stand condemned for that.
Ms Maher: There is a an old wives' saying: if you cannot take the heat, get out of the kitchen.
MR HUMPHRIES: Exactly; if you cannot stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. That is what has happened here. The old blowtorch went on the tummy and they had to run for cover.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .