Page 190 - Week 01 - Thursday, 9 April 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I will not trot out the sort of ideological troglodyte line that we have heard here this afternoon. There are a few other things that should be put on the record. It must have been quite funny this morning in the Liberal Party's party meeting. What happened, Madam Speaker, is that this MPI was raised by a previous Liberal member on or about 14 August last year. Exactly the same question was asked in this house. I think the person's name was Stefaniak. I believe that he was a Liberal MLA. I recall seeing in the paper a photograph - I think it was taken at the front of the Assembly - of him being wheeled out by the Opposition Whip in a garbage bin. It was quite obvious that they did not take out his previous questions at the same time. It shows you just how bereft the Opposition is of issues to raise when they have to find Stefaniak's old questions, left in the bottom of his drawer, to raise as the first matter of public importance of the new Assembly. But it is fairly typical of the way that the Liberals intend to approach industrial relations.
What sort of approach is that, Madam Speaker? It is fairly typical, one would suggest, of those policies which, for 13 years, Margaret Thatcher inflicted on the people of Great Britain, creating a wasteland, north of London, in the whole of the rest of Great Britain. That is the type of policy that our people across this chamber wish to inflict on the people in the ACT. Rather marvellous!
The other point is that the MPI is factually wrong. The Minister has quite clearly indicated, because of the report tabled here in this house yesterday, that in fact the excesses that the Auditor-General was talking about were under the stewardship of the Leader of the Opposition, the then Treasurer; the person who also, after some people got a bit of sense in this house and kicked the Alliance Government out, as chairman of the Public Accounts Committee, let them go on. He did not comment on them. So here today, in the first matter of public importance, they raise this issue which is factually wrong. They raise an issue which is a rehash of a failed attempt in August last year written by somebody whom the people of Canberra quite clearly said they did not want to represent them any more, because he is not now sitting in this chamber. Not only is it a rehash, not only is it factually wrong; but it also gives the opportunity for the troglodytes to march out the true liberalist Lamborghini philosophy of industrial relations. It is something that you would expect of the zealots on Hewson's staff, but not down here.
We assumed that there might be a breath of fresh air with the Opposition. Unfortunately, we were wrong. All they can do is look in disused bottom drawers and pull out matters to put on the table, because they cannot think of anything else. It is typical; that is it.
Mr Wood: Bring back Bill.
MR LAMONT: That would not be a bad conclusion to this afternoon's debate. At least, over the next 12 months we might get a few decent MPIs from the Opposition, something of substance rather than an opportunity for them to get up and ramble on with the ideological claptrap that one would expect from the Lamborghini brigade on the hill. We might get something of substance that we could talk to and debate properly in this house, rather than this nonsense.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .