Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 12 Hansard (5 December) . . Page.. 3693 ..

MR OSBORNE (continuing):

Surely any reasonable sensible person would really have to question their motives. Mr Quinlan has been arguing quite passionately about how important money is for the Labor Party and how this plan of Mr Moore's will have a negative impact on their campaign, and how it is going to have a bad effect on them in the lead - up to the election. I think that it is become increasingly clear just how crucial that money is, and I would argue that that is the reason, Mr Speaker, that the Labor Party is taking this stance on poker machines in relation to the casino, or the pubs and taverns.

So I, too, share Ms Tucker's concerns about political donations. When I look down the list of both of the major parties, I scratch my head. There are a number of people on both sides who sent me cheques prior to the last election, which we sent back. I think that anyone who can stand up in here and claim that they are not influenced by an organisation that pays them over - what was the total here? - $388,594.24, is kidding themselves.

Mr Quinlan has made it very clear that it is all to help them in the election campaign. Anyone who receives that amount of money and then comes in here and claims that it does not have an impact on how they are voting is fair dinkum kidding themselves.

I will support this initial part of Mr Moore's amendments and I look forward to some further debate on the issue that seems to be getting people hot under the collar.

MR HARGREAVES (8.35): Mr Speaker, I cannot let that last comment go unchallenged, because what strikes me about this legislation is its lack of even - handedness. It also strikes me that there will be more casualties resulting from this than just the one that the government is trying to achieve.

It seems to me that the government, led by Mr Moore, is just targeting the Labor Club, and Mr Osborne is under the impression that the Labor caucus would dance to the Labor Club's tune. I have to say that, first, that is not so, and also that the reason why the Labor Club exists is because people join it to support the Labor Party. That is why they do it. That is why they are members of the club, in very much the same way that people contribute to the 200 Club.

And people who join the Labor Club know full well where their profits are going. Mr Osborne talked about disclosure, and he held up a piece of paper, Mr Speaker, which was a photocopy of an article in the Canberra Times, and it specified how much people received, down to the last cent. That is pretty open disclosure in my view. It says in here that Howard Smith Industries gave $1,500 to the Labor Party. It also says Howard Smith Industries gave $1,500 to the Liberal Party. It is pretty specific.

But this legislation only deals with the left - hand side of the ledger. All that Mr Moore's legislation is doing is penalising one club, because he has some kind of vendetta against it. He has been muttering about this as long as I have been here, and, in fact, even longer than that. I do not understand his logic. I have tried to understand his logic so that I can mount an argument against it, but I do not. It is obvious how much money we are receiving towards the running of the Australian Labor Party in this town. Not every penny of it is directed to people here and, I might say, not one penny is directed to any individual member here. Not one penny - it would be on my public disclosure.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .