Page 2963 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 30 June 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
They will be listening to the fact that the planning minister, the wanna-be Treasurer, just came in here and effectively accused the Treasurer of engaging in grubby politics.
He did not do the work. He did not look at what was said. He shot from the hip and he had absolutely no idea. I think he demonstrated again why his party has chosen to overlook him for the leadership and for the Treasurer’s job, because we see the constant job application. It was the Treasurer who claimed that there was a deal or arrangement. It was a mysterious deal that we do not know anything more about, other than what the government has told us. The Treasurer told estimates:
There is no document that exists that we have identified at this point in time that would indicate how this deal was made and who was involved.
Those are the Treasurer’s words, Mr Speaker. The ignorance of the planning minister to come here and say, effectively, that the Treasurer has engaged in grubby politics in seeking to have a go at us—
Mr Smyth: Whose words?
MR SESELJA: They were the Treasurer’s words. The Treasurer talked about a deal or arrangement. She went on. I said:
So it is a deal between who?
The Treasurer’s reply was:
I do not know, Mr Seselja.
And later she says:
I cannot answer how this arrangement was entered into.
Ms Gallagher said that there was a deal or arrangement entered into. She cannot say who engaged in it. That is a serious accusation to make and Mr Barr has actually—
Ms Hunter: Did you say “mysterious”? I don’t remember you saying “mysterious”.
Ms Gallagher: No, although it is a bit—
MR SESELJA: It is mysterious in that we do not know who signed this deal, who did this handshake agreement that we refer to. Mr Barr has exposed, in fact, what the Treasurer was saying. He has called it grubby politics. If he does not have the evidence, if he cannot say who, if he cannot say whether it was the Australian Valuation Office, whether it was the developers or whether it was the government—which arm of the government that actually ticked off on this—it was an extraordinary contribution to the debate from the planning minister to talk about this deal or arrangement. But it does highlight the Treasurer’s position.
Perhaps it was deliberate. Perhaps it was deliberate to highlight the fact that the Treasurer has made these claims about a deal or an arrangement. That was a particularly ignorant contribution. Like Ms Hunter, Mr Barr has not actually read the motion. That was clear.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video