Page 3524 - Week 08 - Wednesday, 18 August 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Mr Hanson: Are you trying to exercise the Speaker’s rule from the crossbench?
MADAM ASSISTANT SPEAKER: Mr Hanson, I would ask you to stop interjecting. Mrs Dunne, you have the floor for a substantive debate if you so desire.
MRS DUNNE: Thank you, Madam Assistant Speaker. What we saw this morning was a truly bizarre interaction between Mr Barr and the Greens, where he was actually going out of his way to coach the Greens about what they should be doing to cover up their embarrassment, which is their policy, as has been highlighted by Mr Seselja’s motion here today. It is interesting because what he actually asked for was for Senator Brown to come out and clarify the position in relation to funding for non-government schools. He had his wish.
At the National Press Club yesterday the question was asked. The question was asked and Mr Brown refused to answer the question. Mr Brown refused to answer the question and on the basis of that, Madam Assistant Speaker, I now move the amendment to Mr Seselja’s motion circulated in my name:
Insert after paragraph (1)(e):
“(ea) the unwillingness of the Leader of the Australian Greens, Senator Bob Brown, to disavow this policy during his address to the National Press Club on Wednesday, 18 August 2010;”.
On the basis of that, I have moved this amendment, because it goes to the heart of the policy. The policy is about cutting money out of non-government schools and Mr Barr fell over himself, in an embarrassing way this morning, trying to get the Greens to clarify their situation. Now Mr Barr is just as embarrassed as the Greens are in relation to this policy.
He can speak again and justify how, after the pleadings of the left of Australian politics—one part of the left of Australian politics pleading with the other part to at least look a bit credible—he cannot come up with a situation where there is clarity. The only clarity is the clear written words in the Greens’ policy. Senator Brown was given an opportunity to take away from that policy and somehow disavow it, and he would not do so. So the clear facts of the written policy remain the policy of the Greens.
We also had the unedifying spectacle of Ms Hunter trying to come up with a more palatable approach to private health expenditure and private health insurance. What she was saying is what I would prefer would be the case—that there should be a means test. But the policy does not talk about a means test. It talks about plain old-fashioned abolition. That is plain old-fashioned abolition of health rebates for ordinary, everyday Canberrans and ordinary, everyday Australians—people like my 90-year-old mother, who spends a considerable part of her pension income ensuring that she has private health insurance.
It relates to people like that who have always, for 90 years or for 60 years, had private health insurance. They want the comfort of knowing that they have the doctor of their
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video