Page 5937 - Week 14 - Thursday, 8 December 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
We have heard long and hard how important it is that we find new ways of doing things, except apparently for when it does not suit the Greens. The Greens can speak to their own purpose and can defend their own purpose, but the reality of what happens today is that all of the arguments about doing things differently are shown to be nothing but a political contrivance to benefit the Greens. When you set up political contrivances, they come back to bite you, and this will bite the Greens, particularly the Greens leadership. Ms Hunter needs to stand up and explain how you decide where you are progressive and where you are not progressive, because the argument, as Mr Hanson points out so well, that Ms Bresnan used was, “Well, we’ve got 20 years of history that said it is to be the whip.” And yet just about every other argument from the Greens members in this place over the last four years is about new ways of doing things.
When it suits them, let’s go the new way; when it does not suit them, we rest on history. That is hypocrisy in the extreme, and it reduces the way that the Greens operate in this place to a simple political contrivance. If we are to be consistent, it calls into question your position, Mr Speaker, as a portfolio spokesperson for the Greens. The tradition in this place has been that the Speaker moves away from holding portfolio responsibility. Only on very rare occasions in the last 20 years has the Speaker participated in debates or initiated debates that were not related to the role of the Speaker.
The contrivance is exposed. The Greens are exposed. Ms Hunter’s lack of leadership is exposed. The inconsistency of Ms Bresnan is exposed. And the bitterness, the pettiness and the poor humour of Mr Hargreaves is exposed. I urge all members to make sure that they look at what they are voting for here today, because you are voting for nothing but hypocrisy.
The Liberal Party should be free to put whomever they want on committees as they are in every other committee in this place. Why is admin and procedure so special? From now on, when we move to establish, for instance, the next estimates committee, will the Greens and the Labor Party feel free to dictate which two Liberal Party members are on it simply because they have got the numbers in this House? When we have changes to a standing committee, will they feel free to nominate who from the Liberal Party should be on that committee? Why is this any different? It is different because somebody is bitter and twisted, and it is different because somebody has some sort of other agenda which they failed to declare. It is different because it does not suit the purpose of the Greens and the Labor Party to have Mrs Dunne on the committee. That, Mrs Dunne, is a badge of honour that you should wear very, very proudly.
When we get to the stage where the Greens-Labor alliance is removing Liberal Party members from committees, you can only say it is because they are effective in their jobs. Mrs Dunne, well done. Wear this with a badge of pride because all of those opposite and on the crossbench should be looking down in embarrassment. I would be embarrassed, either moving or voting in favour of this motion today.
It is an attack on the integrity of the parties in this place that they are now no longer free to decide whom they will put on a committee. If we go to House of Reps practice,
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video