Page 2448 - Week 06 - Thursday, 10 May 2012
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
What we do know is that in the Labor Club’s report they acknowledge that this is a law in principle. Remember, members, that I said, “I hope this law does not have to be passed because, based on what was said across there, apparently there is no need for it.” I think I am on the record as saying, “I hope this law does not need to be passed.”
What we do know now is that millions of dollars were transferred, Ms Hunter, to beat this legislation, in anticipation of this legislation here today. The Labor Club, in their annual report, actually acknowledge that what they are doing may be subject to a penalty. What I did was not retrospective. I simply drew a line in the sand, and there are many examples of this in many jurisdictions where things have immediate effect. We have it in some of our laws. You can have a draft variation with immediate effect. It happens all the time. Anyone who says that it is retrospective is lying, because it is a lie. It started from the point that it was tabled in the Assembly, not the day before, the week before, the month before or the year before. It started the day I gave notice that that was the start date. “From this point forth it will be law if it’s passed.” That is what I said. I did not cast it back. I did not go back years, decades, centuries—whatever you want. It is not retrospective and anyone who says so is lying, because it had a specific start date and moved forward.
What confuses me immensely is that the Greens would support this on that day but they have now rolled. What the Greens are condoning is what the Labor Club board actually said in their report, which was, “If this law passes we’ll be fined because we’ll be breaking the law.” They knew that. They went ahead in the full knowledge that they would cop a $50,000 fine per offence. But they saw that as the cost of doing business. That is the Labor way. You have seen it in Wollongong, in New South Wales, in so many jurisdictions: “We’ll cop the fine because it’s simply the cost of doing business.” That is not right. For the party of fairness, equity, truth, justice and all the things that the Greens purport to be, when push comes to shove they are the lackeys of the Labor Party and they go to pieces.
This bill was passed in good faith in principle. It was passed in principle so that when we got to this debate today the whole emphasis of the new law had not been rorted. The emphasis of the new law has been rorted. It has been rorted by the Labor Party. They have got in ahead of it and now, aided and abetted by the Greens, they will pay no penalty for it. There will be no price here.
The Greens, who like to hold people up and attack people who behave corruptly, are going to let the Labor Party get away with this because it suits them. There has been no genuine explanation from Ms Hunter as to the stance that the Greens have taken tonight. I would ask the other Green members whether they agree that you vote for something in principle that we say we hope never needs to be used, we have denial from the party for whom this law was put in place that it was even happening, and yet in the last 36 hours of the financial year everything I said came to pass. It is amazing how, in 36 hours, you can make loans, set up trusts and buy properties.
The Labor Party did not know that the 1973 foundation, the Labor Club or whoever it was who had bought it was buying them an office. It is just like Christmas in July: here is an office! But they knew enough so that if they did not declare it in their
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video