Page 3228 - Week 08 - Wednesday, 22 August 2012

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


comment from the community and have that inquiry by the public accounts committee. That was an important part of the consultation process. The Greens were always very open as to how we might refine the way we might move forward on this, which is exactly what we did.

The original bill did have a series of negative screens that were taken from some very large and reputable companies across the world. They are very common screens. But we did, as I said, go ahead and refine what we put into the bill that I tabled recently and that we are debating today.

I am sure that if someone put a scenario to the Liberal and Labor parties and said, “Do you think it is okay to make money from companies who use children as slave labour?” for example, they would say, no, it is not okay. The people of the ACT would not want to benefit from an investment like that. I do not think Mr Smyth will publicly criticise Christian Super for their ethical investment charter and argue that they should be investing in weapons and should not proceed with their plans to create new policies to deal with issues like child labour this year.

I do not think that when Mr Coe had the opportunity to meet the Queen he told her that she was making a mistake in the way she invested her money. She is, after all, one of the world’s largest investors in renewable energy.

I welcome the fact that Mr Barr has just said that the government will develop a proxy voting policy. This is good news, and this is exactly what was proposed in the bill, so that is another thing that has been picked up. This will mean that we can vote according to the policies of the territory and the values of our community in a number of votes that occur around the world—votes that we can take part in and participate in.

Certainly the Greens are very pleased that, even though this bill will not pass today, it has been the catalyst for significant change. That should be acknowledged. I am pleased that, because of this bill, we will no longer directly invest in tobacco, cluster bombs and landmines, and that a record of all proxy voting actions for the financial year will now be published.

I would make the observation, though, that the fact that we will continue to invest indirectly in some types of companies through indexes and other vehicles is inconsistent with the values the new policy purports to promote. This certainly is not the end of this issue. I think that, over time, there will be more and more pressure to change the way that we invest our money. And we are not alone.

It is important to reiterate the point that all this bill does is apply the same standards to our investments as we do in our daily lives. It is unlawful in the ACT for a public authority to act inconsistently with rights recognised in the Human Rights Act. It is unlawful to make children or adults work in sweatshops. It is unlawful to test cosmetic products on animals. Any attempts to paint this as anything other than applying the standards we apply to every person in the ACT every day to the way we invest our money is disingenuous.


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