Page 1839 - Week 06 - Thursday, 5 June 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
MR HANSON (Molonglo—Leader of the Opposition) (11.35): No-one from the government? Okay. I can certainly indicate I will not be supporting this motion today. Let us be very clear what this motion is about. Mr Rattenbury does the government’s bidding. We saw that actually in the cartoon on the front page of the Canberra Times yesterday about the budget, the caricature of Mr Rattenbury as the government’s lap dog.
But every Thursday in executive members’ business he gets to come up with a motion where he can feed it to his base in the Greens and say, “It’s all right, I’m still a Green, I’m still doing what Senator Milne wants me to do,” whether it is banning piggeries that do not exist or, as it is in this case, moving this motion. We know that this will have no effect. This is a federal issue. This is a matter that is currently before the federal parliament. It has not been to the Senate yet. I think it is likely that this will not get through the Senate. But what is quite clear is that this will have no effect and is much more about Mr Rattenbury trying to make a political point rather than having any substantive effect.
Before I go to the substance of the issue, I do find it a little ironic that Mr Rattenbury is complaining about a $7 co-payment today, when he was saying that he was going to support a budget that is going to put rates up by, on average, $150 a year. Where he says the co-payment is unfair, it is transformational to bill you an extra $150 a year. We know that Mr Rattenbury wants to put parking fees up by 30 per cent, hitting people’s back pockets.
Mr Corbell: On a point of order.
MADAM DEPUTY SPEAKER: Resume your seat, Mr Hanson. Point of order, Mr Corbell. Stop the clock, thank you.
Mr Corbell: The motion is specifically about the Medicare co-payment, and we have heard very little from Mr Hanson on this in the time he has had on his feet already, and I would ask you to ask him to remain relevant to the question before the chair.
MR HANSON: Madam Deputy Speaker, on the point of order, the main thrust of Mr Rattenbury’s argument was about the effect on the cost of living and people’s ability to afford the $7 co-payment, and my point about people’s cost of living and other cost pressures is equally relevant to this debate.
MADAM DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you, Mr Hanson. Notwithstanding your last remark, Mr Hanson, quite a lot of what you have been speaking about to this point has not been relevant, and I would ask you to be relevant to the motion that is before us at the moment, thank you.
MR HANSON: Members, it seems that when I start to hit the mark, debate gets shut down in this place, does it not? When I start to make some points––
Mr Corbell: Point of order.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video