Page 2534 - Week 09 - Tuesday, 11 August 2015
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
MR BARR (Molonglo—Chief Minister, Treasurer, Minister for Economic Development, Minister for Urban Renewal and Minister for Tourism and Events) (10.21): I thank the Leader of the Opposition for setting the scene of opposition for opposition’s sake once again. In a week in which his party has very firmly put on the public agenda the slashing of penalty rates at weekends for retail workers and hospitality workers, it is interesting that the Leader of the Opposition’s opening salvo on ideology is about how his party will stand up for the rights of low paid workers. Their entire industrial relations agenda is to cut the pay of those workers at those particular times that the Leader of the Opposition has just been talking about. The rank hypocrisy of the Liberal Party on these questions is brought to bear in the first 30 seconds of the Leader of the Opposition’s contribution.
That is the ideological position of the Liberal Party. We know that. They are bursting to cut people’s wages—bursting to do it to retail and hospitality workers on Saturdays and Sundays and to those who have to work antisocial hours. That is their agenda—to cut the pay of those people. The Leader of the Opposition once again displays how out of touch he is with working people in this city and how out of touch his party is with working people in this country.
In relation to questions about water, better that my taste be water than that it be Bollinger, Moet or the likes of the drinks that those opposite would no doubt consume on their big nights out. If we are going to have an argument about drinks of choice, yes, I have chosen to drink water.
Opposition members interjecting—
MR BARR: There we go. Yes, a $100 dinner for two people. I do not think a $100 dinner for two people is considered extravagant these days. A $100 dinner for a family of four is hardly considered extravagant. I do not know, and I do not intend to provide a commentary on, the Leader of the Opposition’s tastes, but if I am to be condemned for drinking water, I think I can live with that. I can live with that condemnation that I would choose water. There we go.
Let me go to the specifics of the issues that the Leader of the Opposition raised in the context of differences between an executive that he would lead and the one that I lead. Indeed, there are many differences. This side of the chamber and this side of politics have a vision for the future of this city. This side of politics want to invest in renewable energy and public transport provision. We want to ensure that everyone in our community is included. That is why social inclusion is a priority for this side of politics. It is not on the other side.
What do we hear from the Liberal Party? That we are a country of lifters and leaners. That is what the Liberal Party is about. That is exactly the ideology and the agenda that they would pursue. We see it in our own city. We see it in the attitudes of the Liberal Party. We know that Mr Hanson would lead a government like Mr Abbott’s. We know that because they are the same party. That is what they are about. That is what they are in public life for.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video