Page 1459 - Week 05 - Wednesday, 4 May 2016
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
What is this government’s response, Madam Speaker? This government’s response is to say, “Stuff small business. Stuff business, because all we care about is our mates in the CFMEU.” So as long as they have their little secret MOU with the CFMEU that enables the CFMEU—the thugs in the CFMEU—to go out and intimidate, to coerce, to demand from business exactly what the CFMEU wants, then this government is happy. This government does not give a stuff about small business. This government only cares about their mates in the lobbying sector and their CFMEU mates that pile tens of thousands of dollars into their pockets. It is the CFMEU that funds Andrew Barr and his colleagues and it is the CFMEU that funds Shane Rattenbury and his colleagues.
When they looked at the budget last night and saw all these initiatives for small business, they did not give a hoot. They do not care because all they care about is what is in it for the CFMEU so that the CFMEU can do better and give them more money. That is the sort of attitude we see from this government.
Madam Speaker, I have circulated an amendment that makes the points that I have just made in my speech. I am calling on the government to stop trying to blame someone else and accept responsibility for their own chronic mismanagement. That would make a nice change, would it not? They should accept responsibility for their poor performance in service delivery and massive hikes in the cost of living. They should better support low income Canberrans, and there are many ways that can be done. I note there is a review of the concessions program. I hope that is not just another attack on older Canberrans—as Mr Doszpot will be litigating shortly—from this ageist, out-of-touch Chief Minister.
Ms Burch: Point of order, Madam Speaker, please.
MR HANSON: Can you stop the clock, please?
MADAM SPEAKER: A point of order. Stop the clock.
Ms Burch: While I was upstairs I heard Mr Hanson say in his narrative that this side of the chamber “does not give a stuff”. I query whether that is parliamentary language and acceptable for you, Madam Speaker.
MADAM SPEAKER: On the point of order, if an issue arises, you should bring it to the presiding officer’s attention at the time. I am sorry, I did not notice it. I would not rule it as unparliamentary, but I would remind Mr Hanson and other members to be mindful of their language. Mr Hanson, on the question that the motion be agreed to.
MR HANSON: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I do not think there is any critique of the actual effect. The language could be changed—let us say they could not give a hoot, they could not care less, they could not give a damn. All are equally valid, and I withdraw could not “give a stuff”. My amendment goes on that—
Ms Burch: Sorry, I apologise—
MR HANSON: Could you stop the clock, please?
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video