Tony Abbott Press Conference - Parliamentary reforms; Speaker’s role; border protection; Wild Rivers legislation; Delhi Commonwealth Games 2010
23/09/10
TONY ABBOTT:
There are two subjects that I wish to talk to people about today. The first is the carbon tax which the Government specifically ruled out prior to the election and has specifically ruled in subsequent to the election. The carbon tax is the first product of the secret deal between the Labor Party and the Greens. The carbon tax is the first product of the alliance between the Labor Party and the Greens which has enabled the current government to be formed. Now, let’s be very clear about what’s happened here. To win votes, the Prime Minister specifically ruled out a carbon tax. To form a Government with the Greens support, the Prime Minister has specifically ruled in a carbon tax. What that means is that this Government is essentially based on a lie. There has been a fundamental breach of faith with the Australian people and this fundamental breach of faith will haunt this Government from now until its ultimate demise. So, that’s the first thing that I wish to talk to you about today.
The second point I want to make is that the Coalition cannot accept the proposed arrangement for the pairing of the Speaker because after careful consideration of the matter we believe that it is constitutionally unsound. We have carefully looked at the Solicitor-General’s opinion and it is clear from a close reading of the Solicitor-General’s opinion that the only basis on which the Speaker can be paired is an informal arrangement. Now the Government of the country, legislation that passes the Parliament, is too important to be based on an informal arrangement. Now, I very much regret that the parliamentary reform agreement in this respect and this respect only cannot now be supported because I think that parliamentary reform is very important. But you cannot agree to do something which is in breach of the Constitution. The problem is that the Government rushed into this. I wrote to the Prime Minister on the 30th of August very much urging that the whole parliamentary reform process should be done under the guidance of the former Clerk, Mr Ian Harris. The Prime Minister rejected this proposal. If Mr Harris had been guiding the process it’s absolutely crystal clear, this problem would never have arisen. So I support parliamentary reform, I continue to adhere to every aspect of the agreement except the pairing arrangement which we now know is fundamentally unsound and just simply cannot proceed.
QUESTION:
Mr Abbott could you pair [inaudible] amend the Constitution? Would you agree to that if it were possible?
TONY ABBOTT:
Well, to amend the Constitution, Parliament must pass a law and then it must go to the people at a referendum. That’s quite a lengthy process and it obviously can’t take place in time for the Parliament to begin next Tuesday.
QUESTION:
It’s not about the Constitution though, it’s about your [inaudible].
TONY ABBOTT:
No, this is about not making agreements that are constitutionally unsound and no agreement can be proceeded with to the extent that it is revealed subsequently to be constitutionally unsound and on this particular point, the Government should’ve done its homework. The Government fundamentally failed to do its homework. It was only after the Government’s recommendation in the agreement about the pairing of the Speaker was concluded that the Government then did belatedly seek the Solicitor-General’s advice and the advice is that this can be no more than an informal arrangement at best.
QUESTION:
[inaudible]
TONY ABBOTT:
Look it is the fundamental responsibility of a Government to provide a Speaker. The first act of every Parliament is to choose a Speaker and it is the first responsibility of Government when Parliament resumes to provide a Speaker. Now, if the Government is unable or unwilling to provide a Speaker for the Parliament, well, then the Prime Minister should not have accepted the Governor-General’s commission.
QUESTION:
Mr Abbott, can I just ask you on the situation of asylum seekers, the clock is ticking on it, is this is becoming embarrassing to Sydney and Australia more widely, internationally?
TONY ABBOTT:
It’s pretty obvious that the system is under extraordinary strain and the reason why it’s under extraordinary strain is because of the flood of boat arrivals. Now, I accept that not all of the people who are currently protesting at Villawood arrived illegally by boat but certainly the flood of illegal boat arrivals since the Government adopted new policies has put immense and it seems almost unbearable strain on the system and the Government has no solution whatsoever. This is a Government which is all about activity but not about outcomes. This is a Government which has no answers to Australia’s problems.
QUESTION:
Does it surprise you in this situation that the police haven’t been called in to pull them down or that they were able to get up there in the first place?
TONY ABBOTT:
This is a matter, that’s an operational matter and I really wouldn’t want to go into that. I’m not on the spot, neither is the Prime Minister and it would be wrong for us to suggest how these delicate and tense and dangerous situations should be resolved in any specific way but the point I make is that the whole system is under almost unbearable stress because this is a Government which has failed to stop the boats.
QUESTION:
Mr Abbott, just looking at your letter here dated 30 August to the Prime Minister, you mention removing Bruce Hawker and Arthur Sinodinos from the process. I was just wondering if you could be specific about the problems that arose in your view of having those two partisan people…
TONY ABBOTT:
Well, I’m not opposed to any particular individual as such. What I wanted to ensure was a fundamentally sound and sustainable parliamentary reform process and the problem is that parliamentary reform has to be guided by parliamentary experts and with all respect to some of the people involved in that process they’re not necessarily experts on parliamentary procedure, they’re not necessarily experts on the constitution and that’s why I though it was very important that experienced senior parliamentarians should be involved and why I thought it was absolutely critical that one of the greatest authorities on parliamentary practice and on constitutional arrangements surrounding the Parliament, Mr Ian Harris, should have been critically involved.
QUESTION:
On a separate matter, when Parliament reconvenes what will your approach be to the issue of the Wild Rivers legislation? If the opportunity arises that private members could be brought forward or something like that are you willing to talk about?
TONY ABBOTT:
Yeah, sure. I think it’s very important that the Queensland Wild Rivers legislation be over-turned. The Commonwealth does have the power I believe to pass a law over-turning that legislation. I think it is abundantly in the best interests of the people of Cape York that they have charge over their own destiny, that they are able to make reasonable use of their land and the trouble with the Queensland Wild Rivers legislation is that it is essentially a denial of the legitimate land rights of the Aboriginal people of Cape York and I am determined because of my respect for Noel Pearson and other significant leaders in Cape York and because of my determination to ensure that Aboriginal people get a fair go in this country I’m determined to do what I can to over-turn this legislation and I believe that it should be a bill which is considered early at seriously by the new Parliament.
QUESTION:
Is that something you’d put forward?
TONY ABBOTT:
Well, I’m talking to people from Cape York about how it’s best proceeded but I have an absolute and urgent commitment to do something on this matter and this is something that one way or another will be brought before the Parliament very soon in it’s life. One final question.
QUESTION:
A couple of Australian athletes have withdrawn from the Delhi Games next month. Do you think that the Australian team should still be competing at those games given the security risks and health concerns?
TONY ABBOTT:
I think it would be a tragedy for the world if the Games did not go ahead but obviously they should not go ahead unless everything that reasonably can be done to secure people’s safety has been done. Now, it’s really up to the relevant teams in the first instance but then I suppose to the relevant governments to be confident that the athletes and visitors to the Games have their safety reasonably secured and that’s a matter which I think the Government should answer for.
QUESTION:
Would you have reservations about going?
TONY ABBOTT:
Look, the Opposition will be seeking a briefing on the precautions that have been taken to ensure that the Games are as reasonably safe as they can be made and I wouldn’t want to pre-empt what might arise from that briefing but I think that it would be tragic if the Games don’t go ahead. It really would be. I think that a lot of people right around the world have been looking forward to them and we don’t want them not to proceed but they’ve got to proceed under the safest possible circumstances and if there are serious questions about their safety well, then, obviously there are big question marks over them.
Thank you.