Page 3305 - Week 11 - Tuesday, 13 November 2007

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

But Peter Garrett has, of course, let the cat out of the bag with his comment that once they get in they are going to change it all. He did not just say it to one journalist. He said on two different occasions. He said it to Steve Price and he said it to Charles Woolley as well. We have to surmise from that that perhaps he actually means it. It was not just a one-off line that he used in an airport. He has used it more than once and perhaps we should actually take him at his word.

This is the Labor Party that very recently elected Mark Latham as their leader and until recently was prepared to put him up as their alternative prime minister. Half of the caucus believed that Mark Latham was the best man to lead this country. We know how that turned out. The current deputy leader of the Labor Party is a big Mark Latham fan. I guess the question for the people of Australia will be whether Julia Gillard and Peter Garrett have more control than Kevin Rudd and perhaps Wayne Swan. This is the great concern.

Some of the questions that come to mind are: what are they really going to do on greenhouse and what are they really going to do on tax? Are we actually going to see tax cuts? Lindsay Tanner is on record as supporting a 60 per cent top marginal rate. Are they going to balance budgets—none of the other Labor governments do—what will really happen to non-government schools and how much control will the unions have?

But the bigger concern, and it is apparent here in the ACT with the campaign to unseat Gary Humphries, is a Labor Party dominated by the likes of Julia Gillard and Peter Garrett with the Greens holding the balance of power. What kind of social outcomes might we see in that scenario? What kind of dugs policy might we see? What kind of policy might we see on the US alliance? What kind of tax policy might we see? What kind of policy might we see on the funding of non-government schools? This is a very scary prospect, a very, very scary prospect—Kerrie Tucker and Bob Brown with the balance of power with a union dominated left-leaning ideologically dominated Labor Party. It is very, very scary.

Water—use and restrictions

MR STEFANIAK (Ginninderra—Leader of the Opposition) (6.05): Thank you, Mr Speaker. It is scary, and I do not even think that Julia Gillard can sing. I want to speak about something different tonight. I have received several reports of the government, either through its contractors or its own employees, using very good potable water—drinking water—for industrial purposes. This relates to a couple of complaints I have received in relation to the new K-10 superschool on the old Ginninderra high site at Holt. I believe that Ms Porter received a first complaint, like I did, early in October—

Mr Hargreaves interjecting—

MR STEFANIAK: Yes, I can actually sing, Mr Hargreaves.

MR SPEAKER: Not everybody calls it that.

MR STEFANIAK: That is true. Nothing actually happened in relation to that complaint because on 30 October another constituent contacted me. He had witnessed

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