QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE (INTERJECTION) – ALCOPOPS
June 23, 2009
Ms LIVERMORE (3.21 pm) — My question is to the Minister for Health and Ageing. Will the minister update the House on the latest developments on the alcopops initiative, and support for the measure?
Ms ROXON — I thank the member for Capricornia for her question. People on this side of the House will be delighted to know—in fact, all will be aware of this because of being in the chamber last night voting for it—the alcopops measure has now passed the House.
Although, I am disappointed to say that it was despite the announcement that was rather gracelessly executed by the member for Dickson that the Liberal Party was going to support the measure. I think he indicated that the Leader of the Opposition had finally had his way over the member for Dickson and the rest of the shadow cabinet. He declared that support would be provided by the Liberal Party for this measure. Actually, when it came to it, there were no Liberal members in the chamber voting for this measure. In fact, there were four members of the coalition parties here voting against the measure.
I have to admit to feeling slightly sorry—and probably not for the reasons that other people in the country might be feeling sorry—for the Leader of the Opposition, who was finally able to say that he saw the merit of our arguments for the alcopops and it was a matter worthy of supporting. He said, ‘Come on troops, we’re going to vote for it,’ and he turned around and suddenly there was nobody standing there behind him. For 12 months they have been arguing against this measure.
It seems to me that the Liberal Party are fine if they are against something. But if you want them to support something, they split in all directions. We have the member for O’Connor, the member for Hume and the member for Gippsland who, after all the love that was shown to him by the distilling industry during his by-election, obviously could not bring himself to vote against the measure. They actually ran an advertising campaign for him during his by-election.
Mr Chester — Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order that goes to section 90 of the standing orders. The minister is inferring that there was something improper in my motives during the Gippsland by-election campaign. There were no donations whatsoever made to my campaign, and I ask the minister to withdraw.
The SPEAKER — Unless there is some other background that I am unaware of, I did not take it as the member has construed.
Ms ROXON — There is not very much love in this House. But to suggest that there is a bit of love between the distilling industry—
The SPEAKER — Order! The minister will resume her seat.
Mr Broadbent — Mr Speaker, on the point of order, I took the same inference from the minister and she should withdraw.
The SPEAKER — I have not taken that construction. The debate on it then builds the construction. If there is a problem, the member for Gippsland has another avenue to rectify it. I call the minister.
Ms ROXON — Thank you, Mr Speaker. I understand why the member for McMillan feels left out. It is, of course, because his advertising campaign was not funded by the distillers, but the member for Gippsland had advertising right through the whole by-election paid for by the distillers.
Mr Truss — Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I ask you to demand that the minister withdraw the claim that a member’s vote was influenced by political donations. That is a vile accusation and she must withdraw it.
The SPEAKER — I have ruled on that matter. The next part went to other things. I call the minister.
Ms ROXON — Of course I do understand why this is sensitive for the National Party. The Leader of the National Party in the Senate, despite the announcement of the Leader of the Opposition and the shadow minister for health, has said that he will not be voting for this measure. The Leader of the Opposition is running a rabble on the other side of the House. They have argued against this measure for 12 months. Finally, they have agreed that there is merit and that this measure should be passed and then he cannot control the people in his team. When he says. ‘It’s time for us to support this measure,’ he has the leader in the Senate saying that he will not; he has members scattered across this chamber who will not follow his leadership. As I said, I confess to feeling slightly sorry for the Leader of the Opposition. When he actually decides to support somebody, there is nobody there standing behind him.