Mr FILING(10.38 a.m.) —I was interested in the comments made by the member for Perth (Mr Stephen Smith) on this matter. It is quite clear, as he says and as is reported in today's West Australian newspaper, that basically Western Australia does not have a voice in the Senate as far as the Liberal Party is concerned. This is a grave disappointment, given the fact that those senators who represent the Liberal Party in Western Australia gave an undertaking, a promise, to the State council that they were going to do something to protect the interests of prospectors in that state.

We have a situation where, once again, there is the introduction of retrospective legislation affecting the resources sector and the mining sector, an industry that produces an enormous amount of wealth for this country. We have a problem where the representatives, who you would assume would do as they tell the preselection panels of the party in their state, represent the interests of the state in instances where the federal government overreaches itself to introduce legislation such as this, all capitulated. The irony is that Senator Lightfoot, who came to Canberra on the basis that he was going to be the supreme voice for the state of Western Australia, was not even there. He was absent.

You might note, Mr Deputy Speaker, that the three Western Australian Independent members are here for this particular debate. Where are the WA Liberals in this place for this particular debate? The answer is: absent again. If I were a member of the State Council of the Liberal Party considering the preselections of the senators next time around, I would be looking very closely at this. I would be considering very closely whether or not it is worth returning to the Senate senators who let their own state down after giving a commitment that they would put their interests first.

We know that this government from time to time has either reneged on or has changed commitments it has given to the electorate at the 1996 federal election. The honourable member for Curtin (Mr Rocher), who is next to me, has clearly pointed out the case in relation to the provisional tax uplift factor. We were promised a reduction from eight to six per cent. Then a bill was introduced into this place whacking it up to 10 per cent the following financial year. Quite clearly, if you average it out it is eight per cent both years—well above the actual growth in income that is applicable, as the member pointed out to the Treasurer (Mr Costello) the other day.

A range of measures have been introduced where the government has contradicted or reneged upon positions it took during the federal election. Another commitment was to reduce red tape or compliance on small businesses, but most of the legislation that impacts on small business introduced by this government has increased compliance and red tape. We have the ridiculous situation where the government has increased the cost burden on small businesses to comply with government legislation.

Today we are debating amendments carried in the Senate to legislation that in effect introduces retrospectivity in the sale of mining leases. All I can say is that under the circumstances of what has taken place in the Senate, under the circumstances of this so-called claim for credit by the five Liberal senators last year that they were responsible for the amendments that were moved by Senator Murray, it is clear that the interests of the state of Western Australia have been well and truly let down. I can only concur with Premier Court, following the outburst the other day in the party room against some of his complaints and particularly his complaint about the bailout of the Thai baht, something on which I share his views entirely, that he has to represent the interests of WA. Quite clearly the Liberal Party here has forgotten them and the WA Liberal senators ought to be thoroughly ashamed of themselves for once again letting down the state which they pledged to represent.