Mr COSTELLO (Treasurer) (3:42 PM) —I move:

That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Deputy Leader of the Opposition and the member for Banks apologising for trying to slur the Prime Minister with racism.

We all know that, when one is debating issues of land rights and native title, passions can be inflamed.

Mr Campbell —Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I was actually on my feet before the Treasurer was called. I had a question to you.

Mr SPEAKER —I am sorry. We are now into the motion. I will ask you to direct your question after we have finished the motion before the House. I am sorry, I did not see you. Members rise in this place and, frankly, it is very difficult at times to work out the purpose of their rising.

Mr COSTELLO —We all know that passions can be inflamed in a debate like this. We all know that it is very easy for people to come along and inflame passions for their own political advantage in relation to this. At all times on this issue, the Prime Minister (Mr Howard) has shown absolute leadership—absolute leadership in securing justice between the rights of native title claimants and those who have pastoral lease. For my own part, for the part of this government and for the part of the joint parties, I want to say that the Prime Minister has done that with distinction.

Mr Allan Morris —Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Earlier in the day I raised with you a question about a substantive motion being on the matter we are discussing now. You ruled it out of order.

Mr SPEAKER —There is a motion for the suspension of standing orders to allow the motion to be considered. The Treasurer has moved a motion, and the House is considering it, as the procedures require.

Mr Allan Morris —When the Prime Minister made the allegations earlier in the afternoon you ruled him in order.

Mr SPEAKER —The Prime Minister responded to questions entirely in accord with the standing orders. We are now dealing with the substantive motion moved by the Treasurer. I call the Treasurer.

Mr COSTELLO —I want to say it again, and I want to say it on behalf of this government, on behalf of the members of the parties which the Prime Minister leads. The Prime Minister has served and led Australia in relation to this issue with distinction—with utter distinction. The despicable and premeditated attempts by the Australian Labor Party to put racial slurs into this debate and to inflame passions ought to be absolutely condemned—and we condemn them. We want to give those members who have injected those racial slurs into this debate the opportunity to come into this parliament and apologise. This is the apology squad. These are the people who love apologies. They ought to come down here and apologise for the things for which they are responsible.

This morning the Deputy Leader of the Opposition (Mr Gareth Evans), in one of the most tacky performances you will ever see a parliamentarian engage in, walked up to a doorstop and said in a quote which he has now confirmed:

I do find it somewhat tacky, however, that the Prime Minister reacted with the exuberance that he so obviously did when he was given the news of the 5:1 decision against the Aboriginal women.

The first point to make about this is that he says he was running off the front page of the Age . You were actually in the parliament yesterday. You were here. You know that the Prime Minister made no reference yesterday to the High Court decision. You also know that the Prime Minister stood here yesterday and, in response to an interjection from me when I complained he had given tax deductibility to the Evatt Foundation, turned around and that is when that picture was taken. The picture on the front page of the Age today was false and you knew it, but you took the opportunity to walk in—and this is now your defence—saying, `I was misled by the Age .' You were not misled by the Age . You very deliberately and in a premeditated way came in this morning, determined to put a racial slur on the Prime Minister. And these are the despicable words that the Deputy Leader of the Opposition went on to say:

This bloke seems to be never so happy as when he's bashing black fellas.

What were people expected to understand by that comment? They were expected to understand one thing. They were expected to understand that the Prime Minister was pleased or would be happy about bashing black fellas. That is the imputation you were trying to put on the Prime Minister. There is no other explanation as to those comments. It was not a discussion about the rights of native title. It was not a discussion about the High Court decision. It was not about pastoral leases. It was a racial slur, pure and simple, and you did it in a premeditated way.

If the Deputy Leader of the Opposition had any decency—and I say this to him now before this debate finishes—he would walk to that dispatch box and he would say to the Prime Minister, `I apologise.' That is all you have got to say: `I apologise. I withdraw.' That is all you have got to say. And what are you being asked to withdraw? You are being asked to withdraw a statement which is so palpably false and despicable that a decent person would withdraw it. You are being asked to withdraw these words:

The bloke seems to be never so happy as when he's bashing black fellas.

You are being asked to withdraw a racist slur which is despicable.

Then we come to the member for Banks (Mr Melham). The member for Banks came into this parliament and essentially confirmed the statement he made on Channel 2 on the 7.30 Report on 29 May 1997. He confirmed this quote:

. . . it's about time the Prime Minister showed leadership.

Again, do you see the way in which they try to sneak the Prime Minister into these debates? He said:

. . . it's about time the Prime Minister showed leadership.

And here is the quote which he confirmed:

There's only one thing missing from this debate, and that's the white sheets and the burning crosses—and that's been the undercurrent in this debate.

I will tell you what the undercurrent in this debate has been. The undercurrent in this debate has been a premeditated, conscious campaign by the Australian Labor Party to try to put slurs on members of the government. That has been the real undercurrent of this debate. You can see it from the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, you can see it from the member for Banks.

Mr Speaker, I will tell you what the undercurrent is; they are trying to put into the subconscious, into the minds of decent Australian people, a despicable slur on the character of the Australian Prime Minister and, if they had any decency, they would withdraw it.

The member for Banks knows that, when he talked about white sheets and burning crosses, there was only one image he was trying to conjure up. You were trying to conjure up the image of the Ku Klux Klan, one of the most notoriously racist groups this century has ever seen. You know that you were trying to conjure up that image and you were trying to project it onto the Prime Minister. You know that. That is why you made that statement. It was a despicable allegation and a despicable statement, and you ought to withdraw it.

This is a time-honoured tactic of the Australian Labor Party. I know that the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, when a recent appointment was made to the ABC board, got up and said it was like Louis Farrakhan being put in charge of the holocaust museum. Didn't you? Again, you were trying to put the racist slur on it. The Australian Jewish community came out and condemned you, and they were right. They were absolutely right to do that.

Mr Latham —Mr Speaker, on a point of order: there is no reference in the motion to the matters that the Treasurer is now referring to. The motion on the suspension of standing orders is fairly specific and fairly narrow in the parliament.

Mr SPEAKER —The honourable member for Werriwa should know that, in the suspension of standing order motion, the Treasurer is entirely in order.

Mr COSTELLO —This is a sleazy pattern of behaviour. It is a pattern of behaviour which has been repeated on numbers of occasions. It is a pattern of behaviour which now draws in numbers of the front bench. It is a pattern of behaviour which has been put together to try to blacken the Prime Minister's name and to try to poison race relations in this country. This is a pattern of behaviour which ought to be repudiated. It ought to be repudiated by those who started it but, if it cannot be repudiated by those who started it, it ought to be repudiated by one person. It ought to be repudiated by the person who claims to be the leader of this little outfit, the person who claims to lead the member for Banks, the person who claims to lead the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, the person who would be a Prime Minister, the person who ought to have some decency and some leadership, the person who is too weak to turn to his own deputy, too weak to turn to his shadow minister and too weak to stand up to the racist slur. Why? Because he condones it. He condones this kind of behaviour while he refuses to make them apologise. We do not condone this kind of behaviour. This is dangerous behaviour in Australia and those members ought to come in and apologise and, until they do, they stand absolutely condemned.