Mr STEPHEN SMITH —My question is directed to the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Transport and Regional Services. Do you recall on Monday refusing to reaffirm the National Party's election commitment that, until an independent inquiry certified that Telstra service levels were adequate, there would be no full sale of Telstra? Are you aware that, while you were going soft on full privatisation, the federal president of the National Party's women's section, Pam Stallman, slammed the push by the Minister for Finance and Administration for full privatisation, saying on regional Queensland radio that it was `insane' and that it was time that the National Party stood up to the Liberal Party? If Pam Stallman can stand up to the Liberal Party, why can't you?

Mr ANDERSON (Deputy Prime Minister) —I note with some interest that that question, or a large slab of it, was simply read off a press release issued by the shadow minister on Monday afternoon. I made it quite plain on Monday afternoon that our policy, which I think has been widely circulated and is widely understood on this matter, still stands. I thought it was quite irrelevant to have to restate the proposition that that includes a public inquiry into the adequacy of service levels—the service levels that we have dictated; that you did not dictate—and the obligations that we have put on Telstra being met before a further sale took place. Plainly, I add that that inquiry would involve input from the country people of the sort that I met in Texas last weekend, who had expressed some concern. The member for Maranoa and the member for New England were also there. The people of Texas in Queensland expressed concerns about service levels, which I will be taking up with the Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts.

But I would have thought that it was quite sufficient to point out that our policy position on this matter has not altered. It does mean us meeting the commitments that we have made but, more particularly, I think it is worth stating that this really belongs in the category of useful contributions to the debate about regional services and the needs of rural communities that we get from the opposite side—such as questions asking me to name the regional universities that are facing some financial difficulties. What a useful thing for me to be asked in this place—name them for the benefit of country parents so that these universities will be exposed! This is an absolutely absurd proposition.

It is worth recalling that the opposition's lack of commitment to services in rural telecommunications extended to the deal they did with Vodafone which would have shut down the analog mobile phone network from the end of this year and would have left huge areas of Australia without any mobile telephone coverage at all. I really believe that this question reflects a pathetic attempt on that side—by a group of people who have opposed every worthwhile reform and policy prescription that we have put forward to help rural and regional Australia—to now paint themselves as having discovered some latter-day concern for the wellbeing of country people.