Senator MICHAEL BAUME —My question without notice is addressed to the Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Status of Women. Given that the preselection for the seat of Blaxland is the first real test of leadership for the new parliamentary Labor leader, Mr Kim Beazley, providing him with a golden opportunity to prove his commitment to Labor's 1994 resolution to increase the number of women in parliament, and recognising there was no hesitation in intervening to install Mr Martin Ferguson as Labor's MP in Batman, what conclusion can Australians draw about his leadership and his commitment, and that of the Labor Party, to its women's quota if he does not intervene to ensure a woman is preselected for the seat of Blaxland? How does this compare with the government's approach to increasing the role of women in politics?

Senator Faulkner —Mr President, I raise a point of order. It is the same as the one that was made many times during the last parliament. This clearly is not within the responsibility of Senator Newman. The matter that has been raised in this question by Senator Baume is a matter clearly for the internal processes of the Labor Party. Mr President, I ask you, on the basis of relevance, to rule the question out of order.

Senator Alston —On the point of order, unfortunately Senator Faulkner rose before he had heard the last part of the question, which specifically asked, `How did the ALP's approach compare with the government's attitude to increasing the number of women in the parliament?' That is very much a policy issue which is within Senator Newman's responsibility. As you have ruled repeatedly, part of that question very much involves a comparison of the alternatives. Of course, in a political forum we are entitled to draw those sorts of comparisons. If we were not, we would not have question time in this place.

Senator MICHAEL BAUME —On the point of order, I will give you the exact words of the question. Senator Alston conveyed the impression. The exact words of the question were, `How does this compare with the government's approach to increasing the role of women in politics?' That is a clear question relating to government policy.

The PRESIDENT —The link is tenuous, but it is there.

Senator NEWMAN —The point of order from the Labor Party does rather highlight the fact that they do not have much of an understanding about the importance of the minister for the status of women and about the role of policy making to achieve more women in the federal parliament. We have seen the results of that failure of understanding and commitment by the opposition by the fact that they have now ended up with only two per cent of their members in the House of Representatives as women. That is, of course, nowhere near—and will not go anywhere near—their quota system, which is to achieve 35 per cent of women by the year 2002.

By comparison, the government very seriously went about an exercise of trying to encourage women of merit by giving them assistance to get into parliament and by not demeaning them by way of quotas. We have already shown the results. Thirteen per cent of our members in the House of Representatives are women and we will go on to greater things because we are building on a sound foundation.

I remember Senator Mackay at the Labor conference in Hobart. She proclaimed it a great day when they produced this quota policy. Well, you must feel it is sackcloth and ashes now, Senator, with the result. As I said, Labor have got a long way to go to meet their quota commitment. In fact, unless many of the present male Labor members of the House stand down and allow women to take their place, it will be well nigh impossible for Labor to meet their quota aim. If they are to keep one of their sacred and most publicised promises to Australian women, they have to start now, and that means selecting a woman for Blaxland. If they do not do that, they will be sending a message to the women of Australia that their commitment to increase women's representation is not worth a row of beans.

Senator Reynolds said recently that there is a principle at stake here, that there would be a fantastic symbol. Mrs Kirner and Senator Reynolds said that. Senator Reynolds also said that, if a woman is not chosen for Blaxland, it will send a negative message; it will be embarrassing and it will be very disillusioning and very disappointing.

Mr President, guess what the Labor Party are doing instead of putting a woman in Blaxland? They are stacking the branches in Blaxland so a man will get in—not a women, a man. That is what they are on about. So much for their commitment. If there ever was a test of Mr Beazley's leadership, this is it, here and now. He is showing every sign of wimping out. We are not going to get a woman in Blaxland if Mr Beazley does not pull his finger out.

The argument at the moment is that it has to be a local. That is twaddle. You did not need a local when you put Martin Ferguson into Batman. What about talented women like Mary Easson? What about Kay Griffin? Are they not going to get a fair go in Blaxland? What does Senator Reynolds have to say? I am sure she is as concerned as the rest of the women in Australia that the Labor Party is not doing better. `Brothers, we want a partnership,' says Senator Reynolds. I ask brother Beazley: what is he going to do?