

- Title
QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE: TAKE NOTE OF ANSWERS
Grants Allocation, Future Fund
- Database
Senate Hansard
- Date
15-03-2012
- Source
Senate
- Parl No.
43
- Electorate
- Interjector
- Page
1892
- Party
ALP
- Presenter
- Status
Final
- Question No.
- Questioner
- Responder
- Speaker
Sherry, Sen Nick
- Stage
- Type
- Context
QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE: TAKE NOTE OF ANSWERS
- System Id
chamber/hansards/b442d77a-bb43-47a2-8619-743f3bf05981/0107
Previous Fragment Next Fragment
-
Hansard
- Start of Business
- BILLS
- PETITIONS
- NOTICES
- COMMITTEES
- BUSINESS
- COMMITTEES
- BUSINESS
- COMMITTEES
- MOTIONS
- COMMITTEES
- MOTIONS
- BUSINESS
- BILLS
- COMMITTEES
- BILLS
- DISTINGUISHED VISITORS
-
QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE
- Grants Allocation
-
Mining
(Sherry, Sen Nick, Evans, Sen Christopher) -
Future Fund
(Cormann, Sen Mathias, Wong, Sen Penny) -
National Disability Insurance Scheme
(Siewert, Sen Rachel, Evans, Sen Christopher) -
Small Business
(Ryan, Sen Scott, Lundy, Sen Kate) -
Employment
(Marshall, Sen Gavin, Carr, Sen Kim) -
Family Court
(Macdonald, Sen Ian, Ludwig, Sen Joe) -
Small Business: Enterprise Connect
(Madigan, Sen John, Lundy, Sen Kate) -
Rural and Regional Health Services
(Williams, Sen John, Wong, Sen Penny)
- QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE: TAKE NOTE OF ANSWERS
- BUSINESS
- CONDOLENCES
-
BILLS
- Fairer Private Health Insurance Incentives Bill 2012, Fairer Private Health Insurance Incentives (Medicare Levy Surcharge) Bill 2012, Fairer Private Health Insurance Incentives (Medicare Levy Surcharge—Fringe Benefits) Bill 2012
- Minerals Resource Rent Tax Bill 2011, Minerals Resource Rent Tax (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2011, Minerals Resource Rent Tax (Imposition—General) Bill 2011, Minerals Resource Rent Tax (Imposition—Customs) Bill 2011, Minerals Resource Rent Tax (Imposition—Excise) Bill 2011, Petroleum Resource Rent Tax Assessment Amendment Bill 2011, Petroleum Resource Rent Tax (Imposition—General) Bill 2011, Petroleum Resource Rent Tax (Imposition—Customs) Bill 2011, Petroleum Resource Rent Tax (Imposition—Excise) Bill 2011, Tax Laws Amendment (Stronger, Fairer, Simpler and Other Measures) Bill 2011, Superannuation Guarantee (Administration) Amendment Bill 2011
- ADJOURNMENT
Page: 1892
Senator SHERRY (Tasmania) (15:11): It is a pleasure to participate in this debate. The contribution that we just heard from Senator Joyce—and members of the Liberal opposition in their questioning of the Minister for Finance and Deregulation, Senator Wong—frankly highlights both hypocrisy and distraction. That is what the Liberal Party is about in raising this issue. Let me go to the issue of hypocrisy on the appointment of Mr Gonski to the Future Fund. The process has been clear, the appointment has been made. It has been made before the current chair's, Mr Murray, position was to lapse, I understand, by some four weeks.
The Liberal opposition have criticised my colleague, Senator Wong, a fine finance minister, on a number of grounds. Firstly, they talked about transparency in the process. Nothing could have been more thorough and comprehensive and transparent than the process that Minister Wong went through. Compare the process and the comprehensiveness over the last year with that of the past. Where was the open and transparent process when Mr Costello, as Treasurer, appointed the original members to the Future Fund? Why is the Liberal Party criticising the comprehensive and thorough and transparent approach of my colleague, Senator Wong, when they did not apply the same set of criteria and standards when Mr Costello was establishing the Future Fund? Why didn't they apply the same standards? It is hypocrisy.
Mr Costello was a Labor appointee to the Future fund. We did not see many Labor appointments to anything by the former Liberal government when they were in power. I just remind the chamber that Mr Costello is amongst a number of appointments of former Liberals by a Labor government recognising the qualifications that they have to make an ongoing contribution to the public policy debate in a range of positions. This is hypocrisy from them yet again. The Liberal Party come in here and criticise a Labor government for not appointing a former Liberal Treasurer when a Labor government in fact appointed him to the Future Fund. And it appointed a number of other former Liberal and National Party people I could mention. We did not see any of that from a Liberal government when they were in power—again, hypocrisy. But I think the ultimate hypocrisy is that the Liberal Party come in here and criticise us for not making Mr Costello leader of the Future Fund when they never had the confidence to make him leader of the Liberal Party and Prime Minister. That is rank hypocrisy. The Liberal Party come in here and plead with the Labor Party, 'Please make Mr Costello leader of the Future Fund when we didn't make him Prime Minister.' That is the ultimate hypocrisy and, frankly, the ultimate insult to poor Mr Costello. I am sympathetic to him on at least that score. But it is yet more hypocrisy from those opposite.
If you look at the process that Minister Wong has gone through as the finance minister compared to the previous process of Mr Costello as Treasurer with the original appointments, it is an outstanding example of transparency and thoroughness. A few people got their noses out of joint—and I am not here referring to Mr Costello particularly. I looked at some of the commentary and briefing from some members of the Future Fund last year suggesting in a range of ways that they should be chair of the Future Fund. They got their noses out of joint. They were not appointed. That is part and parcel of what this is all about in terms of the public debate. I notice a couple of people saying: 'Shock horror! The government's actually made an appointment!' Shock horror: governments have been doing that at a federal level for the last hundred years. Governments of the day—Labor and Liberal—have been making appointments to chairs and a whole range of other authorities, so to criticise the minister on that ground is, again, rank hypocrisy.
I could speak for the next five minutes about the number of Liberal and National Party political appointments that have been made. It is hypocrisy— (Time expired)