Mr SLIPPER (9:31 PM) —I listened to the contribution made by the honourable member for Corio (Mr O'Connor) with some amazement. The honourable member for Corio appears to have forgotten the sad and shabby history of 13 years of Labor government and the hypocrisy shown by the former Labor government. Time and time again that government said that it would not privatise public assets—that it would not privatise Qantas, the Commonwealth Bank and the Commonwealth Serum Laboratories. Yet those promises were broken time and time again.

Mr Price —Mr Speaker, on a point of order: the member for Fisher took several points of order on relevance, and I would ask that you direct him to address his remarks to the bill, which is about the further privatisation of Telstra.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Mossfield) —There is no point of order.

Mr SLIPPER —Mr Deputy Speaker, I did not take any point of order on relevance. My points of order were in relation to the reflections cast by the member for Corio on the Minister for Resources and Energy (Senator Parer). He really ought to listen. It ought to be appreciated that, unlike the former Labor government, this government is determined to keep its promises. We went to the people of Australia prior to the last election with a pledge that, subject to strict conditions, we would sell one-third of Telstra. We have delivered on that promise. We have now announced that we will legislate to sell the remaining two-thirds of Telstra, and this legislation before the chamber at the moment will bring that about. We have made it clear that the people of Australia will have the choice at the next election to cast a verdict on our policy and thus this act will not become law until after the next poll. The reason that we are bringing the legislation into the parliament now is to ensure that, after we receive a further mandate to sell the remaining two-thirds of Telstra, we will not have Senate obstruction frustrating our election policy, which had been supported by the electorate. The honourable member for Corio also wrongly accused the government of imposing a guillotine on this bill.

Mr Price —That is correct.

Mr SLIPPER —It is not correct. By arrangement between the parties, there is eight hours of debate on this Telstra legislation. No-one in his or her right mind could suggest that eight hours of debate is a guillotine. By agreement we will have eight hours of debate, and we believe that is fair, reasonable and appropriate.

Mr Price —One hour for every $5 billion.

Mr SLIPPER —The member for Chifley will have his go shortly, but the fact of the matter is that, unlike the former Labor government when it was in office, we are prepared to facilitate extensive legislation on important changes confronting this country.

It was also interesting to listen to the honourable member for Corio speak about profit seekers. He seems to think that it is wrong that the mums and dads of Australia will be able to buy the remaining two-thirds of this important national company. The honourable member for Corio also would have us believe that Telstra does not operate in the marketplace as a commercial enterprise. He also managed to fudge the reality, which is that the government has ensured where no more than 35 per cent of Telstra could be owned by overseas interests—with not more than five per cent owned by any individual.

The Prime Minister (Mr Howard) announced on 15 March that the government will seek an explicit mandate from the Australian people at the next election to give us the opportunity to allow them to buy the balance of Australia's largest company. We are keeping the commitment we made at the last election that we would not sell more than one-third of Telstra in this term and we are seeking explicitly a further mandate. Unlike our predecessors, we are honest and upfront, and we do not apologise for that.

Mr Martin Ferguson —Is this a core or non-core promise?

Mr SLIPPER —You ought not to interject, my friend. Why don't you tell us that the Labor Party in its draft policy was going to sell a further 16½ per cent of Telstra but that policy was withdrawn at the last minute? The Labor Party will do anything and say anything. The Labor Party has a sad and sorry history of saying that it will not sell public assets, and then breaking those promises. The difference between this government and its predecessor is that when we have sold public assets we have paid off debt. When we sold the first one-third of Telstra, we retired a considerable amount of debt and we had a social bonus—the $1.25 billion Natural Heritage Trust of Australia. We are the only government to have such a wide ranging policy to address the impact of 200 years of European settlement in Australia.

The Prime Minister has indicated that when we sell the remaining two-thirds of Telstra we will be able to retire 40 per cent of Australia's remaining foreign debt and that there will be a further social bonus. I believe that this will be as far reaching, visionary and necessary as the social bonus delivered by the sale of the first one-third of Telstra.

Many people listening may not be aware that the coalition inherited from the former Labor government a debt of some $96 billion. The interest payment on that debt cost taxpayers $8 billion last year, without reducing the actual debt at all. In selling the remaining two-thirds, we will pay off a substantial portion of that debt and we will in doing so make a better future for our children and grandchildren. The honourable member for Corio claimed that by selling Telstra we would deprive the government of an income stream. He maintained that this was used to support infrastructure such as schools. He ought to look at what respected economist Chris Richardson from Access Economics has said:

If we pay off government debt, then we're saving money forever, and the net balance . . . is in favour of the Telstra sale to the tune of $1.5 billion a year. That is the saving in interest versus the . . . loss of income from Telstra.

So the honourable member for Corio has been shown to be selling a shabby and false argument, because the government and the people of Australia will be infinitely better off, not worse off, through the sale of the remaining two-thirds of Telstra.

He made mention of the fact that there has been some reduction in the employment sector of Telstra. That is nothing to do with the privatisation of Telstra. Many companies, whether private or publicly owned, have reduced their number of employees, as it is necessary to compete effectively in the marketplace. Telstra has been exposed to the blowtorch of competition and obviously it is a leaner and meaner but better company. Telstra will provide a very effective service to rural and regional Australia, and the government has legislated for the community service obligation. The minister himself mentioned that there would be a penalty of some $10 million at times if Telstra fails to deliver on its community service obligation.

It must also be appreciated that the idea of governments owning telecommunications companies has not become popular in recent times. Right throughout the world, governments have been divesting themselves of telecommunications companies because there is a general recognition that in a deregulated, privatised marketplace with competition it is simply not appropriate or necessary for governments to own them. This bill will provide to the people of Australia the opportunity to buy the remaining two-thirds of Telstra. In fact, the Labor Party sought to frighten the employees of Telstra prior to the first part sale by suggesting that they ought not take advantage of the special opportunities given to employees to participate. Well, the employees of Telstra voted with their feet: 92 per cent chose to invest in Australia's largest company. They obviously supported what the government wanted to do, and they, like other shareholders, will be the beneficiaries.

The government also believes that it is important to allow the people of Australia to buy and own large Australian companies. The Labor Party, when one listens to what they have been saying in this debate, appears still to support `the socialisation of the means of production, distribution and exchange'. The Keating and Hawke governments flogged off everything they could see and used the money they got for recurrent expenditure. Unlike them, this government is making the sale of some public assets, but we are using the proceeds to pay off debt.

The Labor Party obviously opposes the attempt by this government to make Australia the largest share owning democracy in the world. Robert Menzies made Australia the largest home owning democracy in the world, but this government, in giving Australians a further opportunity to directly share in the ownership of Telstra, will help turn Australia into a country of shareholders. We will free Telstra from the restrictions of government bureaucracy and allow it to perform better. A better Telstra will deliver better services, more choice and lower prices to its customers around Australia. Phone prices have already been coming down as a result of the coalition's historic move last year to allow competition with Telstra, and this will continue.

Let us look at the contribution of the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Beazley). He said that the government is selling Telstra for `tawdry electoral purposes'. What reasonable person could say that retiring $40 billion in Labor accumulated public debt could be for tawdry electoral purposes? He also said, referring to the Prime Minister, `that without consultation the Australian public would stand idly by and that the opposition would stand idly by and witness the privatisation of a public asset'. What we have done is to announce to the Australian people what we plan to do, and we are seeking a mandate to achieve that. The Prime Minister does not expect the Australian people to stand idly by. He does not expect the opposition to stand idly by. What we are doing is going out to the electorate and saying exactly what we plan to do. The Labor Party, on the other hand, has a long history of saying one thing and doing another. The Leader of the Opposition also claimed, wrongly, that it is actually impossible to legislate for community service obligations. What absolute nonsense. We already have legislation on the statute books for community service obligations, and I must say that legislation will remain in place.

The Leader of the Opposition says that the people own the system through the government and that this legislation eliminates people's shareholding in Telstra, yet 1.8 million Australians now own shares in Telstra, including 92 per cent of Telstra employees. The Leader of the Opposition suggests that this legislation will somehow divest the ownership of Telstra from the people of Australia. What we are doing is permitting ordinary citizens of Australia to invest in this important national enterprise.

The Leader of the Opposition also shamefully referred to the Natural Heritage Trust as a blatantly political exercise. We make no apology for repairing the impact of 200 years of European settlement on our environment. Environmental groups have said that the Natural Heritage Trust is the most wide-ranging program ever put in place by any government to benefit the environment of Australia.

To sum up, the bill before the House is honest, up-front and it follows on from our election promise given prior to the 1996 poll. We are saying to the electorate: if you re-elect us at the next election, whenever it is, we will sell the remaining two-thirds of Telstra, subject to very strict conditions. We will ensure that no more than 35 per cent of Telstra is owned by overseas interests, that no more than five per cent is owned by any individual and that the community service obligations remain in place so that there is a quality telephone service regardless of where people happen to live in Australia.

Mr Price interjecting—

Mr SLIPPER —The honourable member for Chifley ought to stand up and say that this bill is a win-win-win situation. It is a win for the people of Australia overall, it is a win for those who choose to buy Telstra shares and it will be a further win for the Telstra employees who no doubt will again participate in this share offer. The Labor Party once again stands condemned and its hypocrisy is breathtaking. It ought to stop scaremongering and support this very important bill, which will allow people throughout Australia to invest once again in this important national company. I commend the bill to the chamber.