 |
Barnaby Joyce, Senator for Queensland
First Speech - 16/08/2005
Senator JOYCE (Queensland) (5.44
pm)—Thank you, Mr President. Firstly, I
would like to acknowledge my parents who
brought me into this world, my wife, Natalie,
and children Bridgette, Julia, Caroline and
Odette who support me in this world, and my
God who oversees all and who hopefully I
will meet in the next. I read this speech to
my wife in the TV room at home and was
impressed how diligently she listened until I
realised she was asleep.
To the people of Queensland, I am your
senator and your servant. In serving you to
my best ability I will be fulfilling the best
role for our country and fulfilling the constitutional
role laid out for our nation at its inception
and after years of deliberation. For
all Queenslanders who are here for the first
time, you might be surprised to know that the
colour scheme was once blue in this chamber
but we have since had it changed to maroon
and I hope you are happy with the result.
What cannot be changed and is still the dilemma
is that politics talks in riddles and
packs with verbiage what is absolutely crystal
clear at the mothers morning tea or the
local hotel. Politics appears to be the art of
telling half the story and your followers
guess the rest while using the absence of the
complete message as a defence against the
implication drawn by your deriders.
When things get contentious we blame our
faction or the joint party room as a reason
that plasters over a personal political ambition.
As with human nature, this is not
unique to Australia but leaves a political
monoculture that can be less than inspiring
and does not give credit to the public’s ability
to hear all sides of the debate and understand
that a decision which favours one side
has to be made.
I know it may be truly naive but it would
be nice to see the debate unencumbered in
this chamber, not in the caucus room or in
the joint party room. Neither of these are
mentioned in the Constitution and it is a convenient
appendix designed by political parties
that was specifically not entertained in
the Constitution.
Our nation stands at the edge of a new epoch.
Together in this house we have all been
given the immense honour and responsibility
to navigate our Australia in a world tormented
or governed by new elements—
elements such as new diseases, including the
H5M1 virus which could decimate our country’s
social and economic fabric; Islamic or
other fundamentalism; or, as mentioned here
earlier tonight, the emergence of China as a
new superpower. Managed well, these issues
will drive our nation’s sails to a new destiny
or, alternatively, not managed, cast us upon
the savage rocks. Eternal vigilance alone will
not sustain us. It has to be a partner of considered
but resolute action. There will be as
much in amendments to the rules of this century
as there was between the turmoil of the
20th century and its antecedent.
Compounding this is that the efficacy of
previous alliances may wane as new threats
to our belief structure rise. There is only one
defence to this and that is our internal belief
that we must construct a strong and selfsufficient
nation on a platform of a society
where children live quiet and unaffected
prior to the turmoil of adulthood. To achieve
this we must encourage a just parliament,
vibrant enough to consider all alternatives.
There is a new troika whose reins we
hold. The horses are, firstly, the relationship
between the new international dynamics of
emerging superpowers and our future in reference
between that and our current economic
and personal freedoms. Next is the
survival of the Australian principle to pursue
your own potential in business and belief so
as to attain your highest potential of personal
freedom by being master of the greatest portion
of your life. Whilst pursuing this there
must be the respect of the totality of the lives
of others, irrespective of what stage that human
life is at. Finally, to be brave enough in
this house that we believe that it is not only
good for our nation but intrinsically good for
our region and our world that we develop a
strong and robust country that inspires the
freedoms we hold dear as a common goal of
all peoples and, as such, is our legacy to the
world in which we live.
My small part in this greater design is to
work with and be considerate of all my colleagues
here in protecting those wider principles
whilst pursuing those issues that the
National Party has given a commitment to
the people of Queensland that I would pursue
on their behalf. My National Party Senate
team took to the people of Queensland four
issues and these were framed on the greater
freedom of the individual in balance with the
greater interest of the community in which
we live: the overcentralisation of the retail
market, mandated ethanol usage, zonal taxation
and core family values. As particular as
these issues are, they reflected a wider and
deeper philosophical commitment by the
National Party to the lives of its constituents
and reflected the Senate’s role as the house
representing not a factional or particular interest
but the interests of the state.
The purpose of the economy is not to produce
the lowest price product for the end
consumer. That may be a consequence of a
good economy but it is not the purpose. The
purpose of the economy is to create the
greater nexus between the wealth of the nation and its people, and it generally does this
through small business.
Today we have accepted a situation in
Australia that would be unacceptable elsewhere
in the world: we allow two retailers to
control between 75 and 85 per cent of our
retail market. In the USA you need to count
the top 12 retailers before you arrive at the
market share that our top two have. In the
UK it is the top eight. In Australia this disenfranchises
the right of our citizens to attain
the greatest level of their personal freedom
by attaining the highest level of control over
their destiny, which comes by being master
of your own business.
The freedom I will pursue is the choice to
enter and chart your own commercial life
and in doing so give a greater breadth to the
economy in which we are all benefactors.
New and expanded products, new managerial
techniques, new holders of wealth investing
in new areas of the nation is a vision that
is peculiar to any economy or part thereof
that stays in front of the vast wave of economic
prosperity. Likewise, we must look to
those areas of our nation that have been left
behind or have never been part of the economic
prosperity that is so apparent in Australia
today.
This government, the government under
whose stewardship we currently prosper, has
responsibility to look into the corners where
the dust has settled and there is a socioeconomic
bind. If a regional area produces little
or no return when we compare the tax revenue
with the social security cost then little is
lost by capping the tax rate. If we cap it for
the individual who both works and lives in
this area then we have proceeded on the first
step to inspire development of new areas of
our continent. We have to believe that this
house represents a nation that has the bravery
to frame a new chapter that utilises the gifts
God has bestowed on us in a form that goes
beyond minor manipulations of the residential
construction based service industries of
current major metropolitan coastal centres.
We must bolt on to those sections of the
economy that place product on a boat that
sustains the standard of living that so many
of our citizens take as a birthright. You cannot
be a great nation of kitchen renovators.
In developing our current industry strengths
in new areas by new entrants we also relieve
the public infrastructure gridlock that is becoming
so apparent in the Sydney basin or
the south-east corner of Queensland. There is
little wrong with the roads in Sydney or
Brisbane—it is just that there are too many
cars on them. If we do not decisively move
now to give a greater reason to live elsewhere,
preferably inland, then what are we to
expect, except an exacerbation of the current
water, transport, social and environmental
problems that are becoming more and more
evident in these megacities in the most
sparsely populated nation on earth?
The only thing that is stopping us is the
fear of trying. It seems peculiar for a nation
that prides itself on the stoic heroism of Gallipoli
or the Kokoda Track that we are fearful
of setting up a concrete new agenda of development
of new areas. Further, it is essential
to deal with the evermore evident problem—
of which water restrictions in Sydney
and the Gold Coast are only one of the most
minor of the impending manifestations—of
an urban coastal development saturation
point.
Our nation cannot expect to prevail with
its transport needs if it has to import an oil
based product that is limited in supply, with
an ever escalating demand driven by nations
such as India and China. Every 10 years, at
the current rate, India and China will alone
produce a middle-class the size of the United
States. And, as will be the case with many
products essential to our day-to-day lives,
they are quite happy to pay a price for fuel
that makes our economy unviable, as we
could not afford to operate with that overhead.
As a nation, we have to prepare for this.
We cannot deal with it once it has arrived. It
will overwhelm us and cause a dislocation
that we may not have experienced before.
Mandating ethanol is a path that offers the
nation not only a way to deal with our own
transport requirements but also the ability to
supply others with the fundamentals of
theirs. Mandating ethanol assists in alternatives
to deal with our ever-escalating trade
account deficit that is itself driven by the
chase for the expensive oil based fuel of our
oil based fuel economy. Ethanol allows us to
develop the seed base for Australian producers
to be the benefactors of the biorenewable
fuel industry of the 21st century, and not the
casualties of it.
We are a nation that relies on terms of
trade and those items that we put on the boat
to pay for the goods that maintain our standard
of living. These products generally
come from the regional areas of our nation
and we must bolt on to these areas and not
replace them with imports that greater exacerbate
our vulnerability. If I sell you a pizza,
or you do my tax return, or a solicitor fulfils
his conveyancing for a client, even though
all these jobs are inherently valuable and part
of our gross domestic product, they do not
pay for one drop of our nation’s fuel that is
imported, nor the imported car it is in. We
have to ask ourselves: what did we put on the
boat today to support our nation and what
did we consume that came off it? If the equation
is unfavourable, make sure you support
those who balance the equation for us all.
The future of the National Party has to
evolve and is evolving. John Anderson correctly
pointed out that there are fewer than
100,000 farmers, and so the vast, vast majority
of our voters are not farmers, nor would
we survive if they were. We are the party of
small business and our heritage is that of the
small business of primary production. We are
now the party of many, including builders,
plumbers, newsagents, hairdressers, pharmacists,
fishermen, accountants, real estate
agents, graziers, regional townspeople and
those who believe that the socially conservative
society is a protection against the pains
of social experimentation and who prefer not
to take the risk. When large and small business
clash we will support small business. As
such, we should strengthen section 46 of the
Trade Practices Act, increase the powers of
the ACCC and investigate divestiture powers
when market domination is unwarranted,
unmanageable and unable to be curtailed in
other ways.
In the Senate, I believe that my job is to
represent my state, Queensland. Not only do
I believe that, but it was the decision in formulating
the Commonwealth at Federation
that this would be the case. The same Constitution
that has given our country the period
of unbridled internal freedom should not be
manipulated unless absolutely vital and no
alternative exists. The Australian people so
categorically endorse this when we take into
account the vast majority of their decisions
on these issues at a referendum. The questions
have now to be asked: has the custom
and practice created a constitutional change
by default that has never been taken to the
Australian people? Have we evolved to a
point where a new form of voting by secret
ballot in the Senate would address this and
bring a better representation of the particular
issues of states or areas within?
There is more in common between the
centres of south-east Queensland than between
the south-east of our state and the
north. Perceptions on issues such as vegetation
management, although predominantly a
state issue, are one of many indications of
this. A free and unencumbered vote by those
from different states or different areas within
states may reflect this. It also includes perceptions
on issues such as the Great Barrier
Reef Marine Park Authority, and the feeling
that many have that the yoke of environmental
conscience has been foisted on them
without fair compensation of the loss of income
or loss of asset. This is an eternal and
justifiable complaint. Brick-and-tile suburbia
of the capital cities have to be mindful of the
encumbrances they place on the property of
others, as it works to the detriment of the
value of landed assets—the calibrator of personal
wealth so fundamental to our freedom.
It also detracts from the capacity of our nation
to produce export income, which is the
calibrator of our standard of living.
For all those who are wondering why I
have not mentioned Telstra, well, it is an issue
in motion. If we had not fought for parity
of service and parity of price in this house
then it would be sold with only the conditions
achieved in the lower house. It is difficult
to argue against something passed by my
colleagues in the lower house but I do not
resign from it. I am not convinced as to the
reason to sell Telstra. Similarly, I was never
convinced as to the reasons to sell the Commonwealth
Bank. I am convinced that the
ramifications of not participating in the debate
would be to the detriment of regional
Australia, as the decision made by others
may be far worse. There are those who have
called for me to be expelled from the coalition
because of it, but that just makes me
motivated to get it right.
Likewise, the anomaly that we have managed
to package the cessation of compulsory
student unionism with sporting infrastructure—
a long-held, accepted part of university
life—is something to behold. That some
believe it is abominable that you have to
reach into your pocket for $100 for the football,
cricket and netball courts, but are apparently
at ease with the fact that the nation
reaches into its pockets for tens of thousands
of dollars per year per student to keep the
vast majority of university students in tuition
is perplexing to say the least. These are two
different issues. It is obvious that they are,
and they should be treated as such.
Debate on these and other issues will be
the case whilst the coalition has a majority in
both houses. It shows the Australian people
there is nothing to fear from the coalition
having a majority in both houses when the
senators fulfil their duty their Constitution
gives them to represent their state as the best
means of representing their nation.
Away from partisan politics, I would
dearly love to have this house open its heart
and have the courage to have a broader debate
on when we attain our right to be nurtured,
protected and supported to our full
potential. At what point between conception
and when we leave the moorings of our family
as an independent adult do we attain the
rights of a human with the protection it affords,
and what is the philosophical premise
of this position? I believe, if we are brave
enough to have a respectful, non-politicallyaligned
debate on this, the most important of
all issues, then we will have already grown
by reason of this and as such be on the road
to being a greater nation.
Abortion is the slavery debate of our time.
It is brokered by good people on both sides.
Long after the annals of time have forgotten
that there ever was a National Party, a Liberal
Party or a Labor Party, the immutable
argument of the worth of human life will
prevail and the acknowledgment of those
who stood to defend it. My debate is with the
action, not with the qualities or attributes of
the person. There are no winners on abortion;
all are left scarred and hurt, and there has to
be a better way.
The fact that I stand here is a testament to
firstly my wife, Natalie, and my children—to
my mum and dad and family, who did what
so many families do in so quiet and unassuming
a way for little or no reward, to
teachers such as my grandmother Troy,
James Rogers, Mel Morrow, Father Drake
and to the National Party and its supporters,
such as Bill and Marilyn Taylor, Martin
Tenni, Lenore Johnson, Denise Jeitz, John
Grabbe, John and Beth Honeycombe, Terry
Bolger, the late Sir Joh Bjelke-Petersen—
who was my mentor and whom I never
met—Lady Flo Bjelke Petersen, who is my
mentor now, the Weller family, Charlie
Brownlow, the marvellous people of St
George, Ron Bauhnish and so many, many
more who have placed so much faith in me
that I only hope to somehow repay them by
respecting and working diligently for our
state of Queensland, and by doing so making
our nation of Australia a continuing legacy of
justice and freedom.
I would like to finally acknowledge the
work of Len Harris, and it should be some
solace that we have replaced one regional
based office in Queensland with another.
Although there are many issues with which I
disagreed, I respect absolutely that those who
supported him have an equal right as any to
be heard and treated with respect.
In summary to my purpose, I reflect on
that of my grandmother Troy Roche, who
left me with this piece from Kipling, and I
conclude by leaving all here with the same. I
hope that it may serve all of us in some fashion
in the aspirations it lays out. It says:
If you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you;
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you,
But make allowance for their doubting too;
If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,
Or being lied about, don’t deal in lies,
Or being hated, don’t give way to hating,
And yet don’t look too good, nor talk too wise:
If you can dream—and not make dreams your
master;
If you can think—and not make thoughts your
aim;
If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster
And treat those two impostors just the same;
If you can bear to hear the truth you’ve spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
Or watch the things you gave your life to, broken,
And stoop and build ’em up with wornout tools:
If you can make one heap of all your winnings
And risk it on one turn of pitch-and-toss
And lose, and start again at your beginnings
And never breathe a word about your loss;
If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew
To serve your turn long after they are gone,
And so hold on when there is nothing in you
Except the will which says to them ‘hold on!’
If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue,
Or walk with kings—nor lose the common touch,
If neither foes nor loving friends can hurt you,
If all men count with you, but none too much;
If you can fill the unforgiving minute
With sixty seconds’ worth of distance run,
Yours is the Earth and everything that is in it,
And—which is more—you’ll be a man my son.
|
 |
