Windsor, Tony, MP

Mr WINDSOR (New England) (09:55): I would like to make a contribution to this. I did not interrupt the shadow minister when he was on his rather excited diatribe, but I appreciate the member for Boothby's calmer approach to this issue. Maybe there are some messages in terms of that and in terms of prosecuting a case. The member for Dickson seemed to make an assumption on a number of things. One was that he knew how I was going to vote. The minister does not know how I am going to vote. I have been engaged in discussions on this issue with the minister. Mr Laming: What about the shadow minister? Mr WINDSOR: Hang on a bit. You will hear a bit about the shadow minister in a minute. It brings into question what the motives are of the shadow minister in coming in to this place, carrying on the way he has in relation to this issue, making statements that my office had not taken the time to contact his office. Mr Dutton: Exactly right. Mr WINDSOR: That is not right. You know that Peter. Mr Dutton: I have logs of all the attempted contacts, Tony. The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The member for Dickson has had his opportunity and will sit there in silence. Mr WINDSOR: You know that is not right. I have always had great respect for you. You also know, as has occurred on previous occasions, that my door has always been open to you—always—if in fact you have ever wanted to speak to me about various issues. I am involved as we all are in an extraordinary number of meetings on a whole range of issues, and I am not saying this is the first time that you have mentioned it, but the first time I have heard that the shadow minister has an arrangement he would like to speak to the Independents about was when he was speaking this morning. I have been in negotiations for some time with the minister and the minister's office about these issues, because they are substantive issues and there are some very real questions that a number of people have been trying to find answers to. But for the shadow minister to suddenly raise the compromise, knowing full well—as all members of the opposition would know, and many of them walked through that door—that if he was really interested in a compromise he could have come and discussed it with me. Given the respect I have had for him—and I still do—one has to question the motives. What is the point of raising these issues in a vitriolic fashion if you are trying to convince someone who has not made up their mind on this particular issue to support you? The reaction that I think most people would have is that you are more interested in the issue than the solution to it. If you were interested in the solution to it and there were a compromise, I would have thought that the shadow minister—and you have not been a precious person in the past, where position puts you on a pedestal where everybody has to come and bow down in front of you; you are not like that. What is the point of raising these issues in such a vitriolic fashion when you know full well that you do not know how I am going to vote? The minister has no idea how I am going to vote. But your contribution— The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The member for New England needs to address his remarks through the chair. Mr WINDSOR: The member for Dickson's contribution was almost an encouragement to vote against his disallowance motion, which leads me to think that the motive for this is to maintain this as an issue rather than solve it. I have been more than happy to talk about compromises on this issue, and the minister would be aware of that. Meetings have been held as recently as this morning with various people about what this actually means, particularly to regional people, in terms of the changes that are contemplated. The member for Boothby, in his much more reasoned debate, raised some of those issues about the transitional arrangements, and those issues are still in discussion. I think there is an issue there. If this particular arrangement is concluded there is an issue—not of the 19-month extent that is talked about—where the two schemes intersect. That is something that does need to be addressed. If the opposition truly have a compromise position that addresses that, I am more than happy to talk to them about that, because we have all expressed some degree of concern in relation to that particular point of intersection. But for the member for Dickson to come in here and make this—I do not know whether you think that that will gain leverage in the electorate of New England or whatever. I think the people of New England are a little bit smarter than that. Irrespective of that, I think it is disappointing that a shadow minister who has genuinely prosecuted a case in terms of the policy that they believe in has prosecuted it very poorly when it comes down to the absolute debate and what sorts of amendments or compromises may be obtained. My staff were in touch with his office, I think as recently as yesterday afternoon, asking for more information about the disallowance. Mr Dutton: It's not true, mate. Mr WINDSOR: One of your staff did ring back— Mr Dutton interjecting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! This is not a conversation between the member for Dickson and the member for New England; the member for New England has the call. Mr WINDSOR: I am disappointed about the member for Dickson's rather vitriolic attack both on me and on my office, but I say again to the member for Dickson: if there is some sort of compromise arrangement, I would have thought it might have been sent to my office. I would have thought that the member for Dickson might well, as he has in the past, have walked through the door and said, as many members of the opposition have done over the years: 'Listen, have you got five minutes? I need to talk to you.' I am more than happy to initiate discussions with them. I leave that where it is. If there is something that I need to know in terms of a compromise, the door is open. Please come and see me.