Grievance Debate

Australian Labor Party

The Hon. J.A.W. GARDNER (Morialta—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (15:11): They say sometimes everything that is old can be new again—in show business, in movies and in politics. I was elected to this house in March 2010, more than 15 years ago. At the time, already here were the member for West Torrens; yourself, sir; the member for Mawson; the member for Frome, as he was then, now Stuart; the member for Unley; and the member for Hammond—eight of them. In the Legislative Council were Michelle Lensink and Russell Wortley. Also elected at that election were the member for Chaffey, the Government Whip, the Hon. Jing Lee and the Hon. Tammy Franks. Everyone else is new, all 56 of them.

Mike Smithson, Matt and Dave, Alan Murrell and the venerable Paul Starick were all serving the people of South Australia as members of the fourth estate. Dan Wills, Adam Todd, Tom Richardson, a number of other people who now work for the Australian Labor Party, were all serving the people of South Australia in their own ways.

Mike Rann was the Premier of South Australia. He was known as 'Media Mike' because there was not a policy issue, a public appointment or a political issue of any scope that could not be reduced to the question of how would it make him look on the telly that night. He enjoyed being on the telly. He was an early adopter of social media to enhance his image. He oversaw enormous spending on government advertising campaigns to promote himself and his government. He had an infatuation with the Kennedys—he loved being in power—and I will tell a story about dogs and cats before this speech is over.

Kevin Foley was the Treasurer of South Australia when I was elected. He was the beneficiary of the most extraordinary surge of unanticipated windfall revenue every year, over and above budget allocations, through the GST. He was focused acutely on the opportunities that those windfalls presented the government, as in the Labor Party, for their re-election, rather than setting South Australia on a secure economic future. He used aggressive, macho posturing in this chamber as a substitute for good decision-making or, indeed, effective economic management. He was full of insults, wind and bluster—a discount Paul Keating.

Pat Conlon was leader of the house. I have a soft spot for Pat Conlon because he never joined in with other members of the Labor front bench at the time with insults to me personally about my voice. You can look up the Hansard on John Inman and Are You Being Served? and members can draw their own conclusions as to what those Labor frontbenchers meant by those comments.

It is worth noting in relation to former Minister Conlon that he did use aggression as a political tool on a regular basis with others. He was famously cutting when he wanted to be. You could always tell he was certain he was the smartest person in the room; he would often tell you so. John Hill was the softly-spoken health minister who introduced ramping and Transforming Health. His shtick in question time was to talk softly and at length so that everyone would be bored out of having an interest in his portfolio.

It is worth reflecting on the current government. Everything old is new again, and for me, this is a cut-price B-grade re-run of the Rann government when we look at the modern-day contemporaries, focused on political outcomes, political interests and Labor interests rather than the people of South Australia.

There is one member of the front bench who had stepped back when I was elected, and that was Michael Atkinson, who spent time on the backbench to focus on his real interest: running local council campaigns. His political legacy will not be as Speaker so much as Attorney-General. It was in that role where his legacy deserves to be remembered as the author of the Summary Offences (Consumption of Dogs and Cats) Amendment Bill.

The story goes that Mike Rann heard on talkback radio that somebody had barbecued a dog in their backyard. He saw a political opportunity to jump on and said that he would stamp it out. He postured, and in October 2003, the JD Vance of this story, Michael Atkinson, duly wrote and introduced the bill as Attorney-General, with a $1,250 fine for transgressors. In introducing the bill, Atkinson said:

The practice of eating dog or cat meat is common in several Asian countries, most notably China, Vietnam and Korea.

He went on to admit that the government had no evidence that this had ever happened but introduced the bill anyway, and it sits on our statutes. The bill remains on our statutes. I am not aware of any opportunity for it ever to have been used. I encourage those across the chamber to reflect on the opportunities to enhance debate in this place rather than to opportunistically serve their political ends at all times—as that government did, as this government did. We should all be focused on the people of South Australia instead.