The Greens have called my intention to vote against the Budget a ‘stunt’

The Greens have called my intention to vote against the Budget a ‘stunt’. This reaction was not in the public interest because the community, more than ever, needs honest and reasoned debate and not more mud-slinging.

There is nothing cynical or theatrical about using every lawful means possible to represent the views of your constituents, nor to stand up for low income and disadvantaged people. That’s actually a parliamentarian’s job.

Senator Christine Milne also claims that to block the Budget would cripple government. This is simply misleading because, in the first instance, the Government would have the option of remedying the miserable aspects of the Budget and bringing it back to the Parliament to be assessed and voted on again.

Even if the Government refused to fix the Budget, or just needed more time, then procedural safeguards could kick in. For instance in 1984 and 1987 interim Supply Bills were passed to allow an election to be held. And in 1996 the new government gave itself more time to finalise its Budget by extending the existing budget on a pro-rata basis. Moreover much of the day-to-day expenditure of the Government is funded by Standing Appropriations and not contained in the annual Budget Appropriations.

Greens Member for Melbourne Adam Bandt’s assertion that my move is ‘cute’ and that supporting my move is a ‘moot point’, because Labor isn’t supporting me, is a curious defence because the Greens, arguably more than any other party, has built its reputation on adopting a principled stand. But in this instance the Greens don’t feel obliged to do the right thing apparently just because another party also isn’t prepared to fight the good fight. This must be a terrible blow for many Greens members and voters.

The Greens need to understand that the Appropriation Bills are the hub of the Budget and where many of the Budget measures are contained, for example the cuts to the ABC and SBS, CSIRO and the Coalition’s plan to index pensions to CPI. It is not good enough to only focus only on the separate enabling legislation for some specific budget measures.

Opposition Leader Bill Shorten’s claim that Labor will also not join me in voting against the Appropriation Bills, because it won’t use public servants as ‘human shields’, is just more misleading rhetoric to support Labor’s decision to simply wave the Appropriation Bills through.

• John Biggs, in Comments: Politics versus principle … that’s what this is about. I fear the Greens are playing more politics than I would like them to and expect them to. They are the one party that claims the high principled ground but here they are slipping. This is a wicked budget, and a politcian’s job is to fight it, as Andrew is doing splendidly. I am disappointed that the Greens are not although the Budget is the very opposite of what they stand for. By far the most of the hundreds of letters the Mercury has published testify, some eloquently so, what the people of Tasmania and especially of Denison think. Andrew is sticking up for them. So should the Greens.

• Phil Na Champassak, Dear learned reader: Do not take the government or opposition’s figures on the Federal Budget as gospel, because it is more often than not that you are being sold smoke and mirrors. Educate yourself by trying the interactive Guardian Budget 2014: how would you cut Australia’s deficit? – interactive HERE Drag and drop the boxes from out to in to include a budget measure. Hit the submit button when you’re done to send us your choices. The deficit is an estimated cumulative deficit figure over the four-year forward estimates period, as are the savings. Each item shows an estimate of how much it would save in total over four years.