Michael Johnson (Ryan, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I am delighted to have the warm support of my colleague the member for Riverina, because she very strongly shares my view of economic credibility: it is economic credibility which the people of Australia consider most important when it comes to matters of who they will support at a federal election.

In 1996, we came to office to fix up the mess that the Keating government had left behind. I want to remind the parliament and the people of Australia of a quote from a current Labor backbencher in May 1991, who was the Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer at the time. I thank the Treasurer for reminding us of this very important comment. This is what Bob McMullan said to the Canberra Times in May 1991:

I know that it is unfashionable to have anything positive to say about the Australian economy at present. However last week I had the opportunity to represent Australia at meetings of the International Monetary Fund…three things struck me during the course of these meetings. First, we should never forget our relatively favourable situation. As I have said before in these articles when compared to the problems of Mali, Peru or Bangladesh all Australians should rejoice in our good fortune – however much we are determined to improve our own position.

My goodness! In 1991 a member of the executive was talking about Australia in the context of Mali, Peru or Bangladesh! Had we got to such an awful position in 1991 that we had to be compared to these three countries?

I took the liberty of finding a report from the US government on Bangladesh. I thought I might talk about this for a moment. The CIA World Factbook makes the following remarks on Bangladesh:

Bangladesh is one of the poorest nations in the world. The economy is based on the output of a narrow range of agricultural products, such as jute, which is the main cash crop and major source of export earnings. Bangladesh is hampered by a relative lack of natural resources, population growth of more than 2% a year, large-scale unemployment and a limited infrastructure; furthermore, it is highly vulnerable to natural disasters ... Alleviation of poverty remains the cornerstone of the government’s development strategy.

There you go: ‘Alleviation of poverty remains a cornerstone of the government’s development strategy.’ By comparison, this government is talking about things like the Future Fund, putting away billions of dollars to fund superannuation liabilities, compared to a country that is just trying to address poverty issues. What a profound commentary on the Labor government under Paul Keating, which the people of Australia threw out comprehensively in 1996.

It is very important that the people of Australia get reminded of these sorts of things. I know that perhaps sometimes we might seem to be a little bit repetitive on this side of the parliament, talking about what happened under the Keating government. But it is very important that the people of Australia, and certainly the people of Ryan, are reminded from time to time what capacities the Keating government had to take us into great mess. That was only a signpost as to what a future Labor government would do. We do not want to let our fellow Australians forget about Labor’s final budget. Let me see: in 1995-96 it was in deficit to the tune of two per cent of the country’s GDP.

See this speech in context