Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Hansard source

The underlying principle in all of this is: at a time of global financial crisis, do the men and women of Australia, the working families of Australia, want to have confidence that we have an independent Secretary to the Treasury, an independent Governor of the Reserve Bank, an independent ASIC and an independent Prudential Regulatory Authority? Do the Australian people want to have confidence in those institutions? Yes, they do. Do they want to have the alternative government of Australia simply taking out the machete and trying to hack them down at every opportunity? That is exactly what the Leader of the Opposition has given his sanction to. He smiles as if this is some small, passing matter. I would say to the Leader of the Opposition: in his attack on the Secretary to the Treasury he has failed at the first and fundamental character test for occupying the prime ministership of Australia. This is an Australian institution. It should be beyond political and partisan attack. The Reserve Bank is an Australian institution. It should be beyond political and partisan attack—a principle which the Leader of the Opposition does not grasp.

The weekend before last, the world was beset by a global financial crisis which was getting right out of control. If you looked at what had happened in stock markets the previous Friday, you would have seen the massive collapse across the world. What you saw were stocks plummeting, credit markets out of control and credit markets drying up. But, beyond that, you saw the visible sapping of confidence of deposit holders around the nation as they became concerned about the security of their deposits. That was the real problem that the democratically elected government of Australia was dealing with. And that is why we sat down with our regulators to work out what to do about it. We met for that weekend. We took tough decisions. We took hard decisions. We were decisive and our decisions were taken with this core interest in mind: how to provide security and confidence for the working men and women of Australia—those in the gallery here today concerned about the security of their deposits and the ability of their banks to provide funding for future loans to business. These were the concerns which drove the government. Those were the concerns which drove the regulators. That is why we spent the entire weekend working here. We acted and we are proud of the decisions we took.

The Leader of the Opposition does not understand the depth of the crisis that we are in. He has said that this crisis is simply mere ‘hype’—his word, not ours. Therefore, when the superannuation policyholders of Australia—there are 10 million of them—are concerned about the impact of stock market collapses on the earnings of those funds, he is saying that they are simply responding to hype. He is saying that those pensioners who are in need of extra support at this time are responding to mere hype. He is saying that those concerned about the security of their deposits in banks were responding to mere hype. Can I say to the alternative Prime Minister of Australia: fear and anxiety are not the products of hype. Fear and anxiety are the products of the events across the world that they saw unfold on their television screens. They were looking for governments and responsible political parties to show leadership and to act. This government did so. This government is proud of the action that it took, which was necessary to deal with the reality of the crisis that we were confronted with.

If you look at the response across the business community, if you look at the response across the banks of Australia, if you look at the response in terms of what the regulators have said about the actions we have taken subsequently, it is quite clear that the decisions taken by the government on that critical weekend were absolute and necessary in the interests of the working men and women of this country, of retirees, of superannuants, as well as those needing loans if they were out there in small business. There is not just that action on deposits; there is also the action for the term funding arrangements for our major retail banks and, on top of that, of course, a $10.4 billion Economic Security Strategy for the future, delivering additional help and support for pensioners, for families and to assist those out there in the hard business of trying to fund the purchase of their first home. That is our policy. We stand by it and we are proud of it.

What is the policy of the alternative government of Australia on the guarantee on deposits? What is it? Five times last night on television—they all hang their heads at this moment—the alternative Prime Minister of Australia was asked this question: ‘What is your policy on guaranteeing the deposits of the men and women of Australia? What is it?’ What those opposite have said and confirmed most recently, depending on who you listen to on what day, is maybe a $100,000 limit, maybe not—depending on the weather, depending on the day, depending on the spokesman. I would say to the Leader of the Opposition: the Australian people want certainty at this time. They have a clear decision from us, which is to provide certainty of guarantee of deposits for the future. That is our policy. We have announced it, we stand by it and we defend it, and it is supported by the regulators.

We turn to the alternative government of Australia. They do not just walk both sides of the street; when challenged repeatedly to name a number, name a limit, name a condition, they cannot do so. I would say to the Leader of the Opposition again, if he seeks to occupy the prime ministership of this country, having a clear position on something as basic to the mums and dads of Australia as whether or not their deposits are going to be secure in the bank is the first ask of leadership, a test of leadership the Leader of the Opposition has failed.

The government has also been acting domestically and internationally, because, in terms of dealing with the confidence crisis which exists across our country and beyond, we are dealing with the problem of financial regulation at home and abroad, we are dealing with the problem of economic growth at home and abroad, and with jobs. We are also dealing with the harmonisation of policies across the globe. Across the last week, together with the foreign minister, together with the Treasurer, together with the trade minister, the government of Australia, apart from attending to these matters domestically, has been engaged in every capital in the world, through our embassies and directly, in ensuring that we would have a place at the table for Australia to argue our case for the future financial order of the world.

The decision, announced this morning Australian time, by President Bush to convene a G20 meeting in Washington, a Group of 20 meeting in Washington at heads of government level, is in direct response to the representations by this government and other governments around the world. There were those in the international community who argued that the G7 alone could handle this challenge. Our argument, looking at the Asia-Pacific region and looking at the significant economies here, is that if we are to deliver a global solution to this problem, it requires a global response. Australia will be arguing internationally for an effective response, just as we have been arguing a decisive case through our actions here at home. This government stand up for the long-term economic interests of the economy. We stand up for the long-term interests of families within the economy. We stand up for the interests of those deposit holders who are here in the gallery in parliament today. We stand up for pensioners, for families doing it tough and for those who are seeking to buy their first home. That is the hallmark of a government exercising proper leadership in the midst of a global financial crisis. I would suggest that those opposite support the government.

See this speech in context