House debates

Wednesday, 4 February 2009

Appropriation (Nation Building and Jobs) Bill (No. 1) 2008-2009; Appropriation (Nation Building and Jobs) Bill (No. 2) 2008-2009; Household Stimulus Package Bill 2009; Tax Bonus for Working Australians Bill 2009; Tax Bonus for Working Australians (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2009; Commonwealth Inscribed Stock Amendment Bill 2009

Second Reading

1:15 pm

Photo of Jamie BriggsJamie Briggs (Mayo, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Exactly. David Jones got rid of retail staff. So there is absolutely no evidence at all that that package meant Westfield kept more people. It meant their profits went up. It is pure voodoo economics from those on the other side, and it is led by their leader, who does not know what he is. Twelve months ago he was an economic conservative; today he is an unreconstructed socialist. That is what has happened here. He is bagging Margaret Thatcher, bagging Ronald Reagan and calling Milton Friedman all sorts of names. His Treasurer is abusing a well-known economist in the US, which is extraordinary for a federal Treasurer of our country to do. They have no idea about what they are actually doing on this. The Australian people understand that the only people in this parliament who know how to manage this economy are those on this side. That is why they will respect in time the decision by this side of the House to stand against parts of this package—to stand against what are excessive parts of this package.

We should not allow this government to take Australia into a situation where we are $200 billion in debt, and that is what this government is asking us to do in a 24-hour period. We did not see the bills until this morning. I note that Senator Xenophon has just been on Sky News. The threats from the other side are that you can jam it through the House—we can sit till 2 am—but you cannot jam it through the Independents in the Senate. I think it would be wise for the government to consider what the Independents have said. Twenty-four hours to spend $42 billion, not of your money but of your constituents’ money, your children’s future—24 hours. How would we explain to our children in the future when they say to us, ‘Why did you let this country get to $200 billion in debt, where most of our budget is taken up by paying interest on this debt?’ What are we going to say? ‘Oh, we considered this in great detail over a 24-hour period.’ What are we here for? Maybe we need to go to the great unreconstructed socialists and have a dictatorship so that the government can just usher through its plans. Those on the other side like quoting the new President of the United States. I note that the new President of the United States is trying to work with both sides of parliament. He is trying very hard to get the Republicans to support his ideas. He is listening to their ideas. What do you think the chances are that this Prime Minister and this Treasurer will listen to Malcolm Turnbull’s ideas?

Comments

No comments