Mark Dreyfus (Isaacs, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to support the Nation-building Funds Amendment Bill 2009. I think it is important that the context for this legislation and indeed the context for the budget that the Treasurer delivered last night be considered. We are experiencing the deepest global recession since the Great Depression and there are a few basic facts to be considered. The world economy will contract by 1.5 per cent. Other advanced economies are in deep recession. Australia is in recession. The economy will contract by 0.5 per cent in 2009-10. Unemployment is going to rise and the terms of trade are to fall significantly.

The reason I start with those basic facts is that it is not possible or appropriate to approach legislation like this without considering the economic context that gives rise to the legislation and to the framing of the budget. This budget is about choices and priorities. Far from this bill exemplifying something wrong, as the member for Goldstein attempted to say, about the approach that the government has taken to the framing of this budget, this bill exemplifies the very stark contrast between the opposition and the government in relation to dealing with the economic crisis, difficulties and challenges that the government and the country are confronting.

The Treasurer has delivered a budget that is designed to support jobs now and deliver the investments to increase Australia’s productive capacity for future prosperity. I listened with care to the speech that was given on this bill by the Liberal infrastructure spokesman, the member for Goldstein, today. What was striking about it was that not once did the member for Goldstein talk about jobs. Indeed, the member for Goldstein spent the 15 minutes that he spoke for talking about debt and attempting to create the impression of confusion, lack of coherence or recklessness—those were the words that he repeated over and over in his speech. We had to wait until the very end of the member for Goldstein’s speech to hear the economic context this budget consideration is about, not about debt or creating some spectre of confusion, but rather a response to a crisis. We had to wait until the last minute of the member for Goldstein’s speech to hear him use the word ‘crisis’, when he spoke of ‘enabling us to rebound out of this crisis’. The starting point for considering legislation such as this is the economic context—it is the fact that there is a global economic crisis. That is why I start my speech by referring to that economic crisis, because it is that which gives rise to the decisions that are reflected in this budget.

It seems that those opposite are having a great deal of difficulty in facing up to the economic challenges confronting the nation. Only last week we heard from the shadow Treasurer, the member for North Sydney, who, extraordinarily, said: ‘It is inconceivable that we could have such a deterioration of employment in such a short time.’ It is not inconceivable—because it is in fact happening. The response of those opposite would appear to be one of disbelief in the economic events that are unfolding across the world, which are having a far worse effect on other developed economies than has yet been experienced in Australia. We hope that, as a result of the decisions that are reflected in this budget, that will continue to be the case. But for those opposite the deterioration of employment, and apparently many other economic events, is inconceivable.

We are yet to hear even the slightest level of coherence in any response by those opposite to this budget or to the economic decisions that have been taken by this government in recent months. Indeed, one would have to say that the response of those opposite to the present economic crisis is eerily reminiscent of the response of conservative governments in the 1920s and 1930s, including—

See this speech in context