Craig Emerson (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Minister Assisting the Finance Minister on Deregulation) Share this | Hansard source

I think I am actually a lot better with numbers than you, mate. You are the numbers man for your bloke, sitting up there on the back bench, the member for Higgins. The member for Higgins is not even here in the chamber, so do not talk to me about being good at numbers, mate. You are hopeless at numbers—absolutely hopeless.

We had the Leader of the Opposition saying that under the coalition the deficit would be $21 billion lower—$188 million; $178 billion; $168 billion; $167 billion. There it is, right on the money—$167 billion is good; $188 billion of net debt is really bad. That is really what he is saying. But even then in his budget reply he did not identify the $21 billion that he would save. He had the opportunity to do so. At least he said, ‘We don’t support this package; we’re voting against it’—and vote against it they did. Why? Because the member for Higgins, the guy for whom you are the numbers man, up there on the back bench and on Lateline, described the stimulus packages as a ‘low-quality spend’. Then it caught on. Here in Canberra the coalition, full of courage and full of bluster, said: ‘That’s a low-quality spend. We’re not voting for it.’ At least you can respect them for that. Here they are in Canberra saying that they are not going to vote for all this infrastructure and school modernisation stuff. It is far too expensive—a low-quality spend.

Okay, that would be understandable, but what have we got? This matter of public importance has been put by the Leader of the National Party, the friend of the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry here—

See this speech in context