Craig Emerson (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Trade and Competitiveness) Share this | Hansard source

I have just heard the shadow minister at the table say, 'Oh, rubbish!' I have also heard the Leader of the Opposition say: 'Well, this $70 billion figure is a fanciful figure. It is plucked from the air by government ministers and I'm surprised you're retelling it to me.' Where did we get the $70 billion figure? Out of the mouth of the shadow finance minister, who said, 'The $70 billion is an estimate of the sort of challenge we will have.' That was on ABC NewsRadio on 16 August 2011. He then said, 'The $70 billion is an indicative figure of the challenge that we've got.' That was on ABC 24 on 18 August 2011. Then, on Meet the Press, a journalist said, 'It's not like a furphy, then?' The shadow finance minister said: 'No, it's not a furphy. We came out with that figure.' We just had the shadow minister for energy and resources saying, 'That's rubbish,' that the shadow finance minister never said that there was a $70 billion black hole. Three times, out of his own mouth, the shadow finance minister said it—'There is a $70 billion black hole', 'It's not a furphy,' and, 'That's the figure that we put out there.' I really do look forward with great anticipation to the shadow minister for energy and resources apologising to the people of Australia for saying that the shadow finance minister never made that statement. They make the statements, deny that they ever made them and then get indignant when they are called to account.

That $70 billion black hole needs to be filled. The coalition know that and that is why they are withholding their policies as best they can. They had two policies out last week, one about drawing a line at the Tropic of Capricorn and another about scrapping the increase in super from nine per cent to 12 per cent. Two policies in two days were each repudiated in two hours. When the policy about a line dividing Australia at the Tropic of Capricorn was leaked to the media, the Leader of the Opposition had run away from it by 9 am. The shadow Treasurer ran away from his own statement, within two hours, that they would scrap the nine to 12 per cent superannuation increase. They do not want the Australian people to know where they will cut to fill that $70 billion black hole. We have had confirmation of that from the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, who was asked by Fran Kelly: 'You will have the numbers you need when the budget is released on 14 May, as of budget night. There'll be no excuse, will there, for the coalition not to move on releasing costings for their policies?' The Deputy Leader of the Opposition said, 'Well, that's not correct', saying that there will be an excuse. Fran Kelly said, 'Why not?' and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition said, 'Well, because the full impact of the budget will not be known until 30 September.' What is significant about 30 September? It is after the election. And that is the caper. The coalition, federally, want to do what Campbell Newman and the Liberal-National Party have done in Queensland—conceal the true savagery of their cuts from the Australian people before the election and use the device of an audit commission after an election, after 30 September, to reveal the true savagery of their cuts.

The fact of the matter is that what is happening in Queensland, what is happening in New South Wales and what is happening in Victoria are just the curtain-raisers for the main game, and the main game is this: the Leader of the Opposition has committed to the same device as Campbell Newman—an audit commission, after an election, after 30 September. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition said that is when they will reveal the costings of their promises. That is actually when they will reveal the true savagery.

We saw it again last night, when there was a Senate estimates hearing involving the new Parliamentary Budget Office. As a result of that hearing, lickety-split, as quickly as they possibly could, there was a joint release from the shadow Treasurer and the shadow Assistant Treasurer which said that they have been given the go-ahead by the budget office to withhold their costings until 10 days into an election campaign. They said:

Accordingly, the Coalition will finalise its policy costings after the PEFO is published by the Departments of Treasury and Finance—

that is 10 days into an election campaign—

and will release them in good time before the election.

They want to do exactly what they did last time. The Hansard transcript shows that Mr Bowen, the head of the Parliamentary Budget Office, repeatedly says sentiments such as these: 'We want the PBO's costings as soon as practicable. In these circumstances we encourage senators and members to submit any confidential costings requests that they wish to resubmit to the PBO well in advance of the commencement of the caretaker period.' So we have got the Parliamentary Budget Office saying, 'We're open for business; please submit them so that we can cost them,' and the coalition already manoeuvring so that they do not submit anything or do not release anything until at least 10 days into the election, and actually through an audit commission after an election.

Let us remember what happened at the last election. I was at the Brisbane Broncos Leagues Club when there was a community debate between the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition. At five o’clock I was watching the television and on come the shadow Treasurer and the shadow finance minister and they say: 'We're releasing our costings. Everything adds up.' They say, 'Everything adds up—it's terrific and we know that it's terrific because we got this really reputable accounting firm to audit it.'

Do you know what actually happened to that really reputable accounting firm? I will read the beginning of a press release:

Geoffrey Phillip Kidd FCA and Cyrus Patell CA of Western Australia

The Professional Conduct Tribunal had found a case established that both Kidd and Patell were liable to disciplinary action in accordance with By-law 40(f), in that a report dated 18 August 2010 prepared for the … Coalition parties—

was basically shonky. That is not a legal term. Accountants do not use the word 'shonky'. They were fined $5,000 each. They said this reputable accounting firm audited it; they did nothing of the sort.

Indeed, after the election, when the Independents were able to insist that the policies of both the government and the coalition be properly costed, they were. After the election the departments of the Treasury and finance found an $11 billion black hole. That is just a matter of fact. That is a matter of history. That is not in contention—well, until this morning. Apparently it never happened. Here we have the shadow Treasurer this morning doing a doorstop interview, and the journalist says:

Your costings were wrong before the last election.

Shadow Treasurer:

I don't accept that at all.

JOURNALIST: $11 billion out.

Shadow Treasurer:

I don't accept that at all. Not at all.

It never happened! There was no $11 billion black hole! There was no fine for the accounting firm! None of that happened! The shadow Treasurer last Friday never said, according to him, that they would scrap the nine to 12 per cent increase. He reprimanded National Nine News and Bernard Keane for reporting what he actually said: 'I never said it. I wasn't there. It wasn't me. I wasn't there.' And then in question time today he said, 'Well, we are actually going to scrap it,' and that there will be a release a little bit later denying his denial when he denied his denial. And the press gallery is supposed to expect that this is the consistency and the intellect of the shadow Treasurer, the would-be Treasurer of this country.

The fact is that the MRRT is a profits based tax. So is the petroleum resource rent tax. The coalition has said: 'You must never base expenditure on a profits based tax because profits go up and down as mineral prices go up and down. You should never do it.' The petroleum resource rent tax is a profits based tax on offshore petroleum. The oil price goes up and down. If the coalition has said it is philosophically opposed to a profits based tax, why did it collect $18 billion? Why did the coalition collect $18 billion from the petroleum resource rent tax? Give the money back. You should have given the money back. They campaigned against the petroleum resource rent tax. They said they were philosophically opposed to a profits based tax and much preferred a crude oil levy, much preferred royalties which deter exploration and investment, and never gave the money back.

The fact is that the coalition will do these things. It will restore the tax on superannuation for low-income earners. It now has said that it will scrap the increase in super from nine to 12 per cent. It will, on the tax-free threshold, take it from $18,200 back to $6,000. It will abolish the small business tax break. It will abolish the schoolkids bonus. And all of the rest will be revealed after the election through the device of an audit commission. Shame on you. (Time expired)

See this speech in context