Chris Bowen (McMahon, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Hansard source

There are times when a government has to consider that so much damage has been done to an economy, that so much is at risk in an economy and that there are such forces at play in an economy that the government has to step in and spend money. There are times when the international economy has turned so badly that a government has to spend and stimulate the economy. It happened during the period of the previous Labor government—the worst financial and economic crisis in 60 years. Labor stepped in and Labor took action. And didn't they rail against it? Didn't they complain that too much was being spent? Well, another Treasurer has decided that so much damage has been done to the economy, that confidence is so low and that the economy is so bad that they have had to increase spending to GFC levels. We see spending outlined in last night's budget at 25.9 per cent of the economy. It was 26 per cent during the depths of the global financial crisis, and it is 25.9 per cent now as they strive desperately to improve the economy after the smashing of confidence that they have perpetrated over the last 12 months.

This says, along with all the other backflips and all the other problems in its budget preparation, that this government stands for nothing. This government stands for absolutely nothing. We see the government walking away from its formal and solemn commitments about budget surpluses. The Treasurer used to tell us, 'There's no revenue problem in Australia, only a spending problem.' He has told us that time and time again, and we find spending on his watch the same as during the depths of the global financial crisis. That tells us just how lacking in substance this Treasurer is, and we see spending as a percentage of the economy 1.3 percentage points higher than it was left under the Labor government.

We see the budget's own documents outlining the impact of government decisions. There is a very important table in the budget papers, and it outlines the impact of government decisions. It shows that the impact of government decisions has blown out the budget deficit by $9 billion. They say: 'Oh, we paid for everything. Everything we've done is offset by other savings.' It is just not right. I saw the Minister for Finance on Lateline last night. This was put to him, and he said, 'You're forgetting one point: the savings from our paid parental leave'—a cunning plan. So they are suggesting that the savings come from a program they never implemented.

I am on good terms with the shadow finance minister—the member for Watson is a good friend of mine—but, if I went to him and said, 'I've got a cunning plan: why don't we come up with a bigger plan that raises expenses, and then we don't proceed with it, and then we can claim it as a saving?' I think he would suggest I take some time out to reflect on my grip on reality! As good terms as I am on with the member for Watson, he would tell me I had lost my grip on reality if I suggested abolishing a program that we had never implemented and claiming it as a saving as part of a cunning fiscal plan. That is what this government has done. It is what the member for Kooyong has done and the Minister for Finance has done.

We see the debt and deficit disaster that we heard so much about.

See this speech in context