Craig Laundy (Reid, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Industry, Innovation and Science) Share this | Hansard source

What is clear to us on this side of the House is that the member for McMahon is not only not up for it; he is not up to it. What he so quickly forgets is his own time in charge as Treasurer. He became Treasurer in June 2013, and one of his first acts was to stand by the forecast budget deficit of $18 billion that the member for Lilley had announced in May of that year. Eighty-six days later he presided over a PEFO—the Pre-election Economic and Fiscal Outlook—where the deficit moved to $30 billion. In 86 days he lost $12 billion. He was 67 per cent out in 86 days.

Mr Bowen interjecting—

Yes, I do support the Giants, as the shadow Treasurer says. I would not put him in charge of the concession stand at a Giants game. But he was not the worst. His predecessor had it absolutely under control. In 2011-12 he announced a deficit in May of $22.6 billion. It was $43.4 billion the following year—out by 92 per cent. It makes the member for McMahon look good. But my favourite was the 2012-13 budget, where we were going to return for the first time to a surplus—the first of four—of $1.5 billion. It ended up being a deficit of $18.8 billion—out by 1,300 per cent!

This is what they stand for. This is what they stand by. They will have you come to this House and propose a question for an MPI on the government's failure of economic leadership when their credentials are non-existent. What did the member for McMahon propose in opposition? What did he preside over? He gave himself a hell of a rap—$16 billion of increases in the budget deficits over the next four years at a time when our AAA credit rating is under close watch. There is fiscal irresponsibility writ large. He plays politics with budget repair for three years and then backflips during the campaign on the Schoolkids Bonus, foreign aid and the pension asset taper. Why? Because he needed the $47 billion of savings over the forwards that that would provide, which is what we have been arguing for up to three years. But this is where it gets worse. Whilst he stands there and wants to claw back $47 billion moving forward, in those same three years net debt increased by $120 billion. If he had not played politics for three years and if he had been constructive as he has been, to his credit, in the last week, we would have been able to change that debt trajectory a lot sooner. Even the $6 billion this week that he has agreed with us is $6 billion moving forward, but it is also $18 billion that has been borrowed over the last three years. And it has to be paid back by future generations of Australians, by our kids and our grandkids. That is the gravity of the issue that we are saying. We have been saying it for three years and whilst I applaud the move this week to support us in this bill, I cannot help but point out that it comes three years too late. I hope that it is the start of more to come.

Then he presided over my favourite. He gave in his 10-minute speech his vision for negative gearing—the 96-word policy. The second paragraph of that policy is where the devil in the detail lies. You could deduct the net interest payments against any other investment income. Who has other investment income? It is not low and middle-income earners. It is high-net-worth individuals. The shadow Treasurer, by mistake, implemented a policy that favoured high-net-worth individuals. He is that economically illiterate that he could not even negotiate a class war properly.

But what is this government done in terms of economic leadership? GDP growth is at 3.3 per cent, its highest in four years. In both the NAB and ANZ surveys released this week, business confidence is at its highest levels since December 2013. In the last 12 months, 220,000 jobs have been created and 60 per cent of those have gone to women. Unemployment is at its lowest rate in three years. The member for McMahon and the Leader of the Opposition hold press conferences—they jump out in front of policy positions and claim credit, when at the same time they are costing, for three years, day in and day out taxpayers' money.

In the last term of parliament, we heard so much. Senator Dastyari has been mentioned a lot, but one of his favourite topics was multinational tax avoidance. For three years we heard their plan—never costed—about how they were going to raise $1.6 billion over the forward estimates.

Mr Bowen interjecting—

Costed but not released, Member for McMahon. What did we do in those three years instead of going out and banging our gums? At the G20 convened in Brisbane the former Treasurer started laying the foundation for multinational tax avoidance reform. What has come from that? There are agreements with a plethora of countries, where for the first time we have access to their books. We have access to the companies based offshore that are diverting profits either through thin capitalisation or transfer pricing, which is how it happens.

What will the task force put in place by the Treasurer deliver? We heard that we have $1.6 billion on the counter. That was what the Labor policy claimed—costed, but never released—to deliver. On our side of the fence, through the changes we took time to initiate and instigate properly, over the next four years we will raise $3.75 billion, more than twice what Labor proposed through their policies.

Then, of course, we go to the free-trade agreements—Japan, Korea and China. I am proud to be a member of parliament for an electorate with a strong Chinese community. I am seeing it playing out on the ground as we speak—the benefits that will come from this. A young 29-year-old grad student came and said hello last week to thank me for initiating the free-trade agreement. I could not take the credit, because it was former Minister for Trade Andrew Robb. He explained to me that he had stopped at his local butcher. He had a strong family networking connection back in China and he had been working with his local butcher, who also owns a cattle property, about exporting boxed meat to China. They are now at the stage in their business career where they are seeking to build and accredit their own abattoirs. This is what free-trade agreements look like on the ground. They want to build the abattoirs in Wagga Wagga, in regional New South Wales, and with that will come profits, tax receipts, jobs and PAYE tax receipts. That is what economic leadership looks like. Of course, we have the National Innovation and Science Agenda, which Minister Hunt and I are continuing to roll out. We have infrastructure—$50 billion Australia wide. In my electorate, there is WestConnex, where the member for Grayndler, through the election campaign, so wilfully and recklessly flew off the cuff and threatened the future existence of that project, which is vital.

In conclusion, we have real problems. We do. You can either play politics with them or fix them. The member for McMahon comes into this place and in front of cameras every day and plays politics. He is all politics. On that side of the House they are all politics. On this side it is about policy, delivery and economic leadership.

See this speech in context