Ted O'Brien (Fairfax, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I am delighted to speak today, and I want to acknowledge the fact that it is the member for Grayndler's birthday, apparently. I grew up in a house where, when it is your birthday, you would have your cake—I do not know if the member for Grayndler had this experience—and you would be able to close your eyes and cut the cake. When you do, you make a wish. We all know the member for Grayndler's wish—that is, that he was the leader of the opposition. Along with the rank and file of the Labor Party, I think he would be a far better—

A government member: The people's choice!

the people's choice indeed—leader of the opposition. I have always thought that the reason he is not is because of the union hold on the Labor Party and the way the unions just call the shots. But the fact that he has put forward today a topic on which the Labor Party has no credibility implies at least that it is also due to his complete lack of judgement. Why the Labor Party would actually wish to debate publicly the topic of investment in productive infrastructure baffles me. It is a key flaw of the Labor Party. The member for Perth, who was the previous speaker, only wanted to talk about WA. Clearly, he does not even support the very motion being put forward by the member for Grayndler. That is okay, because why would you when you know the history?

In the 2010-11 budget, the Labor government said they would spend $6.8 billion on infrastructure in the 2012-13 financial year. Six months later, they reduced the $6.8 billion down to $6.1 billion. Do you know what the actual spend was? The actual spend in 2012-13 by the Labor government was not the $6.8 billion they promised. It was $3.6 billion. They get excited about their track record during their years of government, and of course that is all about their stimulus packages in the GFC. But I remind them that the biggest package in the GFC by Labor was in 2009 and, from memory, that was $42.5 billion. Nearly $15 billion of that was for school halls. What productive infrastructure that was–productive infrastructure indeed.

The problem with talking about productive infrastructure is that you can go wrong in one of two major ways: (1) you can not spend enough money, which is exactly what the Labor Party was guilty of in government—again, $6.8 billion down to $3.6 billion in 2012-13; and (2) you can spend money on the wrong things. That is exactly what they did through their stimulus packages. Compare that to $50 billion being invested by the coalition government—$50 billion. Now I am a Queenslander—

See this speech in context