David Coleman (Banks, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Finance) Share this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Dunkley, in particular, for his very strong contribution to this debate. He again hits on the important point about restraining government spending. It's a very important contrast with those opposite. I will talk to the member's question about some specific savings measures that have been passed through the parliament in recent times, but we also need to understand the alternative.

One way of improving the budget position is to make savings. That is the better way. That is the preferable way. Those opposite are all about tax increases. They propose more than $200 billion of tax increases. The member for Rankin wanted to talk about older Australians in his contribution. He and his colleagues are proposing to smash older Australians with a massive retiree tax that will devastate hundreds of thousands of older Australians. Those opposite also want to smash the housing market by abolishing negative gearing for all except new homes. In an environment where the housing markets around Australia are already under pressure, that is going to lead to tremendous problems, and it's going to hit the most important asset of the vast majority of Australian households, their home. It is an appalling policy. They also want to put up capital gains tax by 50 per cent on everything, not just on housing and not just on investment property. They voted against tax relief for any business that has a turnover of just $2 million, which is a very, very small business. Those opposite said, 'No, this is some sort of big business, and it is not entitled to any form of relief.'

Those are bad policies. They are in contrast to the priorities of this government and of the member for Dunkley. He knows that getting the budget back on track is about sensible budget repair. He knows that since MYEFO we've implemented and delivered savings worth some $4.6 billion. We are doing the hard work of actually passing budget repair measures. Since the 2017-18 budget there has been some $16 billion worth of budget repair measures. Since the 2016 Pre-election Economic and Fiscal Outlook, the value of budget repair measures implemented by this government has been some $41 billion. That is a massive improvement in the fiscal position of this nation, and that is why in this financial year we turn the corner on net debt and begin paying down that legacy of debt, with some $30 billion of net debt reduction expected over the forward estimates. That is being driven by the strong results of this government.

I note that the member for Rankin has left us, but I do want to address a number of his comments. In relation to the forecast on wages and other matters, here are some comments. Saul Eslake says that the economic growth forecasts in the budget are reasonable and the commodity price assumptions are conservative. Stephen Koukoulas, not known as a raving fan of the government, says:

It is important to note, in this context, that the budget is framed on a series of realistic and reasonably conservative economic forecasts for economic growth, wages and company profits …

That is a very sensible contribution by Mr Koukoulas. This sort of assertion from those opposite is just wrong. We note that in an environment where we are constraining government spending growth to just 1.9 per cent in real terms, that means that public-sector spending is under control. That is the right thing for this nation.

Proposed expenditure agreed to.

See this speech in context