Jim Chalmers (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Hansard source

Thank you to the member for Lalor for her question about the implications of the combination of circumstances we confront in the economy and what that means for the Commonwealth budget. It's true that in recent times the good prices that we have been getting for our commodities on global markets have helped prop up the budget, as has the fact that in the last year at least the former government found it very difficult—indeed, impossible—to get some of their commitments away. That means in the near term there have been some improvements in the budget. But the structural issues that those opposite presided over and made worse over almost a decade in government do constrain the new government's choices as we deal with this combination of challenges. What we've been saying for some time now is that there is an onus on us to provide genuine value for money, to invest in the future of our economy, to invest in responsible cost-of-living relief, at the same time as we trim back the legacy of rorts and waste which defined budget policy for the best part of a decade under those opposite.

I listened to the shadow Treasurer earlier on responding to the statement that I gave to the parliament. In that 14 minutes of absolute drivel from the shadow Treasurer, I noticed that the fake indignation we hear from those opposite would be far more convincing if they hadn't been in government for the best part of a decade and created all of the challenges that the new government is now left to deal with—whether it's in water, as the member for Sydney said, or really right across the board. All the ministers are now dealing with the legacy of almost a decade—

See this speech in context