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

Yes I can, and unfortunately this question is based on a completely unsurprising misunderstanding or misrepresentation from the shadow Treasurer. If the shadow Treasurer knew anything about the Future Fund, if he knew anything about the announcement which has been made today, he would understand a couple of things. First of all, as I reminded him a moment ago, there will be no draw-downs from the Future Fund, at least until 2032. That means that there won't be any taking of money out of the Future Fund and putting it towards the budget. That's the question I'm answering, which he asked a moment ago. That's what I was asked about. The priority areas that we want the Future Fund to invest in are consistent with the government's priorities but in addition to the substantial program of investment that we already have going.

We understand what this question is really about. We know what this question is really about. They want less investment in housing.

That's why they team up with the Greens in the Senate and voted against investment in housing. They want less investment in cleaner and cheaper energy, and that's why they vote the way they do in the parliament. They don't want to make our economy more resilient.

If those opposite knew the first thing about the Future Fund or, indeed, about Australia's major economic pressures and opportunities, they would support, not oppose, our efforts to make sure that capital flows more efficiently in our economy in the service of our national economic objectives to the ultimate benefit of the Australian people, workers, communities, businesses and investors. Every question they ask and every ill-informed, dishonest statement that they make about the changes we are making today reminds people out there in the broader Australian community that they don't want to see investment in housing, cleaner and cheaper energy, or infrastructure, and we do.

See this speech in context