Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is directed to the Prime Minister. In his previous answers, the Prime Minister has indicated that the forecasts upon which the government relied in formulating the $10.4 billion package were from the IMF, which has forecast 2.2 per cent growth next year, and the Reserve Bank of Australia, which has forecast growth of 2.25 per cent to 30 June next year. Is the Prime Minister then telling the House that the growth forecasts upon which the government have relied are not less than the 2.2 per cent forecast by the IMF?

Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If the Leader of the Opposition had listened today to the questions I was asked by the gallery at the National Press Club—

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I was about to return to what was said earlier today and to repeat it here—the most recent data available to the government was about growth with a ‘2’ in front of it and, secondly, in the current global economic environment, what Australia needs is a buffer for the future. That is why we have provided the Economic Security Strategy. It is the right course of action. It is done responsibly on the basis of what is occurring internationally, on the basis of what is happening with forward commodity prices, on the basis of softening in China’s economic growth, on the basis of the softening in global growth and the most recent statement by the Reserve Bank as of last Tuesday. It is the right course of action.

What we have had throughout question time is the Leader of the Opposition walking both sides of the street. The Leader of the Opposition says in one press statement that he supports a $10.4 billion economic package for the nation but in every question he has authorised in question time today he has sought to undermine that package—walking both sides of the street, on every question that has been put—for example, on questions about taxes, when in the Senate at the moment they stand in the road of tax measures which would benefit 330,000 to the tune of up to $1,200 a year—walking both sides of the street, on a whole range of policy questions. We have seen again recently the Leader of the Opposition saying, on the one hand, that he supports the economic regulators but, on the other hand, casting doubt on the regulators; saying, on the one hand, that he supports what APRA and the Reserve Bank are saying and, on the other hand, saying that the Reserve Bank’s statement about the robustness of Australian financial institutions may not be exactly accurate. I say to the Leader of the Opposition: his pursuit of a short-term, populist headline in the newspapers may suit a short-term political agenda but it is no substitute for the long-term economic leadership which Australia needs today.