Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. I refer to the Treasurer’s suggestion that the Vision luxury apartment project in Brisbane, which proposes selling 110 apartments in the current environment for up to $5 million, is just the sort of project that may qualify for a taxpayer backed loan from Ruddbank. Treasurer, does this fall within your definition of ‘social housing’ in your $42 billion stimulus? Moreover, is the standard application fee for a loan from Ruddbank a $500,000 donation to the Labor Party, as reported in the Sydney Morning Herald? Given that the government is borrowing $2 billion to establish Ruddbank, isn’t this just another example of how bad government policy makes the risk of a Rudd recession even greater?

Wayne Swan (Lilley, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What it is an example of is responsible economic management.

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Wayne Swan (Lilley, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Putting in place a vehicle to support employment for 150,000 Australians is not a laughing matter. Those opposite do not understand the magnitude of the challenge. Foreign banks have not been able to guarantee to the Treasury that they will keep funding syndicated loans in this country, and there is a need for such a vehicle. We are putting it in place in a responsible way, with the governance that is required, to ensure that we do our best to support employment in this vital sector, because if foreign banks do withdraw then that will affect property prices across the board and it will result in a massive increase in unemployment in this country.

What those opposite do not understand is the nature of the challenge. First of all we have had the World Bank again revise down growth forecasts. They have revised down the growth figures for China to something like 6.5 per cent. China has been the engine room that has been boosting this economy and the commodity boom for a long time. This is going to be very damaging for the Australian economy. It sends a shock right into the economy. And we have got overnight from the IMF the release of further revised-down forecasts, the fourth revision in a few months. The secretary-general has indicated that once again there will be a further revision down and is putting forward a much sharper contraction in the economy. That is the background to putting in place the Australian Business Investment Partnership, which we are doing with the best corporate governance, which has been put in place with the advice of some of the best minds in business.

Scott Morrison (Cook, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Housing and Local Government) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I raise a point of order on relevance. The question was: was the $500,000 a Ruddbank fee?

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, repeatedly members of the opposition are using purported points of order to make what are political points across the dispatch box. It is disorderly conduct, and disorderly conduct should be dealt with under the provisions of standing order 91.

Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Education, Apprenticeships and Training) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker—

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, I am in a position to rule and I really think delaying question time in this way then becomes disruptive. So the Manager of Opposition Business will resume his seat.

I understand the proposition that is being put to me but the decision about that, as I said earlier, is in my hands about whether it is being disruptive. But I really think that perhaps one of the things that the House could look at is that, when people are offered the opportunity to state a point of order, it is simply what the point of order is; it is not an opportunity to add. I will invite people if I need clarification. To paraphrase parts of a question is not in any way making the case of relevance—or not any more accurate. In fact, my concern about the particular point of order—and this gets to matters that have been discussed this week—is whether there is an inference that should be dealt with in some other form by the House in the part of the question that was highlighted by the member for Cook. The Treasurer is responding to the question and the Treasurer has the call.

Wayne Swan (Lilley, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The partnership’s lending decisions will not be made by politicians. There is an independent board which will use guidelines, which will use best practice. That is exactly what will happen. The honourable member opposite knows that but he is seeking to do the big smear. Whether it is the Economic Security Strategy, our Nation Building and Jobs Plan, our bank guarantee or now this partnership, or the motor vehicle partnership, they cannot support one positive initiative to support employment and growth in the Australian economy. So it will be on their heads if this vehicle is not established and the consequence is that someone who would have been eligible for funding cannot get it because they would not support it in the Senate. It will be on their heads.

This government has the guts to take the tough decisions. We took a decision yesterday on executive pay, a decision they could not take in 12 years. We will take the hard decisions. We have taken the hard decision with the bank guarantee. The member opposite knows that if it were not for the bank guarantee we would not have any stability at all in our financial sector. We took that decision and we took it early. We took the hard decision to put forward an Economic Security Strategy last October when most countries around the world were not even acting. Again in February we got ahead of the curve when we brought down the Nation Building and Jobs Plan, well before many other countries in the Western world. We did it because we understand the nature of this challenge, which will be underlined by the IMF forecast which will come out overnight.

Our conscience is clear. We will do what is right by the nation, and what is right by the nation is the measures we have taken, and we have taken them on the best possible advice. Those opposite are only acting in their political self-interest. They are not acting in the national interest, and they should be condemned.