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

Mr Speaker, I wish to make a personal explanation.

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

Does the honourable member claim to have been misrepresented?

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

I do.

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

Please proceed.

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

During question time, the Minister for Finance and Deregulation claimed that my colleagues and I were lying about his statement that ‘dotting the i’s and crossing the t’s did not matter’. I refer the House to the interview between David Speers and Lindsay Tanner yesterday on Sky News PM Agenda. David Speers said:

In the rush to stimulate jobs at the time of the global financial crisis when it hit, in hindsight would not some pause have been worthwhile to look at what some of these problems could result in?

Lindsay Tanner:

Obviously, those things have been taken into account. The minister—

meaning the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and the Arts—

and his department have been on the ball on the implementation challenges, but we have had some difficulties in this program. But I don’t think it’s right—

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

Mr Speaker, a point of order: the member for North Sydney knows full well that he has to go directly to where he has been misrepresented. He has been talking for two minutes.

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

The member will conclude his personal explanation.

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

There is only one more sentence and then I am finished. I repeat that Lindsay Tanner said:

Obviously those things have been taken into account. The minister and his department have been on the ball on the implementation challenges, but we have had some difficulties in this program. But I don’t think it’s right to say that we should have sat back and said, ‘Well, hang on a second, let’s focus on some of the dotting of the i’s and crossing of the t’s,’ because we’re in a crisis situation.

Lindsay Tanner (Melbourne, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I wish to make a personal explanation.

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

Does the honourable member claim to have been misrepresented?

Lindsay Tanner (Melbourne, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I do. And it has just been repeated in the most recent statement.

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

Please proceed.

Lindsay Tanner (Melbourne, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In question time today, the Leader of the Opposition stated that I had said yesterday that the government could not be expected to dot its i’s and cross its t’s with respect to the administration of the insulation program. As those who are listening might have noted in what was just read out by the member for North Sydney, I was asked a specific question about delaying decisions with regard to the government stimulus matters, and the question related to: why didn’t the government deal with issues such as the risk association with metal fasteners at the time it made these decisions? My answer was: these are matters for implementation, rightly to be dealt with by the minister and the department, and this was not a reason for delaying those decisions. So the interpretation that is being placed on my statement by the member for North Sydney and the Leader of the Opposition is totally false.