Peter Slipper (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have received letters from the honourable member for Chifley and the honourable member for North Sydney proposing that definite matters of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion today. As required by standing order 46, I have selected the matter which, in my opinion, is the most urgent and important; that is, that proposed by the honourable member for Chifley, namely:

The urgent need for responsible fiscal management in the upcoming budget to deliver real reforms for working people.

I call upon those members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places.

More than the number of members required by the standing orders having risen in their places—

Ed Husic (Chifley, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am pleased that we are discussing this matter of public importance today because it is critical for a whole range of reasons. We at this point in time are gearing up and the next time we come back here we will be discussing the federal budget. That federal budget will be delivered at a time when there is global uncertainty about the state of the economy. A few years ago, as a nation we were confronted by one of the worst economic circumstances in 75 years in the shape of the global financial crisis, where economies around the world were freezing up as a result of financial systems and where people simply did not trust each other with money. They did not trust each other in terms of lending money. As the banking system started to feel the reverberations of that, we saw in our case—particularly, for example, in the construction industry—projects faltering and not going ahead, and a serious concern about what would happen with jobs.

But, despite all that, as a result of the quick, thorough moves taken by this government that ensured that jobs would not be lost, we have now come out of it with solid growth. The economy is on track to grow at trend this year. We have an unemployment rate that is the envy of the world. It is 5.2 per cent here compared to about 10.7 per cent in Europe. In some parts of the world there is up to 20 per cent unemployment and large numbers of youth particularly, who are seeing the best years of their lives waste away because they are simply unable to find work. Here we have been able to bottle inflation, with underlying inflation sitting squarely in the Reserve Bank's target band and a cash rate sitting at 4.25 per cent, which is incredible when you consider in the 11 years that those opposite were in government how long they were able to even get that cash rate. It was about six months. Six months of 11 years is about as good as it got for those opposite. We have 4.25 per cent.

The Treasurer mentioned today—and it has been mentioned on a number of occasions—that when you look at how much investment is in the pipeline you will see that there is $455 billion in resources alone. The other great thing is that we have very low net debt. It is less than a 10th of the levels across major advanced economies. We will return the budget to surplus while keeping the tax to GDP ratio lower than the level that it reached at its peak when those opposite were on this side of the House. It is probably worth noting again that, when those opposite were sitting here, tax as a percentage of GDP was about 24 per cent; now, under us, it is down to 21 per cent.

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Why don't you look at expenditure as a percentage of GDP? That's a different story!

Ed Husic (Chifley, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Despite the impact of the ongoing turbulence that I mentioned earlier, our public finance is the strongest in the world. Let us go back to net debt. I heard the member for Bradfield interject. If you compare net debt and expenditure—let us look at net debt.

Mr Ruddock interjecting—

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Berowra and the member for Bradfield ought to know better.

Ed Husic (Chifley, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Net debt is expected to peak at 8.9 per cent of GDP in 2011-12. That, as I said, is less than one-tenth of the average net debt of major advanced economies, which is some 92.9 per cent of GDP. We will return to surplus light years ahead of major advanced economies.

Let us look at expenditure: through MYEFO we delivered a further $11.5 billion in new savings through spending cuts, building further on the $100 billion of savings across four budgets. Again, our record of fiscal discipline is there to be seen and has been endorsed by the international community. Our discipline has seen us get AAA credit ratings from all three global ratings agencies. That was never achieved by those opposite. They would have loved to have got it, but they never achieved it.

The IMF, the RBA and the global ratings agencies continue to back the strength of our position, that we will be getting back to surplus in 2012-13. Our fiscal settings have been endorsed by the IMF. Jorg Decressin, of the IMF, told ABC Radio National: 'where you have these strong investment plans in the pipeline, where the growth prospects are still quite good, this strikes me as appropriate.' That is the result of our being able to navigate our way through the worst economic circumstances in 75 years. We have seen jobs grow at a faster rate than anywhere else in the world, our overall growth rate is fantastic, we have bottled inflation and we have got net debt lower. We see the benefits.

What does that mean for my neck of the woods? Look at the types of things we have been able to achieve for my community in the course of the last few years. In my electorate unemployment is still stubbornly high and has been for years. There are a number of reasons for that: there are students who leave school way earlier than they should. They have decided that they will not go to university and so drop out of school. They get a job quickly, but are among the first to suffer whenever there are economic contractions. We are trying to build in students a personal bank of skills and we are doing that in a number of ways. I have been proud to see a number of trade training centres open up in my neck of the woods. Trade training centres open up education pathways for students who are necessarily interested in staying longer at school and who might otherwise have placed themselves in a vulnerable position for the future.

Earlier this year, we announced the investment of $1 million into a new trade training centre in Mount Druitt for Chifley College Senior Campus. This is part of an overall $2.5 billion program to help build schools and upgrade trade training facilities and comes on top of the $15 million spent in the Chifley electorate alone on a trade training centre for Doonside and Evans high schools, which, I was pleased to see, was opened by the Deputy Prime Minister and Treasurer. A trade training centre was opened last year at Tyndale Christian school. Loyola Senior High School, in Mount Druitt, has always had a strong tradition of providing students who do not want to go on to university with opportunities to learn a trade. The trade training centre at the school, which I toured recently, and which the member for Kingsford Smith came out and saw, is very close to being opened. It will include an automotive centre and cater for electrical apprenticeships, hospitality and hairdressing.

These centres match skills that are required in the local area, as advised, for example, by industry groups such as the National Electrical Contractors Association. These groups are working hand in glove with schools such as Loyola to make sure that we have schools that can train people up for jobs that are waiting for them. You cannot do that if your budget finances are not in order. You cannot do it if your values do not look at what will best help people on the ground, particularly in Western Sydney. That is the case whether it be through building trade training centres or, for example, setting up homes for vulnerable Australians who live in my area.

We have built 259 new homes under the Social Housing Initiative; they are providing safe and secure accommodation for my community's most vulnerable people. These are people who sleep in cars, with friends or with family. Over the course of the last few years we have been able to build new homes for these vulnerable people. We have also ensured that about 30,000 people in my electorate who earn under $37,000 a year will pay no tax on superannuation. That will help hardworking people such as mums who might be working part time, contract cleaners, shop assistants, childcare workers, hairdressers and aged-care and disability workers. All these people on low incomes, because of the low-income superannuation contribution, will not pay tax on their superannuation. If they currently pay up to $500 a year in tax, they will save more for their retirement. Again, these are good things that are a result of the financial management and fiscal discipline that we have demonstrated.

On top of that, we have been able to see 1,000 former students take up places in 2012 to work as GP registrars in hospitals and doctors' surgeries in urban and rural areas across the country. The Minister for Health visited the Chifley electorate recently to announce that initiative. In an area where we experience workplace shortages, where people sometimes have to wait an hour to see a GP, we are bringing on line more doctors to make sure that we can cut those times and make sure that people can get to see a doctor. That is on top of the $20 million we have invested in Blacktown hospital, which services the electorates of Greenway, Chifley and Parramatta, to make sure we train in Western Sydney doctors who will stay in Western Sydney. You cannot do that if you do not have the fiscal discipline necessary to ensure that you can deliver those types of programs.

Again, on our side of the fence we have demonstrated the ability to manage our finances and get triple-A credit ratings from all three major agencies. We have been able to achieve higher growth, lower unemployment and inflation contained. We are in a minority government and the pressure is on for both sides to demonstrate their ability to manage finances. I have outlined already what we have been able to do. Those opposite do not have a proud record in demonstrating how they would manage their finances.

You may recall that yesterday I referred to the fact that, when the razor gang of those opposite were meeting in August of last year, a figure had to be put to them for the savings they would need to find. The figure was different for all of the principals in that meeting. That was deliberately done, not in the interests of economic policy but in the interests of finding out who, on their side of the fence, was leaking. A figure of $70 billion was deliberately put out there. As a result of that, we have a situation where those opposite—who could not even last year find $6 billion in savings because they claimed we did not need a flood levy in response to the worst natural disasters that Queensland had faced in living memory—were unable to find savings of their own, but now think that they can find $70 billion in savings.

As I pointed out yesterday, they have been working very hard and long, late at night, to try and find those savings. The member for Goldstein, I think, proudly announced—and I will stand corrected if I am wrong—that in terms of trying to find that $70 billion in savings they had reached for what always gets reached for when you are trying to demonstrate you have been able to discover some sort of waste or mismanagement: they found $50 million in government consultancies. Fantastic work that! $50 million in consultancies—

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

It was $500 million!

Ed Husic (Chifley, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It was $500 million? You know what, Member for North Sydney? I will give that to you. So that is $69,500 million to go in finding savings. What does $70 billion mean? As we have previously said, that is like stopping Medicare payments for four years, aged pensions for two years, assistance to people with disabilities for three years, or family tax benefit payments for three years. It requires savings equivalent to 1½ times GST revenue for a year.

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

Come on, Ed—you're better than this!

Ed Husic (Chifley, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Member for North Sydney, I would be interested to find out where you are able to find those savings. The member the North Sydney interjects and says that I am better than this. But, Member for North Sydney, we do not run our ERC on the basis of entrapment! You deliberately hand out different figures amongst yourselves to see who the leaker is. Who manages an economy that way? If in opposition they behave that way, how do you expect them to manage a $1.4 trillion economy? That is what they have to do. They have been unable to demonstrate that level of discipline.

I think the biggest thing, too, that needs to be explained is getting $4 million in support from one particular person and then pushing as hard as you can to get rid of all the revenue gained out of the minerals resource rent tax. You have another serious problem there. You have Clive Palmer effectively helping run the coalition's economic policy when you have the biggest—

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Chifley will resume his seat! I was almost going to say, at the end of his speech, that he had stayed within the reference rules. Member for North Sydney, are you seeking the call?

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

No, I was just having a wander, actually.

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You were 'just having a wander'! You have upset me. I have sat him down. Member for Chifley, go, but relevancy would be good.

Ed Husic (Chifley, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

He has to walk around. He is always walking around trying to find savings!

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Don't go to the dispatch box, though!

Ed Husic (Chifley, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

He has a big job and I want him to be fit, because he is going to have a hard job finding $70 billion in savings. (Time expired)

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

Thank you, Member for Chifley, for caring about my good health! I am delighted the member for Chifley has chosen to debate the need for responsible fiscal management. I could not have chosen a more appropriate topic on the last sitting day before the presentation of the 2012-13 budget.

The main focus of the coalition in this budget will be on whether the government actually can deliver an underlying cash surplus in 2012-13—not whether they promise a surplus but whether they can actually deliver a surplus—and we will not know that until September 2013.

Australians would be wise to subject the budget's numbers to particularly close scrutiny, as we will do. The bottom line is that the budget numbers, no matter what they are, simply cannot be believed. The government has an appalling record in forecasting its budget and economic numbers. There has been a massive error in forecasting this year's budget deficit. The 2010-11 MYEFO forecast a deficit of $12 billion. Six months later the forecast budget deficit was $23 billion. Six months after that the forecast budget deficit was $37 billion. That is a blow-out of over 200 per cent in a budget deficit in just 12 months. And the Treasurer says, 'Well, this is all the GFC.' In fact, there is a whole lot of expenditure going towards increasing the budget deficit, such as the expenditure associated with the carbon tax and the money the government is choosing to spend this financial year rather than next financial year.

The end result may be even worse. The current estimate of a surplus next year is based on a massive increase in tax receipts for the Commonwealth. In fact, the Commonwealth currently projects a $38 billion increase in receipts between this year and next year. That is based in part on ongoing high commodity prices. This is now looking unrealistic. Economic commentator David Uren has observed that, if company tax receipts perform as poorly in the June half year as they did in December, the government could face a deficit of $50 billion in this current year—$50 billion! That would be the second-highest deficit on record, exceeded only by Labor's previous spectacular effort—a $55 billion deficit in 2009-10.

The economic growth numbers on which the budget is based have also been all over the place. The 2010 budget forecast real GDP growth at an above-trend four per cent in 2011-12. Six months later in the MYEFO it was revised down to 3¾ per cent. Six months after that, the growth figure was revised back up to four per cent, and the latest forecast is that it is back down—this time to 3¼ per cent. So up down, up down, up down—they are the economic growth forecasts from this government over the last two years. Now, even that estimate looks too high. Growth has averaged under 2½ per cent for the first two quarters of this financial year, and it will take a mighty rebound to get anywhere near the forecast growth figure.

The most damaging example of Labor's budgetary incompetence and bungles is of course the mining tax. This has now been through five versions. The original RSPT was predicted to raise $12 billion over four years. The compromise negotiated by the real Three Stooges—the Prime Minister, the Minister for Resources and Energy and the Treasurer—was forecast to be $10.5 billion. Then we had the 2010-11 MYEFO, which said it was $7.4 billion. The 2011-12 budget said it went back up, to $11.1 billion. Then, the last MYEFO said it was back down to $10.6 billion. Even these numbers seem dodgy, because the government has not taken into account the nearly $1 billion impact of the increase in mining royalties from the New South Wales government.

This government claimed that it had not been informed of the change in the royalty regime in New South Wales. The only thing is, it was in the New South Wales budget papers. It was released in the New South Wales budget. There was a press release from the New South Wales government. But this government chooses to ignore all that and says they just were not told about this increase in royalties. Therefore their numbers, according to them, stand. We had the extraordinary situation earlier this week with the Treasurer saying on Radio National that the difference between the first mining tax and the second mining tax was not $60 billion and that a 10-year estimate was never produced by Treasury, and within four hours we released to the Treasurer his own Treasury document that said there was a $60 billion hole and that there were 10-year estimates. The Treasurer had that on his own website, and he denied that it existed. Not only have the invention, creation, development and implementation of the mining tax been a shambles but I can assure the House that, when the budget comes around and we try to find the revenue figures actually delivered by the mining tax, there will be yet another Labor Party black hole.

Labor continues to boast about spending commitments worth tens of billions of dollars, but they are unfunded or not included in the budget bottom line. This includes the $50 billion National Broadband Network and the $10 billion Clean Energy Finance Corporation. These programs are funded by additional borrowed money which will take the Commonwealth gross debt position to over $250 billion. In addition, the government has refused to explain where the money is coming from for 12 new submarines, costing $36 billion; the Commonwealth's 30 per cent share of the Gonski education plan, starting at $5 billion a year; up to $6½ billion each year for the National Disability Insurance Scheme; or for its promise to the Greens to have a dental program, which could cost $4 billion a year. On top of this there are structural holes, as I have pointed out many times, in the carbon and mining taxes which amount to more than $6 billion over the next three years.

It is only the Labor Party that could introduce new taxes and leave the budget worse off. They are the only people capable of introducing new taxes, increasing taxes, and somehow making the budget worse off, with a bigger deficit. This unfunded hole is now well over $100 billion. In addition, future governments—I suspect we will be one of them—will have to find $136 billion to repay just the principal on Labor's debt. Labor's debt is going to cost Australians $8 billion a year in interest alone. On current numbers, it will take 63 years to repay this government's $136 billion of net debt. Where is the member for Longman? He will be getting a letter from King William on the occasion of his 100th birthday when Labor finally gets this debt paid off.

Labor has also been moving money around in the budget. My colleague the shadow finance minister provided last Friday a full account of the trickery engaged in by the government, and I will mention just a few examples. Labor will spend just over $1 billion this year to support energy markets through its Energy Security Fund. It will also spend just over $1 billion on guaranteeing our energy security in 2013-14 and $1 billion in 2014-15. But there is a big gap. It is a billion dollars on energy security this year; next year it is not a billion dollars—they have deleted the 'b' and put in an 'm': it is a million dollars. But, then, the year after it is a billion dollars and the year after that it is a billion dollars. So what is the deep, dark valley that represents a billion-dollar hole in the Energy Security Fund in 2012-13? It must be going towards their so-called surplus. But it is not real. It is unbelievable. There is a billion dollars this year, a million dollars the next year, and a billion dollars in each of the two years after that, and that represents accounting trickery.

Another example is that Labor's coal sector jobs package will spend $222 million this year, $10 million next year, $247 million the year after and $257 million the year after that. So this year it is a quarter of a billion dollars, next year it will cost only $10 million but the year after that it is a quarter of a billion and the year after that is a quarter of a billion.

Philip Ruddock (Berowra, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They're not cooking the books, are they?

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

I do not believe they are cooking the books; I think they have cooked the books. They are not cooking; they have been burned in the microwave. It is amazing! The government brought forward the disaster relief payments for Queensland at $1.4 billion. That means it is spent this year, and the deficit gets worse this year. They have brought forward $1.4 billion on infrastructure spending for New South Wales, Queensland, Victoria and South Australia. It was meant to be next year but it is now this year, and they have been engaging in other tricks in other areas.

This chicanery all adds up. This trickery all adds up. What it means is that the government is trying to make this year's deficit worse. Next year, they are going to claim to have a surplus, but the problem is that they have built in structural expenditure. In the year after and the year after that and all the years after that the spending gets larger and the debt burden gets higher. All they are trying to do is trick the Australian people into believing that they will have a sustainable surplus next year when the truth is that they are building tricks into the budget.

The other thing we will be looking for on budget night is new or increased taxes. I know it is hard to believe, but the Labor Party loves new taxes. They love increased taxes—in fact they have had 20 of them since they were elected in 2007. Of the $22 billion in announced saving measures in the last budget, a third were from new or increased taxes. As I have said before, the $38 billion surge towards a surplus in the coming year is overwhelmingly higher taxes.

We will also be looking for waste. Where in its $370 billion of expenditure is the government finding the savings and cutting back? We all know the story: a $1.7 billion blow-out on school halls, $2.4 billion wasted on pink batts, $900 cheques going to dead people or to people living overseas, a $1.4 billion blow-out in laptops in schools, an $850 million blow-out in the solar homes program, $300 million wasted in green loans programs and they are giving set-top boxes to people at up to $1,500 each when Gerry Harvey said that he would personally go around and install them for $170. Only this government would do it.

There is the broadband costing of $50 billion with no business plan, and what about $40 million for bike paths? Leo McLeay would have loved having a proper and decent bike path, wouldn't he? As we heard in question time, the government is spending $145,000 to study sleeping snails; $340,000 to see whether climate change is affecting the fiddler crabs; and $314,000 to see whether birds are shrinking—they are certainly not Ingham's chickens. They are not shrinking, are they? They are all on the 'roids'. No, they are not. Last but not least, there is $578,000 to research an ignored credit instrument in Florentine economic, social and religious life in the 1500s.

This is the Labor way: waste of taxpayers' money and absolute disregard for the hard work and effort of everyday Australians who have to pay that tax. This is the Labor way: chicanery and trickery in the budget numbers in order to try to fiddle the surplus promised for the next financial year by moving money around—but at the end of the day there is the structural expenditure. This is the Labor way: to make promises that are not delivered—and the promises that are made are never kept. It is the Labor way to be dishonest with the Australian people not just about the carbon tax, not just about the events on Australia Day this year involving the tent embassy and not just about the member for Dobell; it is the Labor way to be dishonest about the state of the nation's accounts. What that leaves is a nation bewildered by its incompetent government, a nation that does not understand the lack of direction out of Canberra and a nation that does not have the confidence to grow as its destiny determines. (Time expired)

Stephen Jones (Throsby, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am very grateful to the member for Chifley for raising this matter of public importance in the parliament today because, after a very long parliamentary session, we have found it very difficult to find a matter of public importance raised by the other side. It falls to Labor and this side of the House to talk about the issues that are important to the Australian people, that should be debated in this parliament. The Leader of the House demonstrated forcefully today the number of hours that have been wasted by those opposite on spurious suspensions of standing orders so that the Leader of the Opposition could get up, day-in and day-out, and sometimes twice a day, to raise his stunts, to absolutely no effect—wasting the time of the parliament. If you want to talk about waste of taxpayers' dollars, just think about the amount of waste that has been caused by the Leader of the Opposition and the Manager of Opposition Business in the House coming in here day after day, wasting important parliamentary time, suspending standing orders and preventing us from talking about the issues that really are the matters of public importance in this House. So I am very grateful to my friend the member for Chifley for raising this matter of public importance—ensuring that we have fiscal responsibility as we approach the 2012-13 budget.

While the opposition is spending their time on stunts, the government is getting on with the important business of government. If there were a week in this parliamentary schedule when that could not have been more clear it is the week we have just gone through. The government has introduced and seen through this parliament some spectacularly important legislation, all of it opposed by those opposite because it is in their DNA is to say no to everything.

They said no to safe rates. They said no to ensuring that, when we and our families and friends get in our cars and share the roads with heavy vehicles, we have a safe motoring and a safe trucking industry. They say they cannot see the link between the number of hours a truck driver has to spend on the road and how safe the working conditions are for that truck driver. They beggar belief. That legislation was supported by this side of the House and all right-thinking Australians but was opposed by those opposite. We saw introduced into the House this week important maritime legislation. There, in the 11 years of government—

Bert Van Manen (Forde, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise on a point of order. Looking at the wording of this matter of public importance—

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Forde will resume his seat. Although the issue of relevance does apply, MPIs are always wide-ranging debates.

Stephen Jones (Throsby, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am simply making the point that when we are discussing matters of public importance—the importance of ensuring that we have responsible fiscal management—it should be seen in the light of the broader of context of what we are trying to do on this side of the House and in the light of the frippery and the stunts which seem to dominate the obsession of those on the other side of the House.

It is seen in their attitude to the important maritime legislation, including the changes in taxation arrangements which will form part of the 2012-13 budget, which was introduced by the Leader of the House, the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, this week. No doubt, that will be opposed by those on the other side of the House, because their idea of a maritime policy was to pull on a damaging one-month strike and confrontation with the maritime union. That strike had us in the High Court and had the nation's ports crammed up and jammed for several months. That is their idea of a maritime policy, while on this side of the House we believe that it is in the national interest to have a shipping line—to have Australian owned and operated ships—and that it is in the national interest that we have a trained domestic workforce that is able to work on those ships.

That is why in this budget and in the legislation before the House today we are putting in place tax incentives and other measures to ensure that we have an Australian shipping industry and that we have Australian workers working on those Australian ships. Those on the other side of the House put in place tax arrangements and other laws which encouraged foreign ships with foreign workers to ply the coastal trade around our great trading nation.

With regard to superannuation, we on this side of the House are introducing laws to ensure that workers get a real shift in their superannuation from nine per cent to 12 per cent. Those on the other side of the House are voting against that. They have form: in their 11 years in government the ordinary Australian men and women—wage and salary earners—never saw an increase in their superannuation as a result of any laws passed by those on the other side of the House, because they are opposed to dignity in retirement and retirement savings for ordinary Australian men and women.

I will move, now, to tax cuts. As a result of the legislation that we are moving in the House you will see 2.7 million small businesses in this country enjoying a tax cut—a tax cut opposed by those on the other side of the House. The reason that it is important that we have responsible fiscal management is that we can do things for pensioners. We have made historic reforms to the indexation of the pension system. That was something that was neglected by those on the other side of the House. In their 11 years in government they had a blind spot for the pensioners of this country.

When the economy was raining gold bars, do you think they could find it their dark hearts to properly index the pension systems in this country? It was beyond them. They opposed that. We on this side of the House are seeing through their stunts and their frippery and introducing important reforms, including the National Broadband Network. It is opposed by all of those members of the other side of the House when they are here in Canberra, but when they get back to their electorates they cannot love it enough. Liberal and National Party member after Liberal and National Party member are rushing back to their electorates and signing off letters to the minister. They are giving great speeches in their electorates about how they are working hard to ensure that they get the National Broadband Network in their electorates.

They talk a lot about deficits on that side of the House, but here is one deficit that you will not hear them talk about—that is, the $60 billion infrastructure deficit that we inherited when we came to government in 2007. You would think that the members opposite who represent rural and regional electorates would get this issue. You would think that in 11 years of government those National Party members would have found their voices and said, 'What are we doing while the economy is raining gold bars? Why aren't we spending money on the ports and on the rail and road networks of this country?' They could not find their voices. They were silenced in the coalition. They have found their voices now, but in the 11 years of government there was not a whisper, not a squeak, from the rural and regional members of the coalition parties.

We will bring the budget back into surplus. Labor will introduce a budget in May this year, which will be back in surplus. We will do that because we have put in place tight fiscal rules—tight fiscal discipline—in a way that was unknown to those on the other side of the House when they were in government. When it was raining gold bars they could not send the money out the door quickly enough. In fact, if you listen to those on the other side of the House, you hear that they say, 'We have a philosophy of introducing surpluses. Irrespective of the economic conditions, we will introduce surpluses.'

Pause for a moment and think about what that means. It means that the philosophy on that side of the House is that they are committed to taxing Australians more than the government actually needs to. That is what they are committed to doing. That is why the tax-to-GDP ratio while we have been in government has decreased from the high of 24.2 per cent when those opposite were in government to 21.2 per cent now that we are in government.

So I thank the member for Chifley for bringing this important matter of public importance before the House, because it is in stark contrast to what we have seen from them all week and all year.

Scott Buchholz (Wright, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The MPI that I speak on today is the urgent need for responsible fiscal management in the upcoming budget to deliver real reforms for working people. We should change the title of this segment from MPI to 'The Comedy Hour', because what we heard from the member for Throsby was absolutely comical. Before coming to this place I was a successful transport operator in Queensland. Prior to that, I was a banker. Being part of the Liberal family on this side of the House, every day I welcome the opportunity to debate the fiscal management of this country and I welcome the opportunity to let Australians hear not the spin that Labor would have you believe but the real facts about how this economy could be run better.

Before I speak about a couple of things I want to pick up one of the points that was made by the member for Chifley about Australia's AAA credit rating. This is interesting for people to get their heads around. Why do we have a AAA credit rating at the moment when we have record debt and enormous deficits? When we were in government, we had money in the bank and no debt. Wouldn't we have been in a stronger position compared to today, when we have a heap of debt and no capacity to repay it? Why do have a better credit rating today than we had then? I will tell you why: Standard and Poor's and Moody's have what are called comparative credit ratings. Australia is compared to the rest of the world. As the major economies around the globe have softened—they have basically gone to hell in a hand basket—that has increased Australia's comparative position. That is why we have a AAA credit rating. I can assure you that the false hypnotic phrases that come from this government in reference to their fiscal management are a joke.

I would also like to bring your attention to the comment made earlier this week by the member for Chifley. He said that Labor will have the fastest fiscal consolidation in four decades. That is all this government can do: talk about what is going to happen; the old 'gunna', 'what we will do'. They cannot talk about their track record, because their track record is pretty ordinary. And I will get to the amount of debt and deficits, because I know that the member for Throsby is interested to know about some of the records that his government has been in charge of: record debt and record deficit.

When it comes to the fastest fiscal consolidation in four decades, I want to break down for you what fiscal consolidation is: it is the capacity for a government to pay back debt. With reference to Labor and its out-of-control spending, one can draw an analogy that their fastest fiscal consolidation—which may happen sometime in the future—is similar to a contestant going on TheBiggest Loser after jamming 50 kilos on in order to rip it off quicker. A fast fiscal consolidation by this Labor government will only be a result of the enormous blow-out in their spending.

Let us talk about the suggestion that they will have the capacity to make these changes or have a surplus down the track. In order to understand whether they have the capacity to forecast such things and whether they have integrity—in order for us to be able to take what they say at face value—we need to go back and have a look at their track record of forecasting. Let us go back just over 12 months to the MYEFO books—and for those people who are here in the gallery, MYEFO stands for Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook. These guys should get a copy of it from time to time.

Stephen Jones (Throsby, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Madam Deputy Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The member for Wright should address his comments through the chair.

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Wright should address his comments through the chair, because I do not think that I have been doing the things that he is talking about and the use of the word 'you' is not accepted. By now, all new members should be aware of that. The member for Wright has the call.

Scott Buchholz (Wright, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I can understand wholeheartedly why the member for Throsby would feel a little ruffled by the comments that he is hearing at the moment. The Labor Party, 12 to 18 months ago, forecast that their budget deficit—the one that is coming up real soon; in a couple of weeks—was going to be $12 billion. These people want us to believe that they have the capacity to forecast. They said that it was going to be $12 billion. Six months later, in the budget figures it was $12.6 billion. That is just a lazy $600 million—they got it wrong by that much.

But that is not all; there are steak knives with this deal as well. In the recent MYEFO documents, that $12.6 billion went to $22 billion. And now it is at $37 billion. That is the capacity of this government, which wants to stand on a stage and talk about fiscal responsibility, to forecast over a period of just over 12 months. They cannot hit the side of a barn when it comes to forecasting deficits.

We have seen in the last parliamentary sitting period three common traits in the bills that have come before the House. Firstly, the majority of the bills that have come before the House somehow end up giving more power to their union mates; secondly, they take money out of the pockets of mums and dads and small businesses, and I will explain to you how they do that; and, thirdly, somewhere woven into the bill is more bureaucracy and more compliance measures—you can bet on that. The Australian Labor Party do not get it. They do not understand the business pressures out there at the moment.

I want to bring your attention to the mining tax and some of the benefits that the Labor Party are boasting about, such as the changes to the company tax rate. I am glad that you are here, Billy. What is your seat?

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Financial Services and Superannuation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister!

Scott Buchholz (Wright, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister Bill.

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Member for Wright.

Scott Buchholz (Wright, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am glad that the Minister for Financial Services and Superannuation is in the House to hear these comments. The company tax rate is going to go from 30 per cent to 29 per cent, a one per cent decrease. We have taken a bit of heat over opposing that. I want to share with you why we oppose that. I asked the guys in my office to ring some of the businesses within a couple of kilometres of my office. These are actual figures and I want you to get your head around them. A bloke who has a building supply business has a payroll of $570,000. Last year his taxable income with $40,000. What that means is that he will get a company tax cut of $400 but will potentially be facing a $17,100 increase in his superannuation liability. This government would have you think that they are paying for that superannuation increase. I can assure you that it will be coming out of the pockets of the small businesses and the hardworking mums, dads and families of my electorate of Wright. Then we went around the other corner and found the motor mechanic. He has a payroll of $500,000 and a taxable income of $75,000. What is his benefit? The hand goes into the pocket and he gets his $750, but the potential super liability out of the other pocket is $15,000. Do the maths: over the six-year period that comes to $15,000. You cannot have a three per cent increase and not have it cost anything. It has got to cost something.

Government members interjecting—

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Wright will return to the MPI and stop encouraging misbehaviour in the chamber.

Honourable members interjecting—

Scott Buchholz (Wright, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am the junior here! I am getting bashed up! I thought you would be my saviour!

Do not just take my word for it when it comes to the management of the fiscal policy of this nation. You do not have to look any further than this morning's Australian Financial Review. We have the government saying how wonderful their fiscal responsibility is, how diligent their economic management is and what a wonderful state our nation is in. Well, one of the jewels in the crown of Australian retail, David Jones, is mentioned in headlines this morning on the front page of the Australian Financial Review. The headline reads 'DJs in fight for survival'. It says a lot when you get comments like that coming from David Jones, which is a true indicator of the real retail sector in this nation. Mr Paul Zahra, CEO, said:

These are the toughest retail conditions that I've even seen in my career and I've been in retailing for 30 years.

How is it that we have a Labor government insisting that things are just a bed of roses, but some of the biggest retailers are struggling to keep their heads above water. David Jones has forecast a downgrading of profits to the tune of 40 per cent.

This government's capacity to forecast is nothing short of outstanding when you have a look at their capacity back through MYEFO and the budget! Now the government will get up and continue to 'spin, spin, spin', but they have continually failed to forecast the stats— (Time expired)

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The discussion is now concluded.