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

My question is to the Treasurer. I refer the Treasurer to the statement today in Senate estimates by climate change departmental officials that Treasury had ignored market prices for market traded carbon tax revenue forecasts and instead chose a straight-line method that shows revenue going up and up and up even though the market is going down and down and down. Given that the government has used market prices for commodities and currencies and so on, Treasurer, where has this novel new straight-line methodology come from and can you name the economists that support it? (Time expired)

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

I thank the shadow Treasurer for his question. Here they go again, attacking the Treasury and attacking Treasury officials. We have seen it for weeks and weeks and weeks. They go out there and attack Treasury officials because that is going to be their smokescreen for their failure to put forward any detailed, costed policy for the future. Now when the Secretary of the Treasury went out last week, he ripped away the last remaining fig leaf from the shadow Treasurer and made it very clear that the forecasts that are in the budget are the forecasts of our professional advisers, the same people who advised those opposite when they were in government. And this question is simply at piece with their continued attack on the professionalism of the Treasury because they have never forgiven the Department of the Treasury and the department of finance for blowing the whistle on their $11 billion hole after the last election. All that this is about is sour grapes, but it is something much more than that—

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

On a point of order, Madam Speaker, the Treasurer was asked about his groundbreaking new straight-line methodology for estimates forecasts of the budget. He says to stop attacking the Treasury, but he is obsessed with—

Ms Anna Burke (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Manager of Opposition Business will resume his seat. The Treasurer has the call and will return to the question before the chair.

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

This is an out-and-out attack on the Treasury, on the professional advice that they provide to the government, because they will not put forward costed policies as we go through to the next election because they know if the Australian people know what they are going to do no-one would ever vote for them. And that is what this is all about: hiding very big cuts which will go right to the bone and trying to get through an election campaign without detailing in a costed way their policies. They now have a secure bottom line. There is nothing to stop those opposite, if they think the government is spending too much, to detail how much they will cost. There is nothing to stop it right now from walking into this House and doing that in the context of these figures which—

Ms Anna Burke (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Treasurer will be relevant to the question.

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

It is very clear what sort of agenda we are dealing with here. It is an agenda to attack the Treasury and its professional officials. The fact is the shadow Treasurer is referring to projections in the forward estimates, and it is entirely professional for the Treasury to do it that way.

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

On a supplementary question, given that the climate change department secretary said questions about the 'pros and cons of the modelling needed to be directed to the Treasury' and given that the Treasurer said 'no other government in our history has done what we have done in the recent budget', Treasurer, when will you deliver an honest budget?

Ms Anna Burke (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is out of order.

Geoff Lyons (Bass, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for School Education, Early Childhood and Youth. Will the minister update the House on how the government is investing in all Australian schools to build a smarter and fairer nation and what would be the impact if the government's record investment did not flow through to our schools?

Peter Garrett (Kingsford Smith, Australian Labor Party, Minister for School Education, Early Childhood and Youth) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Bass who, like Labor members on this side, has seen such incredible investment in education in his electorate: $86 million, 25 classrooms, seven libraries, seven science or language centres refurbished, four trades training centres, eight schools benefiting in Bass, 7,200 families benefiting from the Labor schoolkids bonus that Mr Abbott wants to take away. So the budget did make a clear choice about investing in a national plan for school improvement. We choose to invest $9.8 billion in the future. Add that to states' investment and you will get over $14 billion in additional investment in schools around Australia linked to the reforms that we know make such a big difference in schools. So I welcome the Tasmanian Labor government's decision to allocate some extra resource funding in the state budget for school reforms. If they agree on a national plan for school improvement with the Commonwealth with the amounts that we put in here, Tasmanian schools would see about an extra $400 million in funding over the future for things like literacy and numeracy coaches, homework clubs and the like, things that are entirely geared to making sure that Tasmania has got a well-trained, well-educated workforce for the high-skilled jobs of the future.

I am asked about the impact on this investment and what happens if it does not flow, which of course is the policy of those opposite. The fact is that Tasmanian students will not get that support under Mr Abbott's proposals at the moment. There has been a lot of confusion about the opposition's views on education and the National Plan for School Improvement but I could not help but notice their discussion paper called Building a strong, prosperous Tasmania. The Leader of the Opposition put together a working group, went down to Tasmania and listened to the community to come up with a vision for the future.

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

On a point of order, Madam Speaker, the minister was not asked about the opposition's policies at all. He certainly is not responsible for the Tasmanian state or the Tasmanian package. He has to answer the question he was asked or sit down.

Ms Anna Burke (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Manager of Opposition Business will resume his seat. The member for Bass got to ask his question and the minister has the call.

Peter Garrett (Kingsford Smith, Australian Labor Party, Minister for School Education, Early Childhood and Youth) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

So it was a paper called Building a strong, prosperous Tasmania. I had a quick look at it. Now who would be surprised that, following a consultation by the Leader of the Opposition, there is not one mention of education or schools in this paper at all—not one? The link between education and prosperity has not dropped into their thinking over there.

Dr Jensen interjecting—

Ms Anna Burke (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order, if the member for Tangney wants to stay till after question time!

Peter Garrett (Kingsford Smith, Australian Labor Party, Minister for School Education, Early Childhood and Youth) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If we want a fairer and smarter nation, we know that one of the surest ways to get us on that path is to invest in education, and that is what the debate in this parliament is about, that is what Gonski is about and that is what our plan for the future is about: investing in a national plan for school education so that the kids in our schools get good jobs in the future, not about cutting education to the bone like Mr Abbott wants to do.