Jim Chalmers (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. Last week, in a speech to The Sydney Institute, the finance minister said there would be $6.5 billion in savings in the omnibus bill. Yesterday, during question time, the Treasurer said it was $6.1 billion, but by later that afternoon he had lost another $107 million. What will the number be next week, and isn't this 'omnishambles' just more evidence that this bumbling Treasurer is completely incompetent?

Government Members:

Government members interjecting—

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Members on my right! The Treasurer does not have the call because the level of interjections is far too high.

Mr Frydenberg interjecting—

The Minister for the Environment and Energy is denying the Treasurer the call. The minister will cease interjecting. The Treasurer has the call.

Scott Morrison (Cook, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for his question. I refer him to my statement to the House yesterday and the revised explanatory memorandum for the bill to which I refer. But I have to update him on something else. At the last election the Labor Party put forward their fiscal plan and they claimed that an increased deficit—

Mr Burke interjecting—

You are going to interrupt me again. It is a common tactic.

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Before I call the Manager of Opposition Business, I remind him that the Treasurer is about 20 seconds into his answer, so he will need to state very clearly what the standing order is.

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, you will appreciate we have very rarely been calling on the relevance point of order, but it is a bit of a giveaway when he says, 'Let me talk about something else.'

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Manager of Opposition Business, I have not called you yet. I appreciate your statement that you have not been calling points of order on relevance in the one question time we have had. I now give you the call. Is your point of order relevance?

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes.

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is no point of order.

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker—

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Manager of Opposition Business will resume his seat. There is no point of order.

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

He said he wanted to talk about—

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You do not have the call. The Manager of Opposition Business will resume his seat or he will be going for walk. The Treasurer has the call.

Scott Morrison (Cook, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I was asked about the omnibus bill. The omnibus bill contains the measures that those opposite put in their forward estimates before the last election, and that is what I am referring to. Despite the fact that they had supported some $6 billion in savings, which are included in that bill, they went to the election claiming, in the fiscal summary they issued before the election, that the deficit would be no worse than $16.472 billion.

I have gone back to what the Parliamentary Budget Office actually reported after the election, and it turns out it was not quite as good as that. In fact, it was $16.6 billion. Those opposite, while they like to dwell on these matters, may wish to reflect on their own contributions to these issues. Going to the last election they said that they thought the best plan for Australia was to increase the deficit by $16.5 billion. They told the Australian people that. It turns out it was $16.6 billion, and there is a great and terrible risk of the approach that Labor was putting forward.

That is our view, but it is not just our view. Saul Eslake, an economist respected by those on that side of the House, said:

…it hardly seems sensible for a would-be Labor government to tolerate a significantly greater budget deficit over the next four years.

He also said, 'They are potentially risking the AAA credit rating if they outline significantly bigger deficits.' Now, that is exactly what they did.

Those opposite present a AAA threat to our economy, because they believe in higher taxes, higher spending and higher debt. The burden is on those opposite. Those savings are set out in that bill, which is the first of many bills that will come through this parliament that are designed to do one thing, arrest the debt. The Turnbull government is committed to arresting the debt that was left to us by those opposite, but those opposite have sat on that side of the House every single day and worked against us as we try to deal with the debt that they gifted to this government.