House debates
Wednesday, 12 October 2016
Questions without Notice
Budget
2:41 pm
Tanya Plibersek (Sydney, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
My question is to the Treasurer. It is now three years since this government took office. When will the government take responsibility for blowing out the 2015-2016 deficit by over eight times in that period? You have octupled it.
Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Members on my left, you have made your point. I think everyone has got the point. You can put your hands down now.
2:42 pm
Scott Morrison (Cook, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
We are still waiting for the four years of surpluses that the member for Lilley apparently delivered. Apparently he delivered them all those years ago and I am trying to remember—where did I hear about those four budget surpluses that we announced tonight—all four of them. I remember reading about them in their newsletters. They announced them and went round their communities and talked about the surpluses they had provided—
Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
The member for Barton is warned. The level of interjections is far too high on both sides. I have cautioned members on my left—
Mr Pyne interjecting—
The Leader of the House will cease interjecting. I have told him a number of times not to interject when I am addressing the House. He operates under the same rules as everyone else. I have given a warning to those on my left. I am warning those on my right. The level of interjections is far too high. If there is a continuation of it, members will be ejected from the chamber.
Scott Morrison (Cook, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Since this government came to office in 2013, the level of nominal expenditure on payments by the government—
Ms Plibersek interjecting—
Scott Morrison (Cook, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
which was set out in the 2013 PEFO—payments by the government—were $424.9 billion. That was the estimate for the 2015-16 year. The actual amount of payments in the 2016 PEFO was $425 billion. So this is a government that has ensured that we have controlled expenditure. Indeed, the budget that I handed down in May, based on the final budget outcome figures, will see expenditure as a share of the economy fall from 25.7 per cent to 25.2 per cent.
Those opposite are calling for higher taxes on the Australian people. There is a reason why they will not support the government's budget measures—it is because the government's budget measures—some $25 billion of measures—are overwhelmingly in the area of cutting and ensuring that government expenditure is brought under control. Those opposite will not show the discipline they need to get government spending under control as they allowed government spending to blow out to record levels on their watch, and they saw the deficit blowout and the debt blowout. They refuse to engage with the government on the serious job—
Ms Plibersek interjecting—
Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
The member for Sydney, this is your final warning.
Scott Morrison (Cook, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
of fiscal budget repair—of getting government expenditure under control. So what do they do? They say, 'Don't worry about expenditure, just lift taxes on all Australians.' They say to lift taxes on police officers—one in five police officers use negative gearing just to ensure that they can build up a nest egg for their financial futures—or the nurses or the teachers or the Defence Force personnel. Those opposite say: 'No, we're not going to get expenditure under control. What we're going to do is jack up taxes on ordinary Australians.' Today, in this parliament, this government relieved taxes for ordinary, hardworking Australians. What we want to do is the same thing for the small businesses who employ them, and those opposite oppose it.