Angus Taylor (Hume, Liberal Party, Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. The Albanese Labor government has weakened the economy and hurt families and small businesses with its economic decisions. The Treasurer has said that the collapse in economic growth, combined with rising core inflation, is part of a perfectly calibrated plan. If a five-quarter GDP per capita recession is part of a perfect plan, what economic failure is next in the Treasurer's plan?

Jim Chalmers (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I said that the current economic conditions justify the position we've taken in the budget, and I stand by that. I gave a detailed answer a moment ago about why that's the case, and I'm happy to repeat the main points that I made earlier: that is, if we'd followed the advice of those opposite—hundreds of billions of dollars of cuts—it would have been diabolical for the conditions people are confronting right now, with a soft economy and people who are under pressure.

I'll tell you what, I won't be taking lectures from the people who left us more than $1 trillion of Liberal debt and almost nothing to show for it. And I won't be taking lectures from the poster child of waste and rorts in the budget that we were left to clean up. I won't be taking lectures from those opposite, who left us inflation with '6' in front of it, and it now has a '3' in front of it.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Treasurer will pause. The member for Hume is going to make a point of order, and I think I know what it is.

Angus Taylor (Hume, Liberal Party, Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This question was specifically about his failed plan.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Treasurer may wish to defend his plan, and that may involve some comparing and contrasting about what his plan is.

Angus Taylor (Hume, Liberal Party, Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

He made a bad decision.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm trying to help you help me, okay? The Treasurer cannot wade into alternative approaches or alternatives. So, he was just going to make sure he's had that point, and now he's got two minutes left to address the remaining parts of the question.

Jim Chalmers (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, we don't want to get that heavily rehearsed pointy finger again from the shadow Treasurer! The point that I'm making is: if the shadow Treasurer is angry about inflation with a '3' in front of it, he must be filthy about inflation with a '6' in front of it, which is what we inherited from those opposite. If he wants to talk about managing the budget, he should be honest enough to tell the Australian people from the dispatch box that the cumulative bottom lines in the budget are $215 billion better as a consequence of our economic management. And he should tell the Australian people about the $80 billion of debt interest that we're avoiding because we're paying down the Liberal debt we inherited. And he should be honest and say that inflation now is almost half what we inherited when he was a cabinet minister in the Morrison government.

We are under no illusions about the conditions in the economy right now. We've been very upfront about the weakness in the economy, the softness in the economy, laid bare by yesterday's national accounts. We know that people are under pressure as well. But more than acknowledging that, more than understanding that, we're acting on it, and we're acting on it despite the kind of nasty negativity and reflexive opposition we hear from those opposite. I mean, if those opposite were fair dinkum, they'd come to the dispatch box and they'd say to all those millions of Australians who are getting a tax cut because of us that they'd rather people didn't get it. And they'd come to the dispatch box and say they don't think people should get energy bill relief or help with their rent or cheaper medicines and all the other things they opposed.

So, the point that I made, and I come back very specifically to the question the shadow Treasurer asked, is that if you factor in the conditions that exist in the economy right now—in the national economy and indeed in household budgets as well—the approach that we're taking is very important, and it is calibrated for the conditions people are facing and the cost-of living pressures and other pressures they're under. Our responsible economic management is getting the budget in better nick, providing cost-of-living help and investing in the future—all the things they failed to do when they were in government. (Time expired)

Zaneta Mascarenhas (Swan, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. How is the Albanese Labor government delivering on cost-of-living relief without adding to inflation, and how does our economy compare to other G7 nations?

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Swan for her question. Indeed, we are taking action on the cost-of-living, because that is our No. 1 priority, and the recent budget showed that. I'm glad that we get some questions about the economy, and the budget, of course, which is the focus on this side of the House.

On 1 July, in less than a month now, there will be lower taxes for every single Australian taxpayer—all 13.6 million of them, not just some. There will be $300 in power bill relief for every single household and more for small businesses; stronger Medicare in every community, with 29 new urgent care clinics being added to the 58 that we have already opened; more homes in every part of the country, with our $32 billion Homes for Australia plan; a better deal for every working parent, with superannuation on paid parental leave; HECS relief, wiping $3 billion off student debt; as well as help for people who are renters, the first back-to-back increase in Commonwealth rent assistance in more than 30 years. We're making these responsible decisions to fight inflation—investing in our skills, our energy security and our supply chains. Of course, we're delivering the second consecutive budget surplus, the first time that has happened in nearly two decades. It comes on the back of the cost-of-living relief we provided in our first two years: cheaper child care, energy bill relief, cheaper medicines that have saved $370 million.

I'm asked how this compares with the major economies around the world, the G7 countries. Australia has faster economic growth than Canada, Germany, Italy, Japan and the United Kingdom. We have a lower unemployment rate than Canada, France, Italy and the United Kingdom. We have faster employment growth than Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the US and the UK. We have a higher participation rate than Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the US and the UK. Of course, Australia has a budget which is in surplus, unlike every single G7 country, and we have the smallest gross debt. This is all a direct result of the conscious decisions that we have made to make sure we provide cost-of-living relief while continuing to put that downward pressure on inflation, whilst also planning for future growth through our Future Made in Australia plan.

Sussan Ley (Farrer, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Women) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. Labor has weakened the economy, hurting families and small businesses with its economic decisions. Yesterday's national accounts show Australia has been in a GDP per capita recession for the last five quarters. Business owner Stuart Knox told 10 News: 'If the GFC was 10 out of 10, this is 20 out of 20. This is as tough as I've ever seen it.' Does the Treasurer seriously believe that business owners like Stuart are wrong and his economic plan is right?

Jim Chalmers (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's gutsy to ask a question about Stuart and small business when they voted against helping small businesses with their energy bills. If you really cared about Stuart and his small business, you wouldn't have done that. Mr Speaker, they wouldn't have done that. So I think people see through these sorts of questions from those opposite. Those opposite couldn't give a stuff about people who are doing it tough. If they had their way, inflation would be higher, growth would be weaker and the budget would be in worse nick.

I say to Stuart, I say to the small-business people of this country, I say to families and pensioners right around Australia: we recognise that the economy is soft and that times are tough, but, more than that, we're responding in the budget with cost-of-living relief and support for small business. I'm asked about small business, and it's a perfect opportunity to tell everybody here and everybody who might be tuning in at home that, every time those opposite have had the opportunity in the Senate to vote for tax breaks for small businesses, they've been voting against them.

The thing about that which makes it particularly comical, from their point of view, is that on the same day that the Leader of the Opposition was giving his budget reply, talking about support for small business, they were in the Senate voting against helping small business by providing them a tax break. This is the kind of chaos and confusion and hypocrisy that we hear from those opposite on a daily basis.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Treasurer will pause so I can hear from the Deputy Leader of the Opposition.

Sussan Ley (Farrer, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Women) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On relevance—the question did not invite the Treasurer to talk continually about the opposition but to answer the question about his economic plan and the small business that I mentioned.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Paterson will leave the chamber under 94(a).

The member for Paterson then left the chamber.

It's highly disorderly. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition is entitled to raise her point of order. She'll be heard in silence. And, if I'm dealing with a point of order, trust me—that is not the time to deal with the point of order. The question did regard the national accounts, the policy on small business and in particular an individual and some ratings about small business. So I'm just going to ask the Treasurer to return to the question.

Jim Chalmers (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I understand it, I was asked what I would say to Stuart. What I would say to Stuart is that we understand that the economy is soft right now. We've said that on a number of occasions, even before this week's national accounts. That's why we're responding in the way that we are in the budget. I'd say to Stuart that if he wants the parliament to support small business then he should tell those opposite to vote for small business in the Senate when they're given that opportunity. I'd say Stuart—I'd remind Stuart—that, when it came time to support small business with energy bill relief, this side of the House voted for it, and that side of the House voted against it. I'd say to Stuart that the approach put forward by those opposite to slash and burn in the budget would be diabolical for small business in this country.

We are managing the economy in a responsible and a considered and a methodical way which is conscious of the conditions that small business and the broader Australian community are confronting right now. You can't say that for those opposite.