Jerome Laxale (Bennelong, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. How is the Albanese Labor government reforming and strengthening Australia's economic institutions, and are there any obstacles?

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

Thanks to the member for Bennelong for the considered way that he engages with the big issues in our economy. The Reserve Bank legislation before the House is all about modernising our central bank, strengthening its decision-making and making it more independent, not less independent. It seeks to implement the considered recommendations of the review, which reported about a year and a half ago and which has been in the public domain for a long time now. It's been the subject of a lot of welcome discussion and debate. The Reserve Bank governor herself is 100 per cent behind the changes and has said she wants to see them legislated. I want to thank her for her efforts working with the government to bed down the changes that have already been implemented.

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

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

As those opposite interject, I want to read to them a quote from a big supporter of the changes to the Reserve Bank:

The recommendations of the review will clarify the Reserve Bank's monetary policy role, strengthen its governance arrangements, improve the transparency of its decision making, and deepen its economic expertise.

…   …   …

It is essential the implementation of the review be as bipartisan as possible …

That's what the shadow Treasurer said about the recommendations of the review, and now he says he's going to vote against it. I have tried to work with the shadow Treasurer to implement the changes in a bipartisan way.

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

You're stacking the board!

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

The Treasurer will pause. The member for Hume has been yelling non-stop all throughout question time.

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

I'm helping.

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

You're not helping. You're showing disrespect, so you'll leave the chamber under 94(a).

The member for Hume then left the chamber.

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

I've tried to work with the shadow Treasurer in a bipartisan way. I have accommodated every single one of the six issues that he raised with me. I have accommodated every single one of the concerns that he raised with me by making sensible changes to what had originally been proposed. I met with him, I arranged briefings for him, I engaged with him genuinely and respectfully, publicly and privately, on this really important matter. That's because my preference was and continues to be a bipartisan agreement between the major parties.

I say, respectfully, I'd rather not deal with the crossbench in the Senate, because I want these changes to endure any future changes in government. That's why I tried to take the shadow Treasurer seriously, even if his colleagues don't. Unfortunately, all along in this process, we have been hostage to the shadow Treasurer's ability to carry an argument internally in his show. He has been unable to do that.

If the House listens closely, they will hear the familiar sound of the shadow Treasurer getting rolled once again. The decision that they've announced today is irresponsible. It creates uncertainty, it's disappointing, but it's not surprising, because this is what happens when the opposition leader's destructive negativity collides with the shadow Treasurer's weakness. This is why they have no credibility on the economy; they're always looking for unnecessary conflict to distract from the fact that they have no credible or costed economic policies, and they won't tell us where $315 billion in cuts are going to come from.

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Government Services and the Digital Economy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. Last week's national accounts data reveals the economy has shuddered to a halt, productivity is going backwards, real disposable income has collapsed, and Australians are paying more tax and more for their mortgages. RMIT economics professor Sinclair Davidson has said 'all the economic indicators are going the wrong way'. What is the government doing fighting with the RBA? Having created a disaster for Australian families, why is the Albanese Labor government fighting the Reserve Bank while Australian families go backwards?

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

I thank the honourable member for asking the question the shadow Treasurer was supposed to be asking before he got turfed out a few moments ago. The question goes to the pressures that people are feeling in our economy right now. We acknowledge them, but more than acknowledging them, we are doing something about it. It beggars belief in the context of an economy which is slowing considerably, an economy where people are under considerable cost-of-living pressure, that those opposite oppose our cost-of-living relief for people who are doing it tough. They've said they want to roll back the tax cuts, they've said they don't support helping people with their energy bills, they've said they don't support cheaper medicines or cheaper early childhood education. They've said that they said they don't support rent assistance. They obviously don't support getting wages moving again, because they deliberately presided over a decade of wage stagnation and wage suppression. So we won't be taking lectures from those opposite on responsible economic management.

When we came to office, inflation was much higher and rising. It had a six in front of it'; it now has a three in front of it. When we came to office, those opposite had presided over the worst decade for productivity growth in the last 60 years. When we came to office, there were huge deficits, and we turned two of those deficits into substantial labour surpluses. When we came to office, real wages were falling 3.4 per cent, and they're growing again. When we came to office, nominal wages were stagnant; they're now growing, on average, almost twice as fast as they were under those opposite. That's a deliberate design feature of our economic policy to get wages moving again so that people can earn more and keep more of what they earn.

The thing that really goes to the difference between the big parties in the parliament when it comes to the economy and the pressures people are feeling right around our country is that when we had an opportunity to give a tax cut to every single Australian taxpayer, we grabbed that opportunity, because we know people are doing it tough right up and down the income scale. If those opposite had their way, only some people would be getting a tax cut—people who are doing better than others. If those opposite had their way, there would be lower wages. If those opposite had their way, there would be no cost-of-living help for people doing it tough. If those opposite had their way, Australia would be in recession right now. We know that because they gave us a lot of free advice about cutting harder and harsher in the budget. We didn't take that advice, and that's because we're going for a soft landing in our economy, and those opposite want a crash landing in our economy because they think it suits their political purposes.

Their time would be much better spent coming clean on the $315 billion in cuts—secret cuts—and telling the Australian people what those hundreds of billions of dollars in cuts will mean for Medicare—

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

Order! The member for Groom is warned.

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

and pensions and an economy which is already soft.