Michael Ronaldson (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I would be coughing, too. You have obviously read this again. I would be coughing—in fact, I would be gagging—at your leader’s total incompetence. In that speech to IFSA in August last year, the opposition leader ran the industry line. He talked about lower rates and he talked about Japan, and he indicated the lines that were run by the industry. So do you think it would realistically be any surprise to the Treasurer, after the budget in reply speech, not to have the sorts of costings that had been floated by the industry, which had clearly written parts of the opposition leader’s speech? This was not some new announcement in the budget in reply. This was not the Treasurer, having heard the budget in reply, walking out and making some comments on it. In August 2006, the opposition leader had floated this and had talked about lower rates, so of course the Treasurer would have had some costings for these matters well before the budget in reply. Senator Sherry’s leader had floated this and some potential outcomes, so of course it was common knowledge what some of the options were and, therefore, it would be common knowledge what the costings would be at various rates—this was 2006.

I will go back to this and pose this question, through you, Madam Temporary Chairman: if greater fund inflows are going to lead to an expanded market, why is Japan lifting its rate from seven per cent to 15 per cent? Why would this be? I pose that question because this is the premise that underpinned the Leader of the Opposition’s argument in relation to this matter. I will read part of his speech again. You have got to have a look at it, Senator Sherry. This is a very important stuff.