Senate debates
Thursday, 12 February 2009
Appropriation (Nation Building and Jobs) Bill (No. 1) 2008-2009; Appropriation (Nation Building and Jobs) Bill (No. 2) 2008-2009; Household Stimulus Package Bill 2009; Tax Bonus for Working Australians Bill 2009; Tax Bonus for Working Australians (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2009; Commonwealth Inscribed Stock Amendment Bill 2009
In Committee
11:39 am
Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source
Senator Coonan, you are dead right: knee-jerk reactions, lurching along, with no idea about the economic management of this country, spinning whatever line suits them on the day. There we were, my friends, accused of reckless spending by spending the surplus, and Labor are now seeking to pass through this place a debt burden on this country of $200 billion. Make no mistake, $200 billion in this legislative package will be a burden of $9,500 per man, woman and child. Those people who thought that they were going to get $950 we now hear are only going to get $900. You know what? You are getting less, but I bet you that the debt will be the same because they have done another side deal.
As I said the other day, imagine going to a pawnbroker with your watch and saying, ‘How much will you give me for it?’ The pawnbroker says, ‘$950.’ You then ask, ‘How much will it cost to redeem it?’ And you are told $9,500 plus interest. You know what? You would walk out of the place because it is not a good deal. So for those people who think that in the short term they might get a cash injection—yes, they will. It will be nice while it lasts. But then think of the decades that it will take to repay that debt. It will take decades. Let us not forget that during a mining boom we paid off $96 billion worth of Labor debt. Hawke and Keating, with all their economic mismanagement, took 13 years to rack up $96 billion. But, with the economic wizardry of Mr Rudd, it only takes him 13 months to budget for a $200 billion debt for this nation.
Are we passionate about this? Of course we are because we are not looking at the short-term next election; we are looking at the future for our children and our grandchildren, who will be saddled with this debt that will take more than a generation to pay off. We are concerned about our future. We want to ensure that our children do not have an economic millstone around their necks.
No comments