Nick Sherry (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Hansard source

I have just a couple of responses. In terms of process, Senator Coonan, my advice is that the offer was made to bring forward the initial 4 o’clock this afternoon briefing.

I have some further information on New Zealand, where apparently they have some transparency. Apparently the New Zealand register, which is publicly available, reveals that most of the bond issuance comes from the Benelux countries, which are the Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg. It is clearly not right that the owners of the bonds come through those jurisdictions. Clearly—while ownership is not clear—those three countries are being used as a cover without revealing the true owners of the bonds. To suggest that in the case of New Zealand most of the owners of those bonds come from those three countries is just clearly not right—but that is what the publicly available information does. There are clearly lots of individuals and entities—financial and otherwise, right around the globe—who are using those three countries as the jurisdictions which the publicly available custodian data is being channelled through. To the extent that Senator Coonan believes New Zealand is useful, that is the extent of the use. But it does not identify who the true owner is.

Senator Coonan has suggested that she would like to know what proportion is coming from China. I do not think it would be too hard if you were from China and you wanted to buy bonds. You would not do it directly in Australia if you did not want it known that you were a Chinese-based institution. You would simply go to the Benelux countries in this case and purchase them through a custodian in the Benelux countries. You would not know, in fact, that the investment was coming from China, or anywhere else for that matter, if that was what your intention was. We do not believe the amendment is practical.

It is not just the practicality issue, it is the cost issue. The amendment requires significant additional work by the AOFM and that involves expense. Senator Coonan said ‘best endeavours’. What does ‘best endeavours’ mean for the AOFM in any practical way in identifying who the real owners of the bonds are? The die is cast on this amendment; I am not going to make any further contribution. For an opposition to move an amendment that is not practical, but will cost extra money in order to try and obtain the information that we know is largely unobtainable and to then express concern about debt I just think is a touch hypocritical.

I conclude on the issue of government debt because Senator Coonan has made some comments about that. I want to make this point: the predominant reason the Australian government has budget deficits in the next six years or so—I do not have the precise projections in front of me—is the collapse in revenue because of the world financial and economic crisis. The collapse in revenue over the forward estimates is estimated to be, I think, $210 billion plus. That collapse in revenue has occurred, and would have occurred whether we were in government or you were in government. You would be in deficit and issuing bonds just as we are because of the world financial and economic crisis.

Then we get claims from the Liberal opposition that they would deliver a lower budget deficit. Tell us where you would cut spending going forward? Senator Coonan is the shadow finance minister and I know she heads the ERC; I look forward to this list of cuts—presumably in billions of dollars to government programs—to be released by the opposition, the alternative government, in the next 18 months. Where is it? You want a lower budget deficit—show us your cuts! As the alternative government and as a responsible opposition I would have thought it incumbent on you to show us where you will cut billions of dollars. It would be tens of billions of dollars if you wanted to move the budget to a surplus in the current circumstances. Show us where you would cut. Let’s see the evidence of fiscal responsibility from the Liberal opposition about where they would cut, given the financial and economic circumstances we are faced with. We will not be supporting the amendment.