David Bushby (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

No, I do not. This is as unlikely to happen as him bringing about the enormous surpluses that will be required to repay the more than $250 billion in gross debt that will have accumulated by then. The reality of the combination of events being as fortuitous as predicted in order to achieve this result is highly unlikely given the vagaries of events that we have witnessed in recent years. It is even acknowledged in the government's own budget papers that only a small fall in the terms of trade from their current record and totally unprecedented levels would completely eliminate the projected surplus for 2012-13 and probably for years after, not to mention the potential impact of further international economic shocks, the fragile debt situation of some European countries, a fall in commodity prices, inflation uncertainty and other economic threats to China's growth and so on—any of which would overturn the assumptions upon which the government's claims of returning to surplus in 2012-13 are based.

The other challenge that defies belief is this Labor government actually delivering real cuts in spending. I am not talking about the government's tricky use of accounting methods and highfalutin economic terms and sophistry to include new taxes as savings; I am talking about real belt-tightening: actual decreases in government outlays and the slashing of spending by the government on programs not otherwise due to end—savings that actually result in falls in the amount of taxpayers' funds spent by the government. This challenge remains, because it would be a standout first for any Labor government in Australia's history to deliver real cuts in spending. With respect to the members of the Labor caucus who valiantly defend the toughness of this budget, it is not reflected in the far less than tough budget measures that are delivered in the other place this week. The problem is, and always has been, that when Labor is in government, they spend big. Under Whitlam, spending increased to such an extent that the Commonwealth share of GDP went from 19 to 24 per cent. Thirteen years of Hawke and Keating saw that figure increase to 26 per cent—a figure that was much reduced under John Howard. The Howard years saw the rolling back of the Commonwealth share of GDP as Costello fought to balance the budget after Labor left us $96 billion in the red in 1996 dollars. But since November 2007 the Rudd Labor government, and continuing under the Gillard Labor-Green government, all of that work has been undone.

Sitting suspended from 18.00 to 20.00