Brett Mason (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Universities and Research) Share this | Hansard source

that is a cost of living—by giving a cash handout, a sugar hit. That somehow addresses cost-of-living pressures. We on this side know that does not address cost-of-living pressures. The cost-of-living pressures will only go down when the costs of government go down. I am not too good at budget papers but I did have a look at Budget Paper No. 1, statement 10, page 6. I realised that in fact, despite all the rhetoric, the percentage of GDP on this budget, a so-called horror budget, is higher than any other budget Mr Swan has delivered. It was 23.4 in 2008-09, 22 in 2009-10, 21.6 in 2010-11 and 22.3 in 2011-12, and the estimate for 2012-13 is 23.8 per cent of GDP. In other words, the budget keeps getting bigger, as does the cost of government. A sugar hit, a cash handout, goes nowhere near addressing cost-of-living pressures. All this in a time supposedly of austerity.

The only thing this government can grow is the size of government. That is okay; I concede that this government takes its model from western Europe, countries that have been running in western Europe since World War II, and thank God we have not had Labor governments with the same frequency as they have had social democratic governments in western Europe; otherwise we would have the same problem. The only reason Australia does not suffer the shocking budget deficits and systemic debt that western Europe does is that conservative governments in this country won about two out of every three elections since World War II. In western Europe they have won about one out of every three. That is the difference, and that explains the enormous difference in the budget scope for this country.

I do not know how many times I have had to remind the Senate that every time Labor leaves government it leaves Australia further in debt. This is the golden rule, the indelible ink of the Australian Labor Party. Ever since 1901, ever since John Christian Watson's first government in 1904, every time Labor has been in government and has lost, Australia is further in debt. This is the golden rule of Australian politics: the Australian Labor Party always leaves Australia further in debt. There has never been one exception since Federation. Labor always says that jobs are in its DNA. The golden rule of Australian politics is this: Labor always leaves this country further in debt. There has not been one exception since 1901. The DNA of the Australian Labor Party is debt; it always has been and always will be.

My friend Senator Cormann raised before the issue of intergenerational debt. The problem with social democratic parties is that they believe that it is kind and gentle and fair to get subsequent generations to pay the debt of current generations. The Australian Labor Party believes it is okay to ask future generations to pay the debts of current generations, that it is okay to spend money on overpriced school halls. The hard thing is for the government to spend money and get good value. That is the hardest possible thing for a government. This lot has never managed that. Ever since 1901, when Labor loses office Australia is always further in debt. It has always been so and it always will be.

When I was reading the budget projections I came across a graph. I am not very good at budget papers—I was not very good at economics—but something caught my eye and I was somewhat startled by Budget Paper No. 1, statement 3, on page 21. At the top of the page it says:

On current projections the underlying cash surplus is expected to reach 1 per cent of GDP in 2017-18, the same year as projected in MYEFO.

Listen to this. This is the killer sentence:

Net debt is projected to return to zero in 2020-21.

Let me repeat it very slowly:

Net debt is projected to return to zero in 2020-21.

And in Budget Paper No. 1, chart 2, page 22, there is a graph which shows Australia returning to zero net debt in 2021, in about nine years time, when I suppose the member for Dobell will be the Prime Minister. Who, including the Australian Labor Party, thinks that in 2021 there will be no net debt? What are the chances that in eight or nine years time the Australian Labor Party, if they remain in government, will return Australia to no net debt? Does anyone believe that? Does the government even believe that? I suspect not.

The reason is this: the best guide for future performance is always past performance. What do we know about the Australian Labor Party and debt? Ever since Federation, every time Labor leaves office Australia is further in debt. Every time this lot gets in, when it leaves the next generation has more debt to pay off, more interest to pay off—as Senator Joyce said today, more and more interest for the next generation. So much for equity. This government always talks about equity, as do the Greens. What about intergenerational equity? What about generations paying for their own welfare rather than the current generation's? They never talk about intergenerational equity; it is always about fairness at the moment. It is very easy to spend public money but very hard to spend it well. I need not have worried, because in 2021 we are all going to be back to no net debt, in eight years time. But just in case I am wrong—and some might think I am being cynical, and you know, Acting Deputy President, I am not a cynic, but just in case—the government has raised the debt ceiling to $300 billion. Just in case, the debt ceiling has been raised from $250 billion to $300 billion.