Dean Smith (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr Deputy President. I left to the last the quote in regards to health issues from Nicola Roxon in October this year:

There were some contentious issues and policy problems that ran for months, in some cases years, without there seeming to be a way to bring contentious issues to a head. There was no avenue for Ministers to bring genuinely difficult issues, where there were legitimately tricky calls to be made, to Cabinet for a real discussion. Health and climate change were the two longest running 'non-discussions' for the first term of Government, with some other contentious policies getting only cursory Cabinet approval at the last minute. There was a reticence by the Prime Minister for big strategic calls to be made by Cabinet, or sufficiently in advance to prepare properly.

So it is no surprise that the Labor opposition in its contribution so far does not want to concede that there is a problem that needs to be addressed by a commission of audit.

I would now like to turn briefly to the Commission of Audit and why it is important. As many will know, the National Commission of Audit's role is to assess the role and scope of government—that is a timely and necessary activity—and to ensure, most importantly, that taxpayers' money is spent wisely and efficiently. Certainly my colleagues on this side of the Senate chamber regard that as a high and important priority of any government. In addition to that—and this is a topic of great interest to Western Australian senators and to me in particular—the work of the Commission of Audit will specifically address the division of responsibilities between local, state and federal governments. Again, this is a timely and necessary activity, one that could have easily been undertaken in the last six years but for the chaos and dysfunction and waste that we saw; in the former minister's comments, that was not taking place.

I would like to note a point that Senator Moore made in her contribution that is worthy of illumination, and that is that it will be, importantly, a public process as well as an internal government process. I would expect that the various stakeholders and interest groups across the country will make a sizeable contribution to that. Importantly, the discussion will be about how we can do more with less, because it is not necessarily correct to suggest that because you spend more you have a better outcome. I can point to no end of public policy areas in this country where taxpayers think, quite rightly, that huge sums of money have been spent with little or no positive outcome.

Importantly—and I think this speaks to the efficiency with which the government is embracing its new responsibilities—the initial report will be provided to government at the end of January 2014, at the end of January next year, so that the final report can be incorporated into this government's first budget. That is an important element in the progress of this important initiative.

I am also pleased to say that the Commission of Audit includes a prominent Western Australian in Mr Bob Fisher. I am sure that Mr Fisher will make an outstanding contribution in making sure that the issues and interests of Western Australia taxpayers are certainly front and centre in this review.

It is important to identify the fact that for the first time in 20 years we are having a commission of audit of this kind. The objective is a clear one: to deliver a surplus of one per cent of GDP prior to 2023. By any measure that is a noble objective and one that is in our national interest. I would like to hear my Senate colleagues on the other side embracing that as a sound objective for the Commission of Audit.

Before I move on it is important to recognise that there are 932—almost 1,000—federal agencies in our Commonwealth that will be part of this review. By any measure that sounds like a large number of bodies. It is worthy to undertake an inquiry into whether or not they are all necessary and whether or not they are all doing what is required of them in the most efficient and effective way.

We also need to recognise this fact: that 76 per cent of the budget is spent on health, welfare and social services alone. It is right to have a discussion, to have a process, where we say, 'Are we doing things as effectively and efficiently with taxpayers' money as we possibly could?' To suggest for a moment that the world in 2013 should be the same as the world that existed in 2007 to 7 September 2013 is absolutely ridiculous.

In the contributions that follow I hope there will be sensible, reasoned discussion and that people will be able to point to the merits of this particular process in reforming our nation's finances so that we can put ourselves in the best position to capture the opportunities which exist for us not only in the region but globally. I hope that as a parliament we will all be able to embrace that and, importantly, start to think out of our box, out of our ideological prisms, so that we can get the best for the Australian community through this particular process. I have every confidence that, when that interim report is provided to government in January, and when the budget is presented next year, even those— (Time expired)