Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Minister for Indigenous Affairs) Share this | Hansard source

I also rise to take note of answers. It is interesting. During question time we should remind ourselves that it is an opportunity for the wider community, not only for people in this place, to get information about some of the programs. I am very disappointed by what at best could be a pretty disingenuous attempt to table budget papers that are clearly on the public record to confuse people. I do have an opportunity to place on the record some corrections.

You have got one thing right, Senator Peris, and that is that it is in fact on page 185 of the budget papers, and that is probably where it ends. If you look at the budget papers on page 185 and read the explanation underneath, you will see that it says:

The Government will achieve … savings of $534.4 million over five years through efficiencies resulting from the rationalisation of Indigenous programmes, grants … administered by the Prime Minister and Cabinet and Health portfolios.

If you bother to examine more than that one page in the budget, you will find a number of very interesting points.

Budget Paper No. 2 includes the savings of TSRA and Health. Over five years, they do indeed add up to $534.4 million. One hundred and twenty-eight million dollars are in the Health portfolio, which leaves in my area $412 million over five years. The $412 million is made up of $3.5 million, which is the $4.5 million from TSRA, and that leaves $409.2 million for my programs. That includes $355.2 million in administrative funding—where you are talking about front-line services, grants and those processes—and it also includes $54 million, which has been taken out of departmental funding, which is administration and backroom saves. That would mean $355.2 million is the total save. We have chosen to reinvest $115.7 million in those portfolio areas. You would be quite familiar with the $54.1 million for permanent police presence, $2.5 million for community engagement officers, $3.8 million for a child abuse task force, $13.4 billion for the Sporting Chance Program, of which I know you are a great supporter, Senator, and $10.6 million for outback power. I hope that clarifies that. The reason I am saying that the actual cuts to front-line services is not $535 million is that it is not.

I will go to some of the other parts of your question. Why is the chairman of the council that advises the Prime Minister going to cut another $600 million? It is pretty disingenuous to couch it in those terms. I have in front of me the article that you refer to, Senator. It says on the very top line:

… Mr Mundine wants to cut $600 million of red tape and inefficiencies … and reinvest the funds in employment, schools and community safety.

That is pretty hard to couch as a cut and it is pretty disingenuous if you then add that cut to the $535 million, which is equally incorrect, come up with $1.1 million and ask me another question. It is disingenuous at best. Whilst I respect the fact that the senator has not been around for a particularly long time, when you are provided with advice from your colleagues on this matter, you should check them out. You have the budget papers. You sought to table them, Senator. You should read the budget papers and those ancillaries—