Paul Scarr (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I am very pleased to support my colleagues Senator Cash and Senator McKenzie on this very important issue. Those listening and watching proceedings today would have seen Senator Wong and would have thought Senator Wong's sentiments in response were all light and reason—nothing to see here; we are very cooperative, with briefings offered to everyone in this chamber; we are very transparent and open. The issue is the gap between Senator Wong's rhetoric and what is actually happening in substance. The gap between the rhetoric and the substance is the issue.

I want to go back to the questions on notice that Senator Cash was referring to and the responses which we are receiving from the government for some of those questions on notice. I'm going to give an example of question on notice No. 1856, which was asked by my colleague Senator Hume. Senator Gallagher, the finance minister, was quoted in the Canberra Times as saying:

Putting a productivity efficiency component into any funding I think is a responsible part of government and making sure we keep the budget on a sustainable footing.

I think that is quite a reasonable proposition. I don't find much to disagree with, to be frank. So Senator Hume asked a series of relevant questions in relation to that, very courteously. The questions were: What is the current efficiency dividend rate for your department? That is a fair question. The minister said we should have an efficiency rate. What is the efficiency rate? Are any agencies or any other entities within the portfolio exempt from that efficiency dividend? That is a fair question. Is the efficiency dividend referenced in the portfolio budget statement? Are there any agencies or entities that have an efficiency dividend that is higher or lower than the rate applied to the department? These were very courteous, obvious questions flowing naturally from a quote attributed to Senator Gallagher.

Now, the way you would expect if the system were working, if the government was reflecting the principles enunciated by Senator Wong in her statement at the outset of this debate, is a logical, considered response to the questions. What did we get? What did we get from the Minister for the NDIS, the Honourable Bill Shorten? This is what we got. The Albanese Labor government—

It is worthwhile reading it again, Senator Gallagher. I know you don't want to hear it but it is worthwhile raising it again. 'The Albanese Labor government inherited a budget disaster from the previous Liberal government'—blah, blah, blah—'featuring a trillion dollars in Liberal Party debt'. Even the ABC fact-checked that and found that was wrong. There is a difference between—