Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the answers given by ministers to questions without notice asked today.

We have seen the sad and sorry sight today of a Treasurer and of a government that have truly lost touch with working Australian families. You just have to go back to 2005 to begin to understand why. When you go back to 2005 you discover that the Treasurer was so consumed with bitterness towards the Prime Minister of Australia that he gave a discussion and an interview to three journalists in which he talked about how he was going to destroy the Prime Minister: he was going to bring the Prime Minister down. So what we see is a Treasurer who takes his eye off the ball—a Treasurer who is so uninterested in the concerns of working Australian families that he wants to put his own ego, his own campaign for self-advancement, ahead of the concerns of the Australian public.

It is not just home ownership that this Treasurer, this Prime Minister and this government have lost touch with. It is also grocery prices and petrol prices—the ordinary day-to-day issues that Australian families are battling with. What is this Treasurer concerned with? He is more interested in his own job and in getting the Prime Minister’s job than he is about ensuring that the economic situation facing Australian families is his primary concern. It is not his primary concern. You just have to listen to the reaction of those opposite to realise that they are also not interested in the impact of increasing grocery prices, increasing petrol prices and increasing interest rates on Australian families. You just have to listen to the comments being made by those opposite to know that. Senator Ross Lightfoot thinks that working families should be grateful for what they have. They should be grateful after four increases in interest rates in the last three years. They should be grateful for the great economic management of the government. Those in the other place congratulate themselves on what a great government they were: ‘We had a great Prime Minister yesterday. We had a great Treasurer yesterday. We had a great Minister for Finance and Administration in here today.’ You just have to listen to them to hear how smug and out of touch they have all become on the other side. While Australian families have been struggling after their fifth interest rate increase—

Government Senators:

Government senators interjecting—

John Hogg (Queensland, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Conroy, resume your seat! We will have order. A couple of people have had a little bit of fun. I accept that you have had your moment of glory. Senator Conroy, address your remarks through the chair, and the rest of the people remain quiet.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr Deputy President, I accept your admonishment. What we are seeing from those opposite today is that they do not want to accept that the Treasurer and the Prime Minister are at war. They do not want to accept that we have a petulant Treasurer and a finance minister who makes Jim Cairns look like he is an economic conservative. The government are incapable of stopping the Prime Minister from spending money like a drunken sailor in the lead-up to this election, and Australian families are going to suffer. The Reserve Bank report in the last few days should stand as a condemnation of the economic record of this government. It should stand as a condemnation of how the Treasurer is more interested in talking about how he can get his own home.

Did you read the article and then listen to the Treasurer yesterday? He agreed there was something to the British practice of providing a separate residence for the Treasurer. In England they have No. 10 Downing Street for the Prime Minister and No. 11 for the Chancellor of the Exchequer. I think there is a lot in that. I tend to agree with Senator Minchin that there is no way that John Howard, the Prime Minister of this country, is going to let Peter Costello move in next door. He will not even let him in the grounds of the Lodge, so he is certainly not going to build him a house next door. The Treasurer is out of touch when he says that the public would complain about the cost but it would be a good investment for the country. Fair dinkum! He has lost the plot. Australian working families are suffering because of the ninth increase in interest rates— (Time expired)

Barnaby Joyce (Queensland, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Isn’t it amazing where the Labor Party is headed—it is the Days of our Lives commentary; that is where they have gone. They are now talking about the argumentum ad hominem of personal politics because they are completely and utterly lacking policy depth after their housing fiasco. The Labor Party’s statement yesterday was that their view for Australia is that we would be renters in public housing estates. The conservative side of politics believes in this ‘amazing new concept’ that you should own your home. What the Labor Party came up with in its place was the giving of a tax break and incentive break to big business and big unions over the individual mum and dad, who would prefer that the money went into their own bank account to pay for their housing loan so that they could then put their heads on the pillows where they live.

The opposition are surprised that there is more than one person in the coalition who wants to be Prime Minister. I can tell you that there are quite a number of people in the coalition who would like to be Prime Minister because it is a team of talent, and talent always aspires to lead. We can look at Costello and at Downer, but let us talk about the Labor team. Maybe Garrett is an aspirant; Prime Minister Garrett—now that would be an interesting day for Australia—or Prime Minister Swan. What a beacon of leadership Swan is! We could have some of the others that you do not even hear of—Fergusons 1 and 2. It is like B1 and B2. I know they are down there but you never hear from them. They do not really matter.

John Hogg (Queensland, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Joyce, if you are referring to people in the other place, you refer to them by their correct titles.

Barnaby Joyce (Queensland, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Sorry. Ferguson and Ferguson: Fergusons 1 and 2.

John Hogg (Queensland, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! You are to refer to them by their correct titles.

Barnaby Joyce (Queensland, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Okay. Well let us take some others—there is Fitzgibbon. Now these people are a wealth of talent! They are the prospective leaders of our nation. Prime Minister Gillard—

George Campbell (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise on a point of order, Mr Deputy President. You just admonished Senator Joyce for the way in which he was addressing members of the other chamber and he has totally ignored your ruling. Could I ask you to explain to him exactly what you mean when you say to address them by their proper title? Maybe he will then get it.

John Hogg (Queensland, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The point of order is well made. Senator Joyce, I have pulled you up already. The people in the other place are due their correct titles, unless you are putting their ministerial titles behind them. You should observe the protocol of this place. You have been here long enough now to know it.

Barnaby Joyce (Queensland, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I acknowledge your admonishment and I shall refer to Ms Gillard under her proper title. It is very important that Australians recognise that Ms Gillard may be their next Prime Minister. I am glad that we are talking about the wealth of talent. The opposition talk about a civil war. Last night, apparently, I was at a civil war; it was called a birthday party, and I spoke to the Treasurer and the Prime Minister, who were talking to each other. They seemed quite civil. There were no blows. Everyone was having a pretty good time.

The Labor Party is harking back to prehistory to come up with the astounding proposition that there are a number of people who want and aspire to be the Prime Minister of this nation in a champion team, which the coalition is. It is a champion team that has delivered the greatest flow of wealth to the individual in recent history. It is a champion team that has given people the capacity to be the greater benefactors of wealth in our nation. I look forward to the day that we will have a Prime Minister Costello, because if we do not have a Prime Minister Costello we will probably end up with Ms Gillard as Prime Minister.

Mr Garrett would be an interesting concept for the environment minister—the man who is more compromise than compromise. More compromise than the Vichy French in the positions that he has changed. He has changed every position he has ever had. I think he is about to maybe regrow some hair because every other position that Mr Garrett has ever stood for has been completely put aside. This leads us to the question of the Labor Left, that once noble body of people who raged against the system and stood up for the rights of the Left. They have been completely and utterly worked over. They are the complete and utter doormats of the Labor Right. They are just there to make up the numbers. At times when they wake up and listen to their fearless leader, Kevin07, as he calls himself, they must wonder what party they are in. The Labor Left has to wake up and say: ‘Oh, now we’re believing in uranium mining. We’re believing in terrorism laws. We believe in the Indigenous plan. We believe in the coalition’s economic policy.’ It is amazing that a lot of them stay there. They are great advocates. Come on over! It is only a short walk. The question is: when is the Labor Left actually going to stand up and grow some courage? (Time expired)

Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I do not think I have ever watched that clock so closely to finally hear the end of Senator Joyce’s rant. It is a pleasure to follow him because we can put some sensibility back into the debate. Senator Parry, I do feel sorry for you as the Government Whip because obviously you got the shortest straw.

John Hogg (Queensland, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Sterle, address your comments to the chair alone and not across the chamber.

Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will, Mr Deputy President. I rise to take note of answers to questions today. I would like to add that 10 years ago the average mortgage repayment-to-income ratio for the typical first home buyer was 17.9 per cent. Sadly, today that figure is 30.7 per cent. Ten years ago the average home cost about four times the average annual wage. A lot of senators in this chamber would know that that figure is a heck of a lot more now than it was then. Today it costs no less than seven times the annual wage. The data from the 2006 census paints an alarming picture of the number of households losing over 30 per cent of their income in rent and mortgage payments. I note that 519,764 households in Australia, or 36.7 per cent of households that rent, are now losing over 30 per cent of their household income to rental payments, and over 500,000 are losing over 30 per cent of their household income to mortgage payments. Over one million Australian households are now losing over 30 per cent of their household income to either mortgage or rental payments. I will say that one more time so those honourable senators opposite can take it in: over one million Australians households.

But last week the Treasurer denied there was a housing affordability crisis. Last week the Treasurer was interviewed on Sky News. He was asked by the interviewer: ‘So, is there a housing affordability crisis, Treasurer?’ The Treasurer answered: ‘No, the crisis is when the market collapses. That is when you have a crisis.’ So what does that tell us about the Treasurer and the crisis in housing affordability? It tells us quite simply that, like his good friend the Prime Minister, Mr Howard, he is no less than in denial. The Treasurer is so distressed about the lack of dinner invites to the Lodge that he has completely lost the plot. I say that without any fear of contradiction.

But I guess at least one thing the Treasurer has to feel happy about is that he may very well believe he was a far greater Treasurer than his good mate—I use the term ‘good mate’ loosely—who was an even worse Treasurer. We hear harping from that side—from some of the senators from Queensland—all the time during question time. They cannot wait to talk about interest rates from 10 years ago. But they fail to acknowledge that under Treasurer Howard, from 1977 to 1983, interest rates were at 22 per cent. A lot of people sit back and think, ‘Well, 22 per cent of a $50,000 home wasn’t a heck of a lot.’ I can tell you now, as someone who was paying off a home back then, Mr Deputy President, as I know you would have been too, it was a heck of a lot. And guess what? We have a common denominator some 20 years later. Now we have a housing affordability crisis and over a million homes are losing 30 per cent of their income to rental or mortgage repayments there is a common denominator—it is Mr Howard again. He has moved from Treasurer to Prime Minister, but we have another housing affordability crisis. So senators opposite can harp on as much as they like. They are in denial, as their Treasurer is in denial.

I challenge senators opposite: get off your backsides and get out to those areas where youngsters are trying to afford to buy homes. Don’t bring us the blame game—‘It’s all the state’s fault; it’s got nothing to do with us.’ This Prime Minister could not wait to go out to the people of Australia three years ago and say that he would keep interest rates at record lows. He took all the credit. It was all about Mr Howard. As soon as interest rates start going up, does he stand up there and say, ‘It is all because of me’? No. He ducks, he dives, he hides—he blames everyone he can. What a pathetic effort. You cannot stick your hand up when things are going good and say, ‘It’s all me,’ but when they start going crook it is everybody else’s fault.

It is no wonder that Mr Costello, the Treasurer, wants to take him out. He made it very clear. I think the words quoted in the Bulletin were: ‘He can’t win. I can. We can win, but we can’t with him.’ Isn’t that absolutely wonderful: three months out from an election and the Treasurer is at it again. Oh my gosh! What a rabble on that side. You may have fooled the people last time but you won’t fool them— (Time expired)

Cory Bernardi (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In rising to take note of answers to questions, I feel I must comment immediately on what Senator Sterle has just said. Senator Sterle told this Senate that he remembers what it was like to pay the enormous mortgage rates that he alleges were under the treasurership of now Prime Minister Howard. The difficulty I have with that is that mortgage rates were fixed under both Mr Fraser’s prime ministership and Mr Whitlam’s prime ministership. Under fixed mortgage rates, which were centrally set, there is simply no way that people were paying 22 per cent on their housing mortgages. It is simply not true.

I would also like to go back to the economic record that is being addressed. When Mr Whitlam took over as Prime Minister of this country inflation was around eight per cent. Within three years inflation was around 17 or 18 per cent. This is what a Labor government does to the economy. In three short years Labor can wreck and destroy an economy. And once again, like always, when they do it there is no responsibility for it—they are in complete denial. Senator Sterle mentioned denial. I am telling you that denial in the Labor Party is as long as the Nile River. They destroy an economy and then they ask for the coalition, the conservatives, the good economic managers, to come in and fix it up. It is a scary proposition, because every time we have to mop up Labor’s mess, both at a state and a federal level, it takes us far longer to do it. Their record is one of $8 billion deficits compared with the coalition’s $10 billion annual surpluses. Labor left a $96 billion black hole. The architect of that black hole was the Placido Domingo of politics—that’s right: the incredibly popular Mr Keating—and the incredibly popular Mr Beazley. They all plotted to get rid of him to install Mr Rudd. Mr Rudd was described as ‘disloyal’ and ‘a notorious leak’ and ‘incredibly unreliable’ by a former leader of the Labor Party, Mr Latham. Mr Latham is no character reference for anybody, in my opinion, but the fact is that he reported all these off-the-record conversations that took place. How did they feel about that? It is simply inappropriate.

Mr Costello made it very clear today that he had an off-the-record conversation with some journalists—and I respect that. That shows the integrity of our profession. We talk about things in any manner, shape or form, and we often say things that, in the clear light of day, we may like to reconsider. We all have these conversations—because we are all human—and to have them exploited for cheap political stunts is really very disappointing. To listen to the bile, spray and diatribe that erupts from the other side is very frustrating for the people of Australia. I look up to the gallery and I see these wonderful young kids who come here to see how the parliament of Australia operates and how we are working for their futures—and what do we hear in this place? We hear this relentless pursuit of nothing. Those kids must be thinking, ‘My goodness, what are my parents getting for their taxpayer dollars?’ And when they look at the Labor Party, they say, ‘We don’t want to pay more tax for you lot.’ Let me tell the people of Australia—and the children who are up there in the gallery today should listen to me now—that, if the Labor Party get into government, taxes are always going to be higher, interest rates are always going to be higher and accountability of public spending is always going to be worse in this country. We cannot risk it. We need to sustain the prosperity for our nation. To listen to those opposite is disheartening for every young person in this nation who aspires to a better life for themselves and their family.

George Campbell (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I also want to take note of answers to today’s questions. I do not want to waste my five minutes responding to some of the garbage that Senator Bernardi has just spewed out, other than to make one point, and that is that there is a difference, Senator Bernardi—and you should know it—between interest rates and mortgage rates.

Cory Bernardi (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

He was talking about housing affordability.

George Campbell (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Sterle talked about interest rates; he did not talk about mortgage rates. You should know the difference. Senator Minchin knows when he talks about mortgage rates in 1996 being 10 per cent that the real interest rates were those being provided by the non-bank lenders, such as RAMS and Aussie Home loans—interest rates which were down to around 6½ per cent at the time. It was the introduction of the non-bank lenders into the marketplace that drove down mortgage rates at that time, not the decisions of the coalition government. It was due to the fact that there was competition in the marketplace. Anybody who borrowed around that time knows that competition was there and knows the impact that the non-bank lenders had on driving down mortgage interest rates.

But I want to focus on the past couple of days. It has been obvious for the past few months that this government is totally out of touch with the Australian community, but the events of the past couple of days have demonstrated not only that they are out of touch but also that some of them are actually off the planet. The Treasurer should be spending his time being concerned about the ninth rise in interest rates in a row and whether or not they are going to continue to rise and what policy formulation is necessary to ensure that that does not happen. He should be worried about credit card debt in this country and the amount of credit card debt that families are racking up to the banks and to those people in the financial sector who run the credit cards—with interest rates around 17 and 18 per cent, which they cannot afford to pay. Families are accumulating debt at a rapid rate, and he should be worrying about what policy settings should be adopted to deal with that issue. He should be concerned about petrol prices and the impact those prices are having on people’s living standards. He should be concerned about grocery prices and the domination of the marketplace—which we often hear Senator Joyce ranting on about in this place—by Coles and Woolworths and the big players and he should be ensuring that consumers are getting a fair go and are not being ripped off. He should be focused on those issues, because that is what the Treasurer’s job is. But what has the Treasurer been focused on? He has been focused on where he is going to live next.

We know he has been trying very hard over the past two or three years to get accommodation at the taxpayers’ expense, but he was focused on the Lodge and Kirribilli House. He told journalists two years ago that he was going to take the Prime Minister on; that he was going to stand the Prime Minister on his head; that Mr Howard could not win the next election; that he, the Treasurer, was the rightful person to carry the banner for the coalition government in the next election; and that he is the one who is entitled to Kirribilli House and the Lodge. He demonstrated over the past couple of years, and with his statement yesterday, how big his heart is. It is about the size of a pea.

He did not have the courage to carry out what he told those journalists he was going to do to the Prime Minister—so now what is his move? He did not have the courage to get the big house on the corner, so instead he is now floating the proposition that we should have accommodation for the Treasurer—‘Why shouldn’t the Treasurer have a house provided by the taxpayer?’ Ordinary working people have just had their ninth rise in interest rates and here we have a Treasurer who wants the taxpayer to pay for his accommodation. He wants the taxpayers to buy a nice house—

Nick Minchin (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance and Administration) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy President, I rise on a point of order. I listened to Senator Campbell with great interest and I normally would not intervene, but unfair, undue and incorrect misrepresentation of what the Treasurer said—given that he is a member of the House of Representatives—is uncalled for and unparliamentary. As I said in question time, the Treasurer made it abundantly clear in his public remarks that he was not referring to any accommodation for the Treasurer while he remained Treasurer. It is misleading and incorrect to suggest that he was talking about public accommodation for himself. He made it perfectly clear that it was an aspiration he had for future treasurers. I would ask you to bring Senator Campbell to order.

John Hogg (Queensland, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is no point of order, Senator Minchin.

George Campbell (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

He was arguing that the Treasurer—and I talk in the broad sense—should have accommodation in Canberra provided for by the taxpayer so that they could live in Canberra and work out of here, while ordinary working people continue to face increasing interest rates. (Time expired)

Question agreed to.