Scott Ryan (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Treasurer, Senator Conroy. Does the government believe that the hallmark of responsible economic management is ensuring that you have a decent budget surplus?

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

Thank you for that question. Clearly it is the last question on a Thursday afternoon, because this government is at one when it comes to taking the decisive action necessary to strengthen growth and to limit the impact of the global financial crisis on Australian jobs. Those opposite might think that the global economic crisis has been hyped up, but the sobering reality is that we are facing the most significant upheaval in global financial markets since the Great Depression. The government will do everything possible in these difficult global conditions to support growth and jobs in this country.

Those opposite are incapable of settling on a consistent position throughout this global crisis. One day they support the Economic Security Strategy; the next day they oppose payments to families. One day they offer bipartisanship; the next day they do all they can to create instability and uncertainty. So let me repeat: this government is at one when it comes to taking the decisive action necessary to strengthen growth and to limit the impact of the global financial crisis on Australian jobs.

What is really disappointing is that they have given this question to one of the new senators, because one of the new senators will not have the corporate history to remember when those opposite ran a deficit. They actually ran a deficit themselves. Senator Fifield ran a deficit. So they give you a question lauding the idea that you must stay in surplus—an economically irresponsible position—when their own Treasurer, and Senator Fifield before him, ran a deficit. (Time expired)

Scott Ryan (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. I may be new in this place but I have a long memory and I do recall what it was like in my home state when Senator Conroy’s colleagues were managing Victoria. My supplementary question to the minister is: was the Prime Minister wrong when he said in the other place on 27 May:

These are the hallmarks of responsible economic management: ensuring that you have a decent budget surplus …

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

As has been repeatedly stated by the Prime Minister, the Treasurer and me, the medium-term strategy is to run surpluses over the business cycle. It is exactly the same as I said to Senator Fifield earlier in the week. This is exactly the same position as those opposite practised when they were in government. As I have already mentioned in the answer, it is quite simple: they ran a deficit. They have given the newbie the question when those who have been around a bit longer clearly would not take it, because it is clearly completely inconsistent to suggest— (Time expired)

Scott Ryan (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Is the minister saying that the Prime Minister is also wrong when he said on the same day:

Responsible economic management means that you do something about ensuring that you have got a reasonable surplus …

By plunging into deficit after only 12 months in office, how can the government, by the Prime Minister’s own definition, qualify as responsible economic managers—or is this simply another example of the hollow nature of the hollowmen’s promises of responsible financial management?

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

I do appreciate that you have the new standing orders to deal with, Mr President, but it is very hard to be relevant to a question built on so many false assertions and false assumptions. We have consistently said that the economically responsible thing to do is to protect Australian jobs and Australian families. If you do not want to sign up to that, just put your hand up. But no, you walk both sides of the street. This government has taken decisive and early action, and we stand ready to take whatever measures are needed to keep Australian families in jobs. That is why we have indicated we are prepared to consider further measures. And those opposite who want to try and pretend that it is responsible economic management to permanently stay in surplus are truly deceiving themselves, because they do not believe in it— (Time expired)

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper.

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I raise a point of order under the definition of direct relevance. I would invite you, in relation to the definition of direct relevance, to have a very close look, in your consideration at the end of this sitting fortnight, at every single question asked of Senator Conroy today and at every answer given today.

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On the point of order, Mr President: there is no point of order. While Senator Abetz might be trying to impress whilst his leader is away, what he says is complete nonsense and I urge you not to take up the suggestion.