Senate debates
Wednesday, 18 March 2009
Questions without Notice
Economy
2:41 pm
Helen Coonan (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Finance, Competition Policy and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Order on my right! Senator Coonan is entitled to be heard in silence.
Helen Coonan (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Finance, Competition Policy and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Do I have the call for a question?
John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Yes, you have got the call. Reset the clocks so Senator Coonan has the full time to ask the question.
Helen Coonan (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Finance, Competition Policy and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Thank you, Mr President. My question is to Senator Conroy, the Minister representing the Treasurer. Can the minister advise the Senate which foreign banks he understands will be withdrawing their existing Australian commercial property loans?
Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
I thank Senator Coonan for that question. As is evidenced by simply picking up the newspapers today, you can make yourself aware of which projects are in danger because those opposite have decided to irresponsibly behave like economic vandals. There are actual businesses who have identified themselves as needing refinancing in the morning papers, Senator Coonan—through you, Mr President. So let us be clear: the Rudd government have said from day one that we are not going to wait till after the train wreck; we are going to put in place a safety net. We are not prepared to gamble with the lives and futures of Australian families and workers while we sit on our hands and do nothing. Those opposite advocate the ‘sit on our hands’ policy approach. It is consistent with their entire approach since this irresponsible and politically expedient Leader of the Opposition took over, and that is reflected right across the front bench opposite: cynical, short-term politics at the expense of Australian families. You can get up tomorrow and explain to those families why their breadwinner is coming home without a job—because those opposite are only interested in their own jobs. The Leader of the Opposition particularly is only interested in one job. He is being stalked by the member for Higgins and 28 other members of the front—
Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Senator Conroy will resume his seat. Senator Abetz—
Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Eric is one of the 28!
John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Order! I am waiting till Senator Abetz can be heard in silence.
Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Mr President, with great respect, surely it does not require a point of order from the opposition to call this minister to order when he is clearly not being directly relevant to the question that was asked. How Mr Costello stalking somebody in any way, shape or form—
John Faulkner (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Senator Faulkner interjecting—
John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Senator Faulkner! Senator Abetz is entitled to be heard in silence.
Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
The answer that was being provided in no way, shape or form dealt with the very specific question asking the minister to advise which foreign banks he understands will be withdrawing their existing Australian commercial property loans. Mr President, I ask you to direct the minister’s attention to the question.
Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
On the point of order, Mr President, the question which was asked started with ‘advise the Senate which foreign banks will be withdrawing’—
John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
The cross-chamber conversation does not allow me to hear what is being said. It is not fair to the person speaking and it is not fair to those waiting to hear the answer.
Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
It is clear that Senator Conroy has been answering the question, advising the Senate about foreign banks which may be forced to withdraw from Australia. It is an important issue. You should listen to him because the actions of the Liberal Party in this area are disgraceful. In answering the question, it is appropriate to hold the Liberals to account in respect of what their position is on the matter while remaining directly relevant to the question.
John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Senator Conroy, you have five seconds in which to answer and I draw your attention to the question asked by Senator Coonan.
Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
As the Rudd government have made abundantly clear, we will not— (Time expired)
Helen Coonan (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Finance, Competition Policy and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Given that the minister has been unable to name one foreign bank threatening to exit Australian commercial property loans and the total lack of transparency surrounding the need for a big, fat, taxpayer-funded fund to prop up commercial loans, what possible justification can there be for exposing hapless taxpayers to the risk of yet another $28 billion of debt to guarantee the operations of the Australian Business Investment Partnership?
Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
The only hapless persons are those on the opposite side of this chamber because a disorderly deleveraging process could force many commercial property projects to sell their assets immediately at whatever price can be obtained—in other words, a fire sale. Such a fire sale could destabilise the entire commercial property sector and create a vicious cycle where falling prices trigger further fire sales. That is what those opposite are advocating. ‘What justification?’ Senator Coonan asks. I could draw on the Goldman Sachs analyst report which pointed out that banks are at their limit of exposure. Goldman Sachs is a very appropriate one to point to. I have a question for Goldman Sachs: how much did Goldman Sachs pay to settle Malcolm Turnbull’s deceitful behaviour around HIH?
Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
What was the amount of money that Goldman Sachs paid to keep the liquidator of HIH—
John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Order, Senator Conroy! You will withdraw that imputation on a person in the other place.
Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
I withdraw, Mr President. (Time expired)
Helen Coonan (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Finance, Competition Policy and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Senator Conroy earlier mentioned jobs. As the government has now spent $80 billion of taxpayers’ money claiming to create or protect jobs when in fact Australians are losing jobs and unemployment has jumped to 5.2 per cent on the Labor government’s watch, why should Australians then be asked to believe that risking yet another $28 billion for Ruddbank will miraculously shore up 150,000 jobs, as claimed by Treasurer Swan?
Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
I thank Senator Coonan for that question. As I was saying, the Goldman Sachs report points quite clearly to the ramifications of the appalling behaviour of those opposite. It is not the first time Goldman Sachs have had their cover—
Helen Coonan (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Finance, Competition Policy and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Mr President, I rise on a point of order that goes to relevance. The further supplementary question goes to jobs, not to a Goldman Sachs report that is not about jobs. Would you ask the minister to be relevant.
John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
I am waiting to hear Senator Coonan’s point of order. It is totally improper for you to be interjecting when I am trying to listen.
Helen Coonan (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Finance, Competition Policy and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
The question I am asking the minister to be relevant to, and for you to rule that he should be relevant to, is why throwing another $28 billion at jobs is going to work when $80 billion has already failed.
Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
This particular point of order demonstrates how out of touch those opposite are. If Senator Coonan had actually read the Goldman Sachs report, she would have seen that it specifically deals with the issue of the impact of jobs by not having ABIP.
John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Senator Conroy, are you debating this issue?
Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
I am arguing the point of order.
Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
The Goldman Sachs report is absolutely relevant to the question. It specifically addresses the issue of jobs. This answer is entirely relevant to the question that was asked.
John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
On the question raised by Senator Coonan, Senator Conroy, I draw your attention to the fact that you have 43 seconds left to address the question raised by Senator Coonan.
Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
As I was saying, Mr President, the Goldman Sachs report goes specifically to the policy failure being demonstrated by those opposite. It specifically outlines the impact on the Australian economy of the actions by those opposite in blocking ABIP. It is very relevant. It highlights exactly why the economic vandals on the other side of the chamber should be condemned. They are to be condemned by Australian families, by the business community and by the property sector. They are to be condemned for their irresponsible behaviour. Goldman Sachs have just payed a settlement to the HIH liquidator to cover up the member for Wentworth’s behaviour over a simple question: how much?