Helen Coonan (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Finance, Competition Policy and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Finance and Deregulation, Senator Conroy. What instructions has the minister given to the Department of Finance and Deregulation to investigate the wanton waste and mismanagement in the $14.7 billion spending on schools?

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. It is clear—as has already been demonstrated by the questions in this place today and the answers given by the minister—that those opposite do not have a fig leaf when it comes to this. There are thousands upon thousands of jobs being created in every local community across Australia—and the key here is: those opposite do not support one of them. They will turn up for the photo opportunity, they will ask to be in the photo, but they come into this chamber, they vote against them and then they attack them and criticise them. It is the height of hypocrisy. They want to come in here and have it both ways. They want to walk both sides of the street. They are happy for Australian families—

Helen Coonan (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Finance, Competition Policy and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, my point of order is of course on relevance. The minister was asked whether the minister he represents in this place has given any instructions to his department to investigate the waste that has been exposed in the schools spending package, and so far he has not indicated whether the minister has given any instructions to his department or whether he has not. We do not know from the answer that Senator Conroy has given, because he has not been relevant, just who is in control of Labor’s reckless spending.

John Faulkner (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Vice-President of the Executive Council) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise on the point of order. With due respect to Senator Coonan, I listened very carefully to the point of order she took and I would suggest to you, Mr President, that it is not appropriate to use the device of a point of order to repeat a question, however poorly drafted and articulated the question was in the first place.

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Conroy, I draw your attention to the fact that you have now one minute and four seconds in which to answer the question that was 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

Thank you, Mr President. As I was saying, those opposite are once again trying to walk both sides of the street. They want to claim the credit and they want to be in the photos but they do not want to come into the parliament and vote for it. It is typical of those opposite that they have no policy agenda to deal with the—

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise on a point of order on relevance. The minister has just gone straight back to where he left off. He has not attempted to change his direction and has not attempted to answer the question. He is now going to wind the clock down. We are losing time. Can he please answer the question?

Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, on the point of order: what we now have again is a repeat of the first question again. The minister is answering relevantly to the question. I think Senator Faulkner hit the nail on the head when he said ‘a poorly drafted question’. When you look at the question, the minister has to attempt to construct an answer to a question that was poorly drafted. It was dealt with in such a way that it is a negative question. It went to the issue of the finance minister investigating the $14.7 billion and so on and so forth. That was the nub of the question. The part of the question the minister is being relevant to is about the Building the Education Revolution. It is about building schools in our community. Maybe the opposition could at least get on the same page.

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Conroy, there are 41 seconds remaining for you to answer the question.

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

Those opposite who are choosing to walk both sides of the street want to jump on board a dishonest and inaccurate campaign being run in one newspaper. As my colleague Senator Arbib has comprehensively demonstrated this week, and already stated, in almost each and every single case they have raised, they have been shown to be factually incorrect. There is no waste and mismanagement.

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise on a point of order. This is a real breach of question time, and I ask you, Mr President, to go back and review Hansard and the tapes of this question time. The minister has come nowhere near the question in the entire duration. We have got nine seconds left. It is a waste of time. If the minister is not going to answer the question, just sit down and say you cannot answer it because you do not know the answer. Do not waste our time. Mr President, please review Hansard. We need relevance in these questions; otherwise, as an opposition, we are going to have to seriously look at the procedures for question time.

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

Mr President, I rise on the point of order. Mr President, I am not sure whether that was an implied threat to you by Senator Parry in his rather agitated contribution. If so, it is totally inappropriate. I might say on the point of order that the minister was asked about whether the finance minister had investigated claimed waste and mismanagement and Senator Conroy was in the midst of refuting the suggestion that there was waste and mismanagement. He could not be more directly on point than that. Senator Parry clearly was not listening, and there is no point of order.

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Conroy, you have nine seconds remaining.

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

As I was absolutely on message, denying your accusations— (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. I can appreciate the extraordinary sensitivity of those opposite to the waste and mismanagement, and I am going to ask the minister this: will the minister now guarantee that every contract let in the government’s $14.7 billion spendathon on schools will provide value for money and meet probity guidelines and that every dollar borrowed on behalf of taxpayers will be properly accounted for?

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

I appreciate that, given that the premise of the first question was completely false, the second question actually bears no relationship whatsoever to the portfolio it has been asked to. The first question is based on a false premise and the second question has already been asked of and answered by Senator Arbib and Senator Carr—because that is exactly where that particular question belongs. I hope that the follow-up supplementary has a skerrick of relevance to the portfolio minister who is being asked it.

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 clearly does not understand that, if he denies in those circumstances that there is waste and mismanagement, he can also provide a guarantee. But obviously he does not understand the sequencing of this line of inquiry. My further supplementary question is: as the Minister for Finance and Deregulation and Deputy Prime Minister have clearly lost control of spending in the $14.7 billion schools program, when will the minister call in the Auditor-General to get to the bottom of this debacle?

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

Once again, the question is based on an entirely false premise. Those opposite have been running a campaign this week trying to highlight what they allege is waste and mismanagement. My colleagues Senator Carr and Senator Arbib have comprehensively dealt with these allegations in this chamber. Those opposite who then want to try to construct questions to the Department of Finance and Deregulation are so out of questions that they are desperately asking a minister representing the Minister for Finance and Deregulation. The question is a joke and it should be treated as such. I invite you to review the Hansard to see if this question had any relevance to this portfolio.