George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, Senator Wong. On this first anniversary of the Prime Minister's election promise that 'there will be no carbon tax under the government I lead', will the minister explain why the government feels no obligation to keep its promises to the Australian people?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government has been very clear about why it is in the national interest to act on climate change. Those opposite who were supporting Mr Turnbull will recall there was a time when you were not led by someone quite so reckless, when you also recognised the importance of acting on climate change.

We have been very clear with the Australian people about the need to act on climate change. The Prime Minister has spoken at length about the reasons for the decision to move to a fixed-price system followed by a floating price—that is, an emissions trading scheme. One thing is clear: it is absolutely in the nation's interest to deal with climate change. This is not an issue that is going to go away. This is not an issue that can be chased away simply by the scaremongering of those opposite.

The government understands there are a great many Australians who are concerned about this policy, who are concerned to understand the impact of the Clean Energy Future package on their households and on their families, which is why the government has worked very hard to ensure that that information is provided to the Australian people. This is, no doubt, a difficult reform. It is a reform that requires this parliament to look to the longer term and not just to the short-term politics. What you can always guarantee is that those opposite are led by a man who will never look to the long term, who will only ever look to what he believes is a short-term political advantage. He used to believe that he needed to act on climate change and that supporting an emissions trading scheme was the way forward, until he thought the politics had shifted. (Time expired)

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Is the minister aware that the Prime Minister assured the parliament on 10 May this year that the government will be:

… returning the budget to surplus in 2012-13, on time, as promised, as I said to the Australian people at the last election.

Does the minister stand by the Prime Minister's statement that a budget surplus in 2012-13 was a promise—not an objective, not an aim, not a goal but a promise?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I am very happy to answer that, although it is not a supplementary question, I would submit. I am not sure what it had to do with a carbon price.

Unlike those opposite, the government have a clear plan to return the budget to surplus in 2012-13 and we are determined to get there. We laid that plan out in the budget, we made the savings decisions that were required, we exercised restraint in expenditure so that, on average, the growth in expenditure is one per cent—

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern and Remote Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What a joke!

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will take that interjection from the very loud senator at the end there and make the point that if you want to find that kind of restraint in expenditure over a five-year period you have to go back to the 1980s. It was not ever achieved by Mr Costello. The reality is: we have a plan; they do not. The opposition have a $70 billion black hole just to get them to the starting line. That is what they have. (Time expired)

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Minister, I refer you to your statement on 29 June that:

… there’s really only one set of numbers I’m worried about. That’s making sure we get back into surplus by 2012-13 …

Minister, do you regard that as a promise? Should the Australian people have as much faith in this promise to return the budget to surplus by 2012-13 as in the Prime Minister's promise that there will be no carbon tax under the government she leads?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We have laid out a clear plan to return the budget to surplus in 2012-13 and we are determined to get there. Those opposite may not like the fact that we have demonstrated fiscal restraint and credibility, in stark contrast to them, but those are the facts.

It is true, there is no doubt, that events in the global economy do make that task more difficult—

Opposition Senators:

Opposition senators interjecting—

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

Senator Wong, you might just resume your seat for a moment so that people can settle down and I can listen to the answer.

Michael Ronaldson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Veterans' Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This claptrap is intolerable. Was it a lie or wasn't it a lie—yes or no?

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

Senator Ronaldson, if people wish to debate the issue, the time for that is three o'clock. You know that as well as I do.

Senator Conroy interjecting—

Senator Brandis interjecting—

Senator Brandis and Senator Conroy, if you wish to have a discussion about Queensland, I suggest you go outside.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I said, we have a clear plan to return the budget to surplus in 2012-13 and we are determined to get there. We put forward our budget to the Australian people and to this parliament. What I would say is this: I wonder if the $70 billion is a promise? I wonder if the $70 billion is a commitment? I wonder if the $70 billion will ever be delivered on?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, a point of order on direct relevance: I only want to know one thing: is it still a promise?

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

Order! There is no point of order. Senator Wong, continue—you have 15 seconds.

Senator Ludwig interjecting—

Senator Ronaldson interjecting—

Senator Ronaldson and Senator Ludwig, if you wish to go outside, go outside and have your discussion.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am sure the Australian people will be very interested in knowing whether or not the $70 billion is a promise. We have a budget. We have put it forward to the Australian people through this parliament, clearly costed, based on Treasury and Finance advice—the same people who found your first black hole. It is a smaller black hole— (Time expired)