Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Finance and Deregulation, Senator Wong. Given that the current government has never made a contribution to the Future Fund, when does the government anticipate making a contribution to the fund from a future Labor budget surplus?

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

What I would say about the Future Fund, as we have confirmed in this discussion today, is that the assets held by the fund are about $70 billion—I think it is around $75 billion—and I suppose the opposition could fill their budget black hole by selling the entire of the Future Fund. That could be their approach to fiscal policy, given that they have yet to have a set of costings that add up.

I make the point that we have traversed this is great detail. Those opposite continue to make assertions around the Future Fund that are not true.

Honourable Senators:

Honourable senators interjecting—

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

Order! If you want to debate this, debate it post question time.

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

Given the $70 billion black hole those on the other side are saddled with, let me say that this government, with a clear and sound fiscal strategy, will be making a contribution well before the opposition ever could—

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Point of order on relevance. The question was: given that the government have not contributed a single dollar to the future fund, when do they think it is likely they might?

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

On the point of order, Senator Wong is clearly addressing the question. She is clearly addressing what is probably the broadest question you could possibly put on the table—

Honourable senators interjecting—

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

Senator Conroy, resume your seat. If you want to debate it, I understand someone has decided to take up the offer to debate it after question time, and that is the appropriate time. Not now.

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

The question was so broad that Senator Wong's answer is completely within the ambit of the question. I ask you to dismiss this point of order on relevance on the basis that Senator Wong is being absolutely relevant to the question.

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

The minister has 58 seconds remaining to answer the question.

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

Given that we do not have the $70 billion black hole that those opposite have, our budgets will be in a much better position than theirs. But I would make this point, because I think it is an important one: those opposite seem to have forgotten something called the global financial crisis. It is extraordinary, isn't it? This economic event has caused major advanced economies to have levels of unemployment in excess of nine per cent, unlike Australia, where the unemployment figure has a five in front of it. It has occupied the policymakers and the leaders of the United States, Europe and all the major advanced economies and the developing economies. And yet they on that side seem to believe that it never happened. They never had a policy for it— (Time expired)

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. I refer the minister to page 25 of the Budget Overview for 2005-06, which states as follows in reference to the Future Fund:

The Fund will be quarantined from the rest of the budget …

and—

… Fund earnings will be excluded from the underlying cash balance …

Will the minister recommit to these foundation principles on which the Future Fund was established?

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

The accounting standards the government follows are the accounting standards that the government has followed for many years. There is a distinction, which the opposition seem not to understand, in terms of the accounting for the sale of non-financial assets—

Honourable Senators:

Honourable senators interjecting—

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

When there is silence we will proceed. You are wasting question time by having these discussions across the chamber.

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

In answer to previous questions, I have already explained the accounting of the sale of non-financial assets. I have made the statement in this chamber on a number of occasions now that the government is not raiding the Future Fund, yet the opposition continue to press the assertion, which is incorrect. I have corrected it on a number of occasions.

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Did you read what your spokeswoman said in the paper today?

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

Senator Cormann, if you want to use the Australian as the entirety of your research that is up to you, mate. Seriously. But I would make this point— (Time expired)

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supple­mentary question. Will the minister give an undertaking that the Future Fund will not meet the same fate as the Higher Education Endowment Fund and the Health and Medical Infrastructure Fund? Will the minister give an unequivocal guarantee that the Future Fund will not be touched under any circumstances contrary to its founding objectives?

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

I would refer the senator to my previous answers to Senator Cormann and Senator Joyce which make clear the government's position in relation to this matter. But I would say that if those opposite care so much about fiscal responsibility they can deal with their $70 billion black hole and they can explain why they voted to increase the government's liabilities when it comes to superannuation. You supported Senator Ronaldson's bill, which will increase public sector civilian and military superannuation liabilities—a decision that Senator Minchin was not prepared to come into this chamber and vote for. So you want to come in here and talk about unfunded liabilities, but you add to them yourselves by the way you vote. The reality is the opposition have no economic or fiscal credibility. They think that because they once sat near Peter Costello that gave them fiscal credibility. Well, it does not.