Gary Humphries (ACT, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Defence Materiel) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister for Finance and Deregulation (Senator Wong) to questions without notice asked by Opposition senators today relating to the 2013-14 Budget.

Senator Wong was asked to answer a number of questions today relating principally to the promises made in last year's budget with respect to things like the delivery of a surplus. Senator Abetz quoted directly from the budget speech given last year by the Treasurer in relation to the absolutely 'rock solid' commitment made by the government at that time that a surplus would be delivered in the present financial year. This was indeed part of a rollout of four years of budget surpluses, stretching as far as the eye could see. Minister Wong, the Minister for Finance and Deregulation, was asked simply to confirm that those budget surpluses promised in the budget would still be government policy. Senator Wong made every effort she could to avoid answering that question. She made a vague allusion to governments having to respond to economic circumstances but did not illustrate for the benefit of the Senate what those circumstances might be.

I think we can safely assume that Senator Wong was not standing by the commitment made by the Treasurer in last year's budget. Nor should she, because it is already patently clear that this government has no intention of standing by those promises. They are promises that they have repeated from time to time—indeed, in the case of the commitment to produce a surplus. They are promises made some 500 times in the last 18 months or so by the Treasurer alone and countless tens of thousands of times by other Labor members, senators and representatives across the nation.

This comes in light of the commitment made by Kevin Rudd, the former Prime Minister, in March 2008, where he said:

We will honour all of our pre-election commitments. Every one of them, every one of them.

Before that, Ms Gillard, who was then a shadow minister, said in May 2005:

The Labor Party is the party of truth telling. When we go out into the electorate and make promises, do you know what we would do in government: we would keep them. When we say them, we mean them.

Well, if a week is a long time in politics, eight years or so is an eternity.

So Minister Wong says that economic circumstances have somehow affected the outlook for this government. Something has changed to cause the government not to be able to sit by the commitment it made last year with respect to a budget surplus. Can the minister tell us which of the other promises Labor has made in the last few years are also now to be sacrificed because of economic circumstances?

When the Prime Minister said, 'There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead,' was that a promise she was entitled to break because of economic circumstances, or was it other reasons that led to that breach of faith with the Australian people? When the government promised that the Commonwealth would take over public hospitals if the states did not act by the middle of 2009, was that a promise broken by virtue of economic circumstances? The promise that there would be no reckless spending, that they would make major infrastructure decisions underpinned by cost-benefit analyses—was that a promise broken by virtue of economic circumstances? The promises that there would be no new taxes, that there would be no cutbacks in IVF treatment and that there would be 64 GP superclinics—were they all broken by virtue of economic circumstances? The 12 new Defence family healthcare clinics—was that promise broken for that reason?

The government was going to get tough on people-smuggling. Well, from what Senator Cash has had to say, far from it. Was that also to do with economic circumstances? The promise that there would be no changes to the private health insurance rebate—was that caused by changed economic circumstances? What happened to the Department of Homeland Security? Do you remember that promise? Is that still coming, or has that gone—economic circumstances?

They said there would be no change to the baby bonus and there would be 260 childcare centres to end the double drop-off. What happened to them? I think we got about 10 before that promise petered out. They promised a trade training centre in every Australian secondary school. What happened to that—economic circumstances? We were promised that no trade union official or ex-trade union official would be appointed to Fair Work Australia. What happened to that promise? Gone. A promise to consult stakeholders on problem gambling reforms—gone. A promise to increase defence spending by three per cent in real terms—gone. A promise to cut red tape—gone. Tax relief, tax cuts based on the carbon tax— (Time expired)

Mark Furner (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A budget reflects what a government does in terms of the economy. If you look at our record on the economy, there cannot be another government that comes close to demonstrating what we have delivered through previous budgets.

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting

Mark Furner (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

All that those opposite want to do is talk down the economy. Conversely, what would they do? Let us reflect on my home state of Queensland and what the Liberal National Party has done up there. They have sacked 25,000 workers. The flow-on effect for the economy in Queensland is an increase in the unemployment rate and a lack of confidence among people to go out and spend. On top of that, what else are they doing? They are selling schools. They are selling aged-care homes as well, the homes of people who are in the last days of their lives, who should be respected and treated with dignity. The LNP are selling their homes out from under their feet. What a disgrace! This is a curtain raiser to what we will see if we end up with the unfortunate situation later this year where those opposite form government. On top of that, they are privatising all our assets in Queensland where possible. Last week I was on a road trip from Brisbane to Central Queensland. I had a very positive meeting with the council in Gladstone and they expressed deep concern over the LNP government's proposal to sell off the port. They referred to that proposal as a huge step backwards in time. The sorts of comments coming from councils who are concerned about what Campbell Newman's government has done in Queensland are also reflected in recent comments by former Prime Minister John Howard at the MFAA conference in Sydney. He said the economy is in good shape. He said that, while many people believe the Australian economy is running on empty at the moment, it is actually showing unexpected resilience. He went on to say that he is optimistic, bullish, about the future of the country and when Prime Minister Gillard, Treasurer Swan and others tell you the economy is doing better than most, they are right. That is Mr John Howard saying that we have got it right and you have got it wrong. That is your former leader in this place saying that we have got it right.

Let us look at the other things we have done. We have created nearly one million jobs since we have been in government, and that has created growth. We have 5.6 per cent unemployment, which is half the rate in Europe, which is presently at 11.9 per cent. Mr Deputy President, you are on the same committee as me, so you know that many ambassadors have come before that committee and commended us on how we handled the economy during the global financial crisis. That is why we have a AAA credit rating. We are one of only eight countries in the world to hold that rating. It is a rating that John Howard and the previous coalition government could never achieve. We are the 12th biggest economy in the world, up from 15th. That is the result of the way we managed the economy through the global financial crisis and protected jobs and growth.

I was travelling up the Bruce Highway on that trip last week. Another commitment we have made is $4.1 billion over 10 years for the Bruce Highway, compared to the $1.3 billion that those opposite managed to spend over 11½ years. The Bruce Highway is a construction site. When you drive on it, there are people with stop/go signs along the way. It is great to see. Although your trip is disrupted, it is great to see people employed on building new, better and safer roads for Queenslanders and for this nation—one thing that those opposite opposed in the stimulus package. (Time expired)

John Williams (NSW, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to take note of answers to questions, especially the question from Senator Abetz to Senator Wong where Senator Wong said, 'We'll update the forecasts.' They are always updating the forecasts because they never get them right. They are not even making a good guess. Here we are: 'The surplus is here; we are out of deficit—here to stay for surpluses.' Where will the surplus be tonight? We will hear more detail—it will be around a $10 billion, $15 billion or perhaps $20 billion deficit for this financial year, whereas they, the government under Treasurer Swan, had forecast a surplus this year, even at MYEFO, back in October: 'We will have a surplus.' There will be no surplus. The Labor Party does not know what the word means. They simply borrow and borrow—and they have done it all my life, whether they be state or federal governments.

Senator Furner referred to Queensland. You would not believe it. There are 4½ million people in Queensland—roughly the same population as Ireland. Ireland owes $120 billion; the government took over the debts of their banks during the global financial crisis. Here we have Queensland owing $73 billion, and that is forecast to grow to $85 billion by 2015. They are heading down the road of Ireland. That is where the Bligh Labor government took the finances of Queensland. No wonder they have to take harsh action now to try to stop themselves going down the road of Greece. Now we have this government doing exactly the same thing. Just in the 10 months this year, on the figures of the Australian Office of Financial Management, this government has borrowed $37 billion. And there was going to be a surplus! No, there will be no surplus.

They do not care if they impact on the confidence of the Australian people. That is what Senator Wong was saying: that we on this side are destroying the confidence of the Australian people. No; you, this government, have destroyed it, through your $273 billion of debt—your waste. We can go through all the schemes: the Pink Batts; the school buildings. Take the building where we in the National Party launched our campaign at Wagga Wagga last year; just on that day the covered outdoor learning area they had built fell over—collapsed. I could go to schemes in Moree where a builder carried out the Building the Education Revolution building and was never paid. That was $600,000 of bad debt to a builder, from Reed Constructions, carrying out a government scheme for the New South Wales incompetent government at the time—I forget who was Premier, whether it was Nathan Rees or Kristina Keneally, or Morris Iemma; I know they changed premiers pretty often in those days. And here is a contractor, someone in the private sector, blowing $600,000 doing a government job. What an absolute fiasco!

We could go out to Tottenham, a little town literally in the centre of New South Wales, where they spent $600,000 to build a school kiosk. It was so small they could not fit the microwave in it—$600,000 worth!

You are an absolute disgrace, and the Australian people do not trust you. They will not believe what the Treasurer says tonight. He is going to talk about 10 years time: $100 billion worth of infrastructure over the next 10 years. You cannot get it right three weeks out. Three weeks ago there was going to be a shortfall of income of $7½ billion. Two weeks ago it was $12 billion. A week ago it was $17 billion. You are not even making a good guess. And if you cannot manage the money, you cannot manage the economy.

This is the craziest thing of all. In October 2009, the Reserve Bank started raising interest rates. We had seven interest rate rises in a row, while the government was doing what? Stimulating the economy! So the government is borrowing money; they have their foot on the accelerator flat out, stimulating the economy, and the Reserve Bank is pulling on the handbrake! Who drives their car with their foot on the accelerator while pulling on the handbrake as they drive along? That is how stupid it is. You would not find an economist in the world who would say it would be good economic policy to borrow money and spend it while your central bank is raising interest rates to slow the economy. That is a stupidity. Of course, up went the Australian dollar. Have a look at the ramifications for rural Australia of that.

We could talk about the live exports of cattle. What a mess it has made of the beef industry! Instead of 750,000 animals going to Indonesia each year it is now down to 250,000. With the dry weather in Queensland, there is a flood of beef coming down to the southern areas and flooding the markets, and we are seeing cattle back at $20 a head. I wonder what would happen if wages went back to 1970 levels. There would be a hell of a fuss from the union movement. That will never happen. But it does not matter when you destroy the beef industry in Australia and put so many under so much pressure! You are a disgrace and the Australian people do not trust you. (Time expired)

Doug Cameron (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will not be lectured by the coalition on economic responsibility—absolutely no way. This is a government who has delivered for this country, a government who have strong growth. The economy is nearly 13 per cent larger than when we came to power. We are now the 12th largest economy in the world. We have a AAA credit rating. We have low unemployment—5.2 per cent. We have an exceptional job creation record. We have contained inflation. We have a low cash rate and interest rates are sitting at some of their lowest ever. That means that a family with a $300,000 mortgage is paying $5,000 less in repayments every year than under the coalition government. We have very low debt. We are the envy of the world in relation to our debt. And, on investment, there has been $1 trillion worth of investment since Labor came to power.

You just cannot get away with one-liners when you come to talk about the economy. You really cannot get away with the nonsense that spews out of Senator Joyce. I know that some of you guys over there are embarrassed when you see Senator Joyce in full flight. Well, I am sure that the voters of New England will see him in full flight and will certainly cast their view on what he will be doing.

What is the great Liberal tradition? The great Liberal tradition on the economy is: if there is a problem, throw money at the problem. That is what the coalition do. What have you got now? You had a problem with your leader, Mr Tony Abbott. The problem was that women did not respect Mr Abbott. So what was the decision? 'Well, we will give women earning up to $150,000 a year 26 weeks paid maternity leave.'

Now the rebellion has started in the coalition. Mr Hawke, Dr Jensen, Dr Washer and Senator Eggleston are all saying that this is a problem, not consistent with coalition values—whatever they are. Senator Joyce was out defending it today, when every one of the Nationals has told you that it is a dog of a policy. It is a policy that you should not put in. It is economically irresponsible. It is unfair. It is unegalitarian. And you know that is the position, so you know you are in trouble with that.

I heard Senator Ryan talking before the Senate sat for question time today. He said, 'We have a conservative approach to budgeting.' Let us go back and have a look at how the last coalition government actually budgeted. I like the quote from George Megalogenis where he said:

Every voter that cried "cost of living" was given a wad of cash to quieten them down.

That is the great economic responsibility of the Howard government—an absolute joke. He said:

The competition for handouts infected the government itself. Howard and Costello argued, repeatedly, over the quantity and the content of the largesse.

That was the coalition's position on the economy. You had the Treasurer and the Prime Minister arguing about largesse, and you had Mr Costello done over by the Prime Minister time and time again. He was done over—that guy had no backbone, a jelly backbone, and no credibility—and he just gave in. That is the problem we had. George Megalogenis said:

While Howard searched for the next payment to make to his target audience Costello tried to reinforce a sense of purity—

well, he failed—

by cutting income taxes as well.

He said:

The upshot was taxes were no longer being collected to provide public services, or to build buffers in good times to deploy in bad times, but to churn back to the electorate. The budget became a frequent-voter program …

(Time expired)

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I too rise to take note of answers given by Senator Wong in relation to questions asked by Senators Abetz, Brandis, Joyce and Sinodinos. Senator Cameron and those senators on the other side who spoke before you, we are talking about broken promises, when you say one thing and you do something completely different. This is not about the interpretation of economic indicators, as you have just stood up and talked about; it is actually about telling the Australian public the truth. I draw to your attention that in 2008—

Senator Cameron interjecting—

Alan Ferguson (SA, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order!

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I draw to your attention, Senator Cameron and others in this chamber, that in 2008 the Treasurer, Mr Wayne Swan, titled his budget speech 'The new era of responsible economic management'. I have to say that I do not think that at the time anybody probably took a great deal of notice, but some five years on I think there is probably quite a lot of amusement out there that somebody could have entitled a speech that proved to be so wrong. The real tragedy is that the joke has been on the Australian public.

Hundreds and hundreds of times over the last five years, we have been told that we are going to have a surplus—we are going to have a surplus soon. At Christmas time, we were still going to have a surplus this year. After Christmas, we thought that maybe we were going to break even and we were going to have a small budget deficit. Two weeks ago, it was a $12 billion shortfall in revenue. One week ago, it was $17 billion in shortfall. One can only wonder, if we are losing about $5 billion a week, whether tonight's budget is actually going to tell us that we have a $22 billion budget revenue write-down. I bet we do not hear the word 'surplus' used too often in tonight's budget speech by the Treasurer.

Let us have a look at some of the other comments that the Treasurer has made. I draw these to the house's attention simply because you cannot constantly keep saying something that is constantly proved to be wrong. We all accept that every now and again you can make a mistake, but what we do in our businesses is go back and revise the errors that we have made. In 2011-12, the Treasurer said:

We are on track for surplus in 2012-13, on time, as promised—and this provides the solid foundations for the targeted investments we announce tonight.

And then, in 2012-13:

… on time, as promised.

The alternative—meandering back to surplus—would compound the pressures in our economy and push up the cost of living for pensioners and working people.

And then another comment, from last year's budget:

This Budget delivers a surplus this coming year, on time, as promised, and surpluses each year after that, strengthening over time—

et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. I am afraid to say how many times you can say the same thing incorrectly. You start questioning whether this Treasurer actually understands what a budget surplus is.

So what have we got? As a consequence of what I would now refer to as 'a new era of irresponsible economic mismanagement', we have a series of resulting backflips that have been caused simply because the government have had to balance the budget. Family tax benefit increases have been scrapped. Increases in the tax-free threshold, as were promised, have been scrapped. We were not going to have a levy to fund the NDIS, but apparently we now have a levy. And the list goes on and on and on. How many houses were we promised would be connected to the NBN by now? I do not have the exact figures, but I would almost guarantee that not as many houses have been connected as were promised by the minister. Where is the funding for Gonski? Where is the funding for the dental scheme? Where are the boats that were going to be stopped, as we heard Senator Cash say earlier? We believe that one of them probably popped into Australia just in the last few minutes.

But I have to say that the winner of the biggest untruth of this government's reign has got to be the carbon tax: 'There will be no carbon tax under the government I lead.' As was mentioned earlier, it is not because of the global financial crisis that we have ended up with a situation where we were promised no carbon tax and we got one, but the real tragedy of the carbon tax is not the fact that the Prime Minister told us a lie but the consequences of that carbon tax on Australia. It is not just the cost of power; it is transferred into the cost of living. We have seen closed businesses. We see people out of work. We have seen the economy being constricted, and we have seen businesses become totally and utterly uncompetitive. So the great legacy of the lies and the untruths and the constant misrepresentation to the Australian people is that this government will leave a legacy that this country does not want.

Question agreed to.