David Bushby (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is also to the Minister for Finance and Minister representing the Treasurer, Senator Cormann. Why is it so important for the parliament to support the government's plan for stronger growth, more jobs and to get the budget back to surplus?

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Bushby for that question. Earlier this week the government delivered our next instalment in our responsible, long-term, economic plan to strengthen growth, to strengthen job creation and to get the budget back into surplus. Of course it is in the national interest for the Labor Party to support the measures that we have put forward for stronger growth, more jobs and a budget that gets back to surplus on a credible pathway.

Tonight, Mr Shorten will have the opportunity to stand up for the national interest. Tonight, Mr Shorten will have the opportunity to show that he has what it takes to make the necessary decisions in the national interest. Tonight, he will have the opportunity to explain how he is going to pay for Labor's $52 billion budget black hole. You, the Labor Party, are asking us questions about our spending growth trajectory which is much lower than yours. Guess what? Right now, Labor is opposing $17 billion in savings and revenue measures put forward by this government. Right now, Labor is opposing $6.5 billion in savings and revenue measures that Labor, themselves, initiated, and they are calling for the restoration of more than $31 billion in spending from savings the government has already banked, including $18 billion in foreign aid. That is Labor economics; that is the Labor magic pudding. You might ask: how many alternative savings measures has the Labor Party identified? How many alternative savings measures has Mr Shorten identified? Let me tell you, Mr President—zero. There is $55.8 billion in expenditure and not a single savings measure.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister, that is disorderly. You can continue, Minister, but you cannot use the props. Minister.

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, $55.8 billion in new spending under Labor, $3.8 billion in revenue proposals, 100 per cent of Labor's effort on the revenue side wanting to increase taxes on people saving for their retirement to pay for Labor's— (Time expired)

David Bushby (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Can the minister further advise the Senate of the savings and revenue measures outstanding from Labor's last budget for the 2013-14 year?

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I can indeed. Here we are, in the last budget of the worst finance minister in Australia's history. She put forward a spending cut, applying an efficiency dividend to university funding. The value of that spending cut over the current forward estimates is $1.2 billion. Senator Wong, having initiated it, having banked it in the budget, is now voting against it. Here we have ending the discount for paying HECS fees up-front—$336 million over the current forward estimates, a Wong savings measure. She initiated it, she banked it in the budget and, guess what, she is now voting against it. There is the change in Labor's Student Start-Up Scholarship. Instead of providing a grant, Senator Wong said the loan repayable should be repayable through HECS—$2.1 billion dollars over the forward estimates. She is nodding. She knows that they are her savings measures. They are savings measures which she initiated, which she banked in her last budget and which she is now voting against. That is the sort of reckless attitude that we are getting from the Labor Party today.

Tonight Mr Shorten has the opportunity to pull Senator Wong into line. Tonight Mr Shorten has the opportunity to show that he has actually got the strength to provide leadership in the Labor Party, that he actually has the strength to do the right thing in the national interest. We are waiting. Australia will be watching. Australia wants to know where the money is coming from. We are saying to Bill Shorten, 'Show us the money.'

David Bushby (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Can the minister advise the Senate of any alternative spending proposals to those put forward by the government in this budget?

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Shorten is always very fast to be out there complaining about the proposals to reduce spending put forward by the government. Labor want to have it both ways: they complain about our proposals to reduce spending; they do not put up any other alternative proposals; and then they complain that spending is growing by too much. If the Labor Party do not like the proposed savings measures that we are putting forward, where are yours? What are your savings? Australia wants to know from Mr Shorten tonight how he will pay for his increased spending and how he will pay for not proceeding with $17 billion in savings that the government has put forward. How will he pay for it? I say it again—and this is a very important message to the Labor Party: 'Mr Shorten, show us the money. Pull Senator Wong into line—the big spender; the worst finance minister in the history of the Commonwealth. Pull Tanya Plibersek into line, who is out there spending $18 billion on foreign aid, which we do not have.'— (Time expired)

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Finance, Senator Cormann. Can the minister confirm that his budget sets spending at $62 billion higher next year than in the last full budget year under the Labor government?

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What I can confirm is that, since the Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook before Christmas, spending is $7.3 billion less. What I can also confirm is that, instead of the massive growth in spending under Labor, hidden in the period beyond the forward estimates, under this government we have brought spending growth down. Senator Wong, the worst finance minister in the history of the Commonwealth, used to have the supposed target where she said, 'We're going to control spending by not exceeding spending growth of two per cent above inflation.' She always failed. She never met that target. Three point six per cent spending growth—

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Pause the clock.

Claire Moore (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Women) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise on a point of order going to direct relevance. There was a straightforward question about the spending level—$62 billion more than in the last year of the Labor government. We have not got close to that answer.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Moore. The minister has a minute and 15 seconds in which to answer the question. I remind the minister of the question.

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What I can confirm again for the Labor Party is that, under Labor, spending as a share of the economy was constantly trending up. The Intergenerational report showed 37 per cent as a share of the economy over the next few decades. Under the coalition, spending as a share of the economy is actually trending down, from 25.9 per cent now to 25.3 per cent. Spending under Labor, according to the Independent Commission of Audit, was heading for 26.5 per cent as a share of the economy in 2023-24. It is actually now trending down. Why is that? Because we are actually controlling spending growth. Do you know what the only reason is that spending is still at 1.5 and not still down at one per cent? Because—

Claire Moore (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Women) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise on a point on order, again going to direct relevance. The minister is confirming everything except the question.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am sorry, Senator Moore, I cannot agree with you on this occasion. The minister was answering the question. I was listening very carefully. He was indicating the spending rates and he was indicating the levels—where they are going up and coming down. That was part of the question.

Senator Conroy interjecting—

Order, Senator Conroy! Minister, you have the call.

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What I would say to the Labor Party is: it is time that you actually started to focus on the national interest, instead of just putting politics over substance. This government is working to get the budget back into surplus. This government is making the difficult or necessary decisions to get back into surplus as soon as possible. All we are getting from the Labor Party is negativity and politics. That is all we are getting from the Labor Party. (Time expired)

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Can the minister confirm government spending will be higher next year than in six out of seven years under the former government?

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No wonder that Senator Wong made such a mess of the budget, because she does not actually understand the indicators that matter when it comes to spending growth. The indicator that matters is by how much expenditure is going up above inflation, by how much expenditure is going up year on year in real terms. Of course, under Labor, on average, in their first five years it went up by 3.6 per cent above inflation. In our first budget, it went up by just one per cent a year above inflation. In our second budget it is going up by just 1.5 per cent above inflation. The only reason why that is slightly higher is because the ramp-up in expenditure on the NDIS is coming into the forward estimates. We have a bipartisan commitment to the NDIS, and that is one of the reasons why we have to make sure that we make space in the budget: in order to be able to afford the important investment into the National Disability Insurance Scheme. I am working very closely with Senator Fifield to ensure that we make that happen. The truth is that Labor left behind an unsustainable spending forward trajectory and we are fixing it. (Time expired)

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Can the minister confirm that his budget returns spending to levels not seen since the global financial crisis? When did the minister decide he wanted to be Australia's biggest spending finance minister?

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

(—) (): And that from the worst finance minister in Australia's history—the finance minister who presided over a $107 billion blow-out in her three short years in the job and who is now part of a shadow cabinet which has blown a $52 billion additional hole, a $52 billion budget black hole, into the budget. You are actually out there in the stratosphere looking down on Australia, looking from the mountain of spending and debt that you are sort of accumulating here as part of a senior member of the Labor Party. I say this: the coalition is working in a measured, responsible and fair way to get our budget back under control. We are focusing on making sure that federal spending growth is on a sustainable trajectory for the future—with no help from the Labor Party. If I could show the prop I would: zero spending reduction from the Labor Party. (Time expired)