Maria Kovacic (NSW, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Treasurer, Senator Gallagher. How much extra spending has the Albanese government committed to in the past week?

Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the senator for the question. All of those details will be released in the budget—in the normal way, as people would expect. The spending that we have supported, including paying super on PPL, along with our other cost-of-living measures, are about supporting the community, easing cost-of-living pressures where we can and continuing to repair the budget. I would remind those opposite that we were the first government in 15 years to deliver a surplus—not to print the mugs that said you were back in black but to actually deliver the surplus. We have removed waste from the budget. We have sought savings and delivered those savings. We have found room for important priorities like super on paid parental leave, because parents take time out of the workforce.

It is an investment, not a welfare measure, as some opposite have called it. We believe these investments are important. We believe they're investments not only for achieving gender equality; they're also good for the economy. All of the spending that we agree to is measured against our fiscal priorities and our fiscal plan, and we will continue to do that. We're in the thick of the budget session now. We are going through all of those decisions. We're fixing up terminating measures and hidden black holes that we inherited from you when you were in government because you didn't budget with a true picture of the state of the budget. We'll continue to do all that work. We'll continue to repair the budget, to lower the debt burden we inherited and to make room for important spending priorities that alleviate the cost-of-living pressures on Australians.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Kovacic, a first supplementary?

Maria Kovacic (NSW, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is it true that the Albanese Labor government made $6.75 billion in new spending commitments in just one week?

Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, I take the supplementary question. There's one thing I don't do and that is accept the numbers that those opposite spout. I have seen them. I have seen how you've added up in your big spending. Some of the things that you have costed, that you accuse us of, are important increases in the pension, for example, and estimates variations where because of inflation we see increases in payments. You count that and say that it's wasteful spending. We have invested in Indigenous housing—tick, yes—because we believe we need to fill the gap that was created after a decade of inaction, to make sure that we are providing housing options for people in the Northern Territory. Yes. Are we backing the critical minerals industry? Yes, tick, we are backing them. Are we investing in the future generations of this country through super on PPL? Yes, we are—and all will be released in the budget.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Kovacic, second supplementary?

Maria Kovacic (NSW, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

How does the Albanese Labor government's latest spender bender, which comes on top of $209 billion of new spending since being elected, line up with the Treasurer's promises that the next budget will demonstrate, 'We will be more responsible and demonstrate more restraint', and, 'There will not be any big cash splashes in the budget, simple as that'?

Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank her for the supplementary question. What I take from that is that you do not support estimates variations to pensions and payments. If you use that figure, that is what you are saying. If you don't support Indigenous housing—that's what I hear from that: that you don't support super on PPL and that you're not backing in the critical minerals industry. Is that what you're saying? That is the implication from the question that you ask.

Now, I know it kills you that we delivered the surplus. I know it kills you that we are more fiscally responsible and that we are managing the economy better. I know all of that really irritates you, but the reality is we are sticking to the fiscal plan that we outlined when we got elected. We are making responsible decisions. We're investing where we can, we're making savings where we can and we're reducing our debt burden. That is what any responsible government would do.