Matthew Canavan (Queensland, Liberal National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

CANAVAN () (): My question is to the Minister representing the Treasurer, Senator Gallagher. Last week's national accounts showed that we are in an entrenched household recession, with productivity going backwards and only anaemic growth at best. To use the Treasurer's own words, who is responsible for 'smashing' the economy—the government or the RBA?

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

The national accounts showed that growth across the Australian economy is slow—it's weak; it's soft—and we are facing similar economic challenges to those being experienced around the world.

Opposition Senator:

An opposition senator interjecting—

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

Well, I think it has been acknowledged by everyone other than those opposite that there are significant global challenges that have presented across the world. In fact, many of the OECD countries have seen at least a negative quarter of growth. Australia has been fortunate in that we have not seen that, but we acknowledge that the impact of those global pressures—the challenges, the price pressures and higher interest rates—are having an effect on growth in our economy. The government take responsibility for an economic plan that is focused on ensuring that inflation continues to moderate but where we are helping households out while they're doing it tough. That's why our cost-of-living approach and our budget management approach, where we've found savings and delivered surpluses, all help in the inflation challenge.

But we're not pretending that people aren't doing it tough, which is why we implemented all of those cost-of-living measures, many of which those opposite opposed. Whether it be energy bill rebates, whether it be the tax cuts that they wanted to fight an election over, whether it be our investments in early education and care or whether it be our housing agenda, they were all opposed by those opposite. These are the decisions we've taken, and I believe the national accounts showed that those decisions were made in the right interests of the economy, that we have managed to continue to grow, albeit slowly, and that the government's decisions have supported growth in the economy at an important time.

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

Senator Canavan, a first supplementary?

Matthew Canavan (Queensland, Liberal National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister, how much has the nation's productivity fallen under your government?

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

I acknowledge Senator Canavan's interest in productivity. Presumably, he was really interested when they were in government and, over that decade, there was the worst productivity growth that had been seen in 40 years.

Well, I'm just drawing your attention, Senator Birmingham, to the fact that you didn't really seem to care about productivity that much when you were in government,. But alright, accepting that you now do: that is why our housing investments are important. That's why our investments in skills are important. That's why our investments in renewable energy and the green transition are important. And that's why our investments in the care economy are important—all significant drivers of productivity in the economy.

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

Senator Gallagher, please resume your seat. Senator Birmingham?

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The minister has had 48 seconds, and she's got 12 seconds left on the clock, to answer—

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

Is it a point of order?

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

the only question Senator Canavan asked, which is for the statistic.

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

Senator Birmingham, are you raising—

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

How much has productivity fallen under the Labor government?

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

Senator Birmingham, you can't just stand up and launch into a very short statement. You need to let me know if it's a point of order. I'm assuming it was. I believe the minister is being relevant, and I will continue to listen carefully. Minister.

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

It's a sore point for Senator Birmingham that they were in charge when Australia had the worst productivity outcomes in four decades and why they stood in front of any measure that we put in place to secure economic growth going forward. (Time expired)

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

Senator Canavan, a second supplementary?

Matthew Canavan (Queensland, Liberal National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Despite the minister's protests, it is much, much worse now. I have the figure. Productivity growth has fallen by 6.3 per cent in just two years, and now our private sector is retreating. How does the government expect the economy to grow sustainably without productivity improving? Or is your economic plan simply a Ponzi scheme based on neverending growth in government spending and subsidies?

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

I would hope, then, based on that question, that Senator Canavan will get in and support the measures that the government has put in place to improve productivity after inheriting the worst growth in productivity in four decades: providing more housing, boosting renewables, investing in skills, grabbing hold of the technology and opportunities that come with that, human capital—perhaps any of that. Does any of that interest you, Senator Canavan? Is there any of that that you might like to get behind? All of those are about securing the future growth of our economy and seizing the opportunities that come with it. Where do those opposite want to go? Back to the 1950s, I reckon—that's where they're going. We're looking forward, in all those areas. Senator Canavan, if there's one area in that long list I read out that you might like to support, we would welcome that.