Gavan O'Connor (Corio, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries) Share this | Hansard source

The honourable member for Ryan launched into this debate with criticisms of the opposition on foreign debt. As we know, exporting performance is very important to controlling those levels of foreign debt. I am merely making the point that the country is awash with Liberal debt. That is the simple point I am making. The Prime Minister said on 20 September 1995:

I can promise you that we will follow policies which will, over a period of time—

like 10 years—

bring down the foreign debt.

Well! Unfortunately, the foreign debt is 2½ times what it was when Labor exited the treasury bench. So I am wondering whether this is another non-core promise that the Prime Minister made—a bit like the never, ever GST, the ‘children overboard’, the weapons of mass destruction and all of those fine promises that have been broken.

We on this side of the House always like deferring to the Treasurer on economic analysis! Honourable members who are new in this place probably do not remember the original debt truck, but they will remember the B-double truck, the road train, that is the Liberal debt truck. I remember the original truck quite well. I was impressed by the now Treasurer’s economic analysis at the time, being the ‘genius’ that he was. He said that, if you combine the net foreign debt with the government debt and you divide it per head of population in Australia, you come up with a figure of the debt for every man, woman and child in Australia. I have done that calculation today: it is $25,000. Every man, woman and child now has a Liberal debt of $25,000. Anybody who stands up in this place defending that sort of record really ought to go back and study their Costello economics. Study your Costello economics, have a look at your Prime Minister’s performance when he was Treasurer and then ask yourselves where you have been, because that is the question we are asking you: where has this government been on the issue of Australia’s export performance?

The EMDG Scheme was a Labor initiative designed to assist companies to earn export dollars for Australia and to change the culture of Australian industry to get them oriented to export. We were extremely successful. Every particular study that has been done here indicates that a dollar put into the EMDG yields anything from $10 to $15 in net benefit to the Australian economy. That is money well spent. I am pleased that members of the coalition support a good Labor initiative.

Having said that, I think it is time that we really did take stock of our export performance. My shadow ministerial portfolio is in agriculture and fisheries. They are major contributors to Australia’s great exporting effort. I come from an electorate which is a major regional centre and also a major exporter. So I have a very intimate interest in all matters of economic infrastructure and policy relating to export performance.

I need to say this honestly to the House: I do not mean to offer any criticism to any member of the government but, quite frankly, members opposite—it hurts me to say this!—you have got a dud as trade minister. I say this in all genuineness, because leadership is very important in this particular area. There would not be a member of the House that would say that the current incumbent in this portfolio holds a candle to Peter Cook or Bob McMullan, two of the great trade ministers of Australia. Anybody who can go into a set of negotiations on trade with the Americans and get so comprehensively creamed and then drop a major rural industry, the sugar industry, off the table in the negotiations really does not deserve to be in that particular portfolio.

All of us here understand the importance of Australia’s export performance to the creation of national income and to the task of keeping interest rates down. We all know that. But we know that it is more significant than that, because the exporting task spawns a whole range of side benefits, such as people-to-people cultural contacts with other nations that feed into the task of securing this nation.

We know that exporters are great wealth generators, in the sense that they create jobs and they spawn an innovative and go-getting culture within their enterprises. These are, as study after study has shown, the major drivers of innovation in our economy. So this scheme is very important to Australia’s future export success, and I am pleased that this government—and I will say it quite honestly to members opposite—has continually supported a great Labor initiative. For that we thank you. We are supporting this particular scheme in the main. We support some 12 of the 14 provisions unequivocally. We believe the scheme ought to be extended. We believe access ought to be there for the small to medium sized exporters particularly, and that is where this scheme is aimed. To be eligible for the Export Market Development Grants Scheme, an applicant must have an income of not more than $30 million in the grant year, must have incurred at least $15,000 of eligible export expenses under the scheme, and a principal status for the export business must be obtained. The criteria are very important. The moneys that are allocated here are very important, and of course we will be supporting the legislation.

But I hold grave fears about the direction of policy, and that was articulated by the member for Batman previously in this debate. He has joined us again in the chamber. He was most articulate in the way that he laid out the important factors that are going to contribute to the growth in our economic performance and to economic growth and wealth creation in this country. But I must say I am a little concerned at the government’s predictive capacities in this export area. I note that in 2001 the government forecast five per cent export growth, when in fact exports fell by 0.8 per cent. The Treasurer who gave that dud prediction should resign. In 2002 the government forecast six per cent export growth. So this great, economic-performing government had ministers in there saying, ‘Australia’s export performance is going to go up.’ But then it stayed down and fell by 0.8 per cent. In 2003 the government again forecast export growth at six per cent, while it grew at one per cent. In 2004 the government forecast eight per cent and it only grew at 2.5 per cent. In 2005 the government forecast seven per cent export growth, which was followed by an expected two per cent actual growth. You would have to be a dud to put your name to that, wouldn’t you?

That is the problem. We have got a dud in the portfolio and we have got a government that now cannot control the net foreign debt, and Australia is awash with Liberal debt. That is not a criterion that I have ever applied to this economic analysis. That is your Treasurer. I am using his analysis. And for every man, woman and child in this country there is now $25,000 of Liberal debt. What an extraordinary burden to bear! I have got to say to the honourable member opposite, the member for Canning, do not do what the honourable member for Ryan did and get up here and try and level the criticism on debt at the opposition when in fact you have got a hopeless trade performance and the country is awash with your debt. I hope you do not do that, because I did make the point that when members opposite get up on this issue and criticise us—I referred to what the former Labor Prime Minister said—it is like getting mauled by a dead sheep.

So do not even enter the zone, because this country is now awash with Liberal debt. We are up to our eyeballs—and higher—with Liberal debt, and it is going higher. The Liberal debt in this country is just going higher and higher. You have no strategy, and your budget tells us you have no strategy, to address the crippling Liberal debt that is now on every Australian household. The burden is this. According to your Treasurer and your Prime Minister, your foreign debt has meant that every Australian household is now shouldering an increased interest rate burden, courtesy of the Liberal and National parties; every man, woman and child in Australia is now carrying $25,000 of Liberal debt.

See this speech in context