Tony Abbott (Warringah, Liberal Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Hansard source

The MPI today is:

The Government’s focus on itself rather than governing Australia in the interests of working families.

The best way to know what is on the mind of political parties is to listen to what they talk about in question time. From the government today we had questions on wages growth, industrial relations reform, inflation, assistance for renters, a new model for public hospitals, Iraq and retirement savings. What did we have from members opposite? Absolutely nothing of any substance at all. Just an attempt to rake over old embers—an attempt to inflame an old issue which has been decisively dealt with and satisfactorily resolved by this government.

We were told repeatedly by the Leader of the Opposition that this government has somehow run out of puff. Let me just remind members opposite—and indeed the Australian people—of some of the big-ticket policies which this government has been pursuing since early 2005, when the alleged conversations which triggered today’s MPI took place. Since early 2005 this government has pushed through historic industrial relations reforms. They were tough reforms, and not necessarily popular, but they were necessary for the long-term future of this country, because you do not build the future, you do not build tomorrow, by embracing the soft option today, which is what we consistently see from members opposite. There have been three budgets since that time, presided over by the Treasurer, with serious personal tax cuts, the establishment of the Future Fund and superannuation reform. We have sold off Telstra—something that was always opposed by members opposite and then, at the last minute, in one of the great pieces of me-tooism, endorsed. The Commonwealth government has achieved debt free status; Welfare to Work reforms have been put in place; the historic plan to save the Murray-Darling Basin has been announced and is being implemented in the teeth of opposition from the Labor states; and, most recently, the historic, once-in-a-generation set of reforms to restore civil society in the Indigenous townships of the Northern Territory. I do not want to boast—I do not think it is a very good policy for government ministers to boast—but it is not a bad record. It has been masterminded by the finest political partnership in Australia’s history: John Howard and Peter Costello, the Prime Minister and the Treasurer of this country.

I do not say for a second that the Treasurer is not ambitious. Of course he is ambitious. He is entitled to be ambitious. If I had achieved what he has achieved, I would be entitled to be ambitious. Why shouldn’t he be ambitious for the higher things and, one day, even a higher job? Why shouldn’t he be ambitious? If from time to time he has been a little impatient, that just proves that, as well as being a great reforming Treasurer, he is a normal human being. I tell you what: we want human beings to be running this country and in charge of this government, and that is what we have got—fine human beings.

We have been told that we have been introverted rather than governing Australia in the interests of working families. Let us just remind members opposite, as they keep saying that this government has no plans: plans do not matter nearly as much as performance. We have endless waffle from the Leader of the Opposition, but what has he ever delivered in his life? He has not even run a local council let alone a national economy. By contrast, we have this government, this Prime Minister and this Treasurer, delivering more jobs, higher pay and greater wealth for the people of Australia—a 20-plus per cent increase in real wages, 2.1 million new jobs, and real net wealth per head in this country doubling since 1996. I do not say that this government is perfect; I do not say that this government has not made mistakes; I do not say that this government has not from time to time been prone to the ordinary human tensions and difficulties to which our flesh is heir, but it has been a good government, and nothing we have seen from members opposite suggests that they could even come close to matching it.

Let me just make a few points in response to the newspaper articles and the press reports which have prompted today’s MPI. If the Treasurer really said what some journalist claim he said, why wasn’t it reported in 2005, when it might have had some relevance, rather than now, when those alleged comments have been entirely disproved by subsequent events? If it wasn’t a story in 2005, why is it a story in 2007? If it was off the record in 2005, why is a distorted and, it seems, factually inaccurate version suddenly on the record in 2007? Let me make this clear: I am a former journalist. I think I know something about the way journalism should work. I think I know a little about professional standards in journalism. Let me just remind the House and anyone who might be listening to it that, if something is off the record, it effectively does not exist—and people are certainly entitled to deny that which does not exist. I know the Treasurer very well. I have known the Treasurer since January of 1977—more than 30 years. He is not perfect—none of us are—but he is a fine man, he is a truthful man and, most relevantly, he is a very effective Treasurer and a very effective politician who is entitled to be the next Prime Minister of this country.

Members opposite have attempted today to suggest that there is some fundamental character flaw in the Treasurer of this country. I am sure that members opposite would discount the sort of thing that I might say, but let me quote a journalist. Suddenly, what journalists say is gospel truth. Let me give an alternative gospel truth to members opposite.

See this speech in context