House debates

Tuesday, 8 May 2012

Matters of Public Importance

Budget

4:03 pm

Photo of Tony SmithTony Smith (Casey, Liberal Party, Deputy Chairman , Coalition Policy Development Committee) Share this | Hansard source

Well, here we are on budget day being lectured by the Labor Party in this matter of public importance on the need for surplus budgets and the need for openness and transparency. We are seriously being lectured by the Australian Labor Party on budget day about the need for a surplus, which they have not delivered at all in government, and about the need for openness and transparency, which they have not delivered in any regard on any day that they have been in government.

Tonight, in a few hours time, the Treasurer, the member for Lilley, will hand down his fifth budget. Four years ago, of course, his budget journey began. Whilst it is very difficult, particularly at the moment—you would appreciate, Mr Deputy Speaker Scott—to make any predictions about what those opposite may or may not do, I think we can safely say that this Treasurer's budget journey, as far as handing down budgets goes, ends tonight. I think that, in their heart of hearts, those opposite know that. In his heart, the member for Fraser, who moved this matter of public importance, knows that is the case. They know that because not only do the Australian people have no confidence in this Treasurer; some of his own colleagues have no confidence in his capacity as Treasurer. If the Australian public are going to listen to a lecture about the necessity for a budget surplus, which everyone knows is necessary, they are not going to be lectured by the Australian Labor Party.

Let us look at the journey so far. Let us go to budget night four years ago. Four years ago almost to the day, the member for Lilley stood at the dispatch box. He had inherited no net government debt; in fact he had inherited $45 billion cash in the bank and a surplus of $20 billion. And do you know what he essentially said? He said that it was not good enough, that he was going to have a bigger surplus, that the Howard and Costello government had been reckless and irresponsible and that he was going to hand down a larger budget surplus. He went to great lengths to explain why he was a more responsible economic manager. Of course this followed on from the Labor Party's pre-election campaign that they were truly fiscal conservatives, more so than Prime Minister Howard and Treasurer Peter Costello who had paid off all of Labor's net government debt, put $45 billion in the bank and handed down a surplus of $19 billion or $22 billion in 2007. But, no, for the member for Lilley, this was not good enough; he was going to do better.

And then what happened the next year, in 2009, when he gave his budget speech from the dispatch box?

I remember sitting here listening to the speech all the way through. I have worked on a few budgets before, in another capacity. I have seen a few budgets delivered and I have listened to lots of budget speeches, and almost from the first paragraph I thought: there is something missing; there is something big missing; in fact, the whole thing that matters is missing! And what was missing was any mention of a surplus or a deficit. This is Labor Party openness and transparency! It was a deficit, and page after page and line after line as the Treasurer delivered that speech there was not one mention of the projected budget deficit for that year. It was projected at about $57 billion, from memory.

In case anyone thought this was some oversight—and the Treasurer could have it either way; he could say it was an oversight, that he was so incompetent he left the budget outcome out of his speech—that was dispelled pretty quickly. We had those contorted interviews in the days after the budget from both the Treasurer and the then Prime Minister, the member for Griffith, where they would refuse to state the dollar value of the projected net government debt or the budget deficit. It was a figure they were embarrassed about and it was a figure they went to great lengths never to mention. This is the openness and transparency that is so dear to the heart of the member for Fraser, who has moved this matter of public importance.

Let me remind members of this House that tonight there will be lots of budget documents, four of five volumes, and there will be PBS statements across the board. But in the end it all comes down to one figure, doesn't it? It all comes down to the outcome. In 2009 the Treasurer did not mention his budget outcome. Such is the commitment to openness and transparency of those opposite. Then, in 2010, even the Treasurer, delivering his third budget, thought, 'I don't think I'll get away with that again,' and he did for once mention his projected deficit. Then he said the deficit would be $40.8 billion. As it turned out, the real figure was not $40.8 billion. It was not less; it was more. It was nearly $48 billion.

Then we come to this year. We have had much fanfare from those opposite about how they will deliver a surplus tonight. What they will deliver, of course, is their projection. I predict that, following the shame of 2009, the Treasurer will actually state what the outcome of the budget is, but it will be his projection for the coming year just as it was back when he projected a $40 billion deficit in 2010 that turned out to be $48 billion. With this Treasurer, the moving numbers are surely something to behold. In this financial year, which still has a little over six weeks to run, his initial projection was that the budget deficit for this year would be around $12 billion. This time a year ago at that dispatch box he said it would be about $22 billion. Then, in his MYEFO, the regular six-monthly update that updates all of the budget figures thanks to the Charter of Budget Honesty delivered by the previous government, it had grown from $22 billion to $37 billion. All predictions are that it will be in the 40s tonight, and it ain't over yet—there are still six weeks to run. We will find out, as we do with all budgets, the final outcome towards the end of September. We know where he started: at about $12 billion. We know he has gone past $37 billion. We know there has been a threefold increase in his projected budget deficit for this year.

Comments

No comments