Guy Barnett (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Chairman of the Scrutiny of Government Waste Committee) Share this | Hansard source

I am very proud to stand here in support of this motion and in support of the evidence and the facts that we have on the table with respect to the waste and mismanagement that has been demonstrated by the Rudd Labor government over the last 2½, and a little bit more, years. It is not gross negligence; it is in fact worse—much worse. It is recklessness in the extreme. There has been a shocking amount of waste and mismanagement. In their time in office under Mr Rudd, Labor have wasted more than $4 billion of taxpayers’ money and they cannot be trusted with the public purse. Tuesday night’s budget delivery has confirmed what the coalition has been saying for months—that Australia cannot afford another three years of a Labor government.

I want to reflect very briefly on the federal budget before reflecting on other evidence with respect to waste and mismanagement under the Rudd Labor government. Labor’s mismanagement of all the major policies over the last two years has left Australia with a massive budget deficit to the tune of nearly $41 billion. That is the largest budget deficit since World War II, bar one budget. It is the second largest in all those many decades. Last Tuesday night’s budget also confirmed our fears with respect to the collapsed Home Insulation Program, the pink batts fiasco, which will cost the Australian taxpayer $1 billion to fix. This additional spending is needed only because of Labor’s mismanagement and maladministration. Labor is now spending good money after bad on this program, and I will say more about that shortly.

Labor will have to borrow more than $700 million a week to fund its reckless and wasteful spending, continuing the upward pressure on interest rates and the cost of living for everyday mums and dads and Australian families. It is wrong, dead wrong. Labor, sneakily, has set aside $126-odd million dollars of taxpayers’ money in the budget to fund its advertising in the lead-up to the federal election. That is very sneaky indeed. It has slipped it into the federal budget, and it includes advertising on climate change. ‘This is the great moral issue of our time,’ says the Prime Minister, yet he has deferred the decision regarding the emissions trading scheme for some three years—and I notice Senator Wong in the chamber today. But they are willing to spend taxpayers’ money on advertising climate change and the government’s response to it. Where is the connection? It is absurd; it is a disgrace. Those are a few reflections on the budget.

But what do we say about the waste and mismanagement? I am going to list the shocking evidence that we have from the 2½ years or thereabouts under the Rudd Labor government. I am going to list the points and then I will speak to a few of them to hopefully gain the support of this chamber for this motion. We have had Building the Education Revolution, with a $1.5 billion blow-out, and the Home Insulation Program, with $1 billion wasted. There was a promise to cut consultancies but there have been $1.2 billion in contracts awarded. We have seen a $1 billion blow-out in laptops in schools, with barely half delivered. In terms of the environment, we have seen climate change advertising, with $50 million wasted, and $1.5 million wasted on the Copenhagen delegation. In terms of the ETS, 150 public servants are doing absolutely nothing for and on behalf of the Australian taxpayers, with $81.9 million wasted. There has been an $850 million blow-out on the solar panel rebate. The Green Loans scheme, a $175 million program, has been cancelled altogether. Of course, we have seen the UN Security Council bid of $35 million by the Rudd Labor government—and I know that is of relevance to you, Mr Acting Deputy President Trood. There was a promise of $4.7 billion for the National Broadband Network before the election and that was replaced with a $43 billion plan by the Rudd Labor government. Also, $20 million has been wasted on the broadband tender process and $25 million spent on paid consultants for the broadband business plan.

What about legal fees under the Rudd Labor government? They are at record levels of $550 million last year. The tax review cost $10 million but we have seen no action. We have seen $46 million wasted on tax bonus payments. Remember the money that went overseas and the money that went to dead people. That was a shocking waste of taxpayers’ money yet again. We saw $2 million wasted on the 2020 Summit. A sum of $45 million was spent on the Indigenous housing program before one house was completed. What a shocking waste of taxpayers’ money! Of the 260 childcare centres promised, 38 were delivered—and, of course, that has now been cancelled. Of the 35 GP superclinics promised, three are fully operational. The government had a plan to stop Japanese whaling. It was promised but not delivered. They are spending $1 million on a whale envoy. Of course, the cost of living has risen under Labor, and I will speak more about that very shortly. We have had the GROCERYchoice website, and what did they spend on that? Eight million dollars—not a bad website. And this is all because Mr Rudd promised before the last federal election that he wanted to get grocery prices down. But, of course, they have gone up and they have wasted $8 million on a website, which they themselves, through public pressure, coalition pressure and obvious common sense, have closed down. But they have wasted $8 million of taxpayers’ money. It is a disgrace. What about Fuelwatch? Prices went up, and this is another broken promise. Of course, you have seen the interest rates rise and rise and rise again.

What about some of the substantial pieces of evidence, whether with respect to the home insulation scheme, to Building the Education Revolution or to the cost of living? Let us have a look at some examples to convince the Labor senators in this place that they should support this motion and hang their heads in shame at this shocking waste of taxpayers’ money. The primary schools element of Building the Education Revolution blew out by $1.7 billion to $14.1 billion, and construction has barely begun. We saw in the budget papers that they are still going to be spending on schools four years after the global financial crisis, which kicked in in 2008. They will still be spending in 2012 in response to the global financial crisis. How absurd! Millions of dollars were wasted on signs and plaques promoting Labor policy and commemorating the Minister for Education, the Hon. Julia Gillard. Fancy spending all that money for that purpose!

Reports of waste and rorting began to emerge, but only after sustained pressure from the opposition, members of the public and people in the media did the government finally concede one example of rorting and waste. It took all that time. Dozens more followed, and here are some examples. In New South Wales, Hastings Public School’s shade project cost blew out from $400,000 to almost $1 million—for a shadecloth! There are plenty more examples on top of that. Tottenham Central School requested a new lab under the BER; instead they received a $600,000 eight-by-2.5-metre brick canteen—a canteen instead of a lab; a canteen without any cooking facilities and rendered ‘useless’ by the school. Marulan Public School in New South Wales received $853,000 for a new library that they did not want. The building is still not complete after being promised by early February. Inclusions such as heating, solar panels and covered walkways have been omitted. Estimates suggest that the structure that has been built could easily have been completed for around $350,000.

Senator Brett Mason asked an excellent question today of the Minister representing the Minister for Education, Senator Carr, with respect to Rawlinsons, who are very credible and well-respected quantity surveyors. They did an assessment of the government’s Building the Education Revolution projects in terms of value for money. But do you think this government is interested in value for money? Clearly not, and the evidence confirms that. What did Rawlinsons say? They said that the way the government is approaching this is ‘insane and anomalous’. In terms of value for money, this government clearly is not interested. Its approach was to spend. Reckless spending is what it is doing.