John Faulkner (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Let us look at the record. We know that you are a particularly divisive force in the chamber, Senator Macdonald, and you appear to have a great deal to say—most of it nonsense. But as far as the establishment of a PBO is concerned, let us run through the record. Here is the record. Mr Turnbull, when he was Leader of the Opposition, advocated for the establishment of such a PBO in his budget reply in 2009. Mr Abbott, as Leader of the Opposition, renewed Mr Turnbull's call for a PBO and included the establishment of a PBO in his election platform for last year. Former Liberal senator Guy Barnett introduced a private senator's bill into this chamber, the Parliamentary Budget Office Bill 2010, again to establish a PBO. The coalition signed a broad cross-party agreement after the 2010 election which included a commitment to a PBO. The coalition agreed to the establishment of a joint select committee. The coalition served on that joint select committee, including representatives at a senior level: the Leader of the National Party in the Senate and the Manager of Opposition Business in the House of Representatives, Mr Pyne, who was the deputy chair of the committee.

The Liberal Party provided a submission to the joint select committee. The committee brought down a unanimous report embracing the letter and the spirit of the Liberal Party submission to that committee. The government, I believe acting in absolute good faith, agreed with the joint select committee's recommendations. The government then funded the Parliamentary Budget Office in this year's budget and the government then introduced enabling legislation for the establishment of the PBO into the parliament. That is the legislation we are debating today.

This is not or should not be a partisan measure. It will work in the interests of all parties in this parliament. This legislation does not in any way offend the critical values of enhancing transparency of process, of ensuring the principle of equity of access to PBO services and of maintaining the separation of the parliament and the executive. This is very good legislation. I believe that the processes leading up to the introduction of this legislation have also been in accordance with parliamentary best practice.

So where do we find ourselves now? Well, the shadow Treasurer, Mr Hockey, informed the House of Representatives on 12 September that 'the coalition would not submit its policy costing to either the Treasury or the PBO prior to the election'. He said, 'We will ask the Australian people to form a view on policies as they stand.' This approach is not in anyone's interests. It is certainly not in the interests of the opposition. Do not forget that the Treasury found an $11 billion hole in the costings of the policies that Mr Hockey and the coalition presented at the last election. How could it be in the interests of a serious opposition to turn its back on the policy development assistance provided by a PBO and the costing resources that are provided by a PBO? That is a service to the parliament that is independent and a service to the parliament that is rigorous. It is a service that would be absolutely confidential outside election periods and fully transparent, as it should be, during election campaign periods.

In my view, the opposition is acting against its own interests, it is acting against the public interest and it is acting against the national interest by opposing this bill and turning its back on the services offered by an independent Parliamentary Budget Office. I will make a prediction in this chamber—and I have a very good record as far as the predictions I make in the chamber go—