David Feeney (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Defence) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to take note of answers as referred to by the previous speaker. It is terrific to see Senator Cormann back on his feet and again unleashed into the economic debate. We were all very fearful in recent days when he was for superannuation, then against superannuation, then for superannuation and then against superannuation—we were all very fearful that the opposition leadership had plucked him out of the fray of the financial debate. It is good to see him back.

This is a nice timely moment for us, as the parliamentary year draws to a conclusion, to consider the questions that were debated today and perhaps have a fresh look at how the edifice of Liberal Party policymaking is going. I am afraid the scorecard is very bleak. As we see the Liberal Party moving around Australia in these final months of the year, we see on the one hand that they are advocating austerity and fiscal restraint. We saw that when the coalition opposed the measures the government took to save our economy from the global financial crisis—this continuing, harping view that austerity and fiscal restraint are the appropriate way forward. But then—completely contradictory—we also find the opposition moving through the community talking about and committing themselves to unfunded spending in a whole series of areas. I am very keen to put the spotlight on some of these areas.

Climate change is a wonderful place to start. The great truth of the climate change debate in this country is that, while Labor has a policy of abating carbon to the tune of 160 million tonnes by 2020, the remarkable and little-known fact is: so do they. So do the coalition—the same target. You would not know it if you were listening to the debates in which they denounce the science of climate change, but the fact of the matter is that the coalition have the same target. The secret difference is that where we have a fixed price permit system, moving to an emissions trading scheme, they have looked to the successful models of Romania, North Korea and various other command economies around the world and they have struck upon the solution of coming up with a giant government program, a giant taxpayer funded program, to abate carbon. More on that later.

In other events of recent days, we have seen the Work Choices debate unleash itself—one of Senator Abetz's favourite old debates—and we have seen the Liberal Party rushing to the defence of the wildcat lockouts launched by extremist and militant employers in our economy. Even in an area such as coal seam gas, we have in recent days seen the Liberal Party marching in one direction and the National Party marching in another, as the National Party seeks to write policy from meeting to meeting.