Senate debates

Thursday, 14 November 2013

Bills

Commonwealth Inscribed Stock Amendment Bill 2013; Second Reading

12:25 pm

Photo of Sue LinesSue Lines (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I am really quite confused about the way the government is behaving. They seem to say one thing in opposition and something quite different once they have assumed the government benches. I do not think that is being fair to the Australian public, because for three years the government has gone on and on about debt.

Before I get to that, there do seem to be some themes emerging with the government very early on in their time in government. The Prime Minister since the election has said on many occasions that the adults are now back in charge. I am not quite sure what he means by that. Does he mean, for example, that the Australian public think children are in charge? I can only conclude that perhaps he is really trying to convince himself and the rest of the coalition to be adults. As adults we have choices about how we behave and about how we respond. We can be adults who take tough decisions, who stand up as leaders and lead and take the country with us. We can be open and transparent. We can explain why we are doing things and be very clear and repeat that message until everybody understands that, 'Yes, that is a reasonable path for the government to take, they have been very transparent and they have told us why they need to do a particular thing.' Or they can be the sort of adults who are sneaky, who go behind people's backs, who do not trust anyone and who do not share information.

What I am saying to the government today is that there is a choice here and, if you really are adults, you should choose to be the type of adults who share information, who are transparent and who are open. Senator Wong and Senator Ludwig have said this morning, 'Let us know. Let the Australian people and the Australian parliament know just why it is that the government wants to massively increase the debt ceiling from $300 billion to $500 billion.' It is just not appropriate to say to the opposition and the Australian people with a nod and a wink, 'Just trust us,' or in fact to blame it on Labor. Senator Wong was very clear when she set out exactly what Labor's position was. So there is this theme emerging that the government does not want to be open and transparent and, as we have seen in other areas, the government is trying to hide things. All we on our side are asking for and what the Australian people are asking for is to be told exactly why the debt ceiling needs to be raised so much. That is the adult transparency and that is the responsible adults approach that Mr Abbott keeps telling us is the sort of person he wants to be.

There is another area that I am really very confused about. Like most Australians I listen to the news and I read the newspapers, and what I have seen over the last three years is this attack by the government when it was in opposition about debt. Almost on a daily basis Labor was reminded that there was a crisis, that we were poor managers, that we were borrowing beyond our limits and our ability to pay back, that we had no intention of bringing the budget back to surplus.

Indeed, prior to and during the election campaign we saw many of the then opposition telling us exactly what, according to their maths, the daily debt was. The coalition prior to coming to government was very clear, very open and very concerned about debt. So this move by the government to increase the debt ceiling in a single leap, a one-off, to $500 billion is extraordinary and made more extraordinary because there is absolutely no reason given, other than a nod and a wink, 'Mind your own business; just trust us on this.' It is made all the more extraordinary because of the carping of the government when in opposition on an almost daily basis. It seems to me to beggar belief.

I remind the coalition of some of the sorts of things that Mr Hockey and other members of the coalition said. Mr Hockey warned the Australian public that the 'debt crisis'—that is what he called it, the 'debt crisis'; these are coalition words, not mine—was 'spiralling out of control'. I remind the Senate that when in opposition Mr Hockey threatened to block a $50 billion increase that Labor was seeking. Yet just a few weeks after taking office cabinet signs off on a $200 billion increase—not the $50 billion that Mr Hockey was so ready to claim that Labor was out of control about, not $100 billion, but in fact $200 billion, taking to our debt ceiling to a record level of $500 billion.

Mr Hockey in the past has also said that raising the debt ceiling was 'a sign of economic mismanagement'. It is interesting that we on the Labor side are saying to Mr Hockey, 'We are prepared to look at what you want—just give us some reasons.' We have not been out there creating this 'debt crisis', creating this view that somehow raising the debt ceiling is some kind of economic mismanagement. These are all words and phrases and media statements that the coalition put out when Labor was in government, that the coalition put out when we were seeking an increase of $50 billion.

Even yesterday in the House of Representatives Mr Nikolic said that a Treasurer has got to be responsible. They are the words that we are using. We want the Treasurer to be responsible. Part of being responsible is actually coming clean on why he wants to increase the debt ceiling. In fact, in an interview with the Guardian in May 2012, Mr Hockey said:

Australians are right to be concerned about handing Wayne Swan yet another increase in our nation's credit card limit.

Isn't that amazing? Australians have the 'right to be concerned about handing Wayne Swan yet another increase in our nation's credit card'. And yet, when we have asked reasonably in the House and this morning in the Senate to give us reasons for the coalition to act reasonably, that is ignored. We have all these threats. We have been accused of being the Tea Party. We have been accused of chucking down business in Australia, when none of that is true and when what we are asking for are reasonable reasons.

He then went on a program which seems to be favoured by the coalition, the Alan Jones Breakfast Show, to argue that the government could not make claims that it was making savings if it were also increasing the debt ceiling from $250 billion to $300 billion. There is just a sense of déjà vu here; there really is. It is simply not good enough for the coalition when in opposition to make debt and deficit a key election platform—in fact, to be very strong about it for three years—and then now in government being about hiding and not being transparent.

Comments

No comments