Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research, Senator Carr. Many Australians, Minister, are asking whether they will see the benefits of the resources boom. What is the government doing to ensure the resources boom means national benefits?

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Sterle for his question. I would like to actually talk about a budget measure—something the opposition, clearly, does not want to do. What we are experiencing in this country is the biggest resources boom in the history of the nation. It is good for Australia. However, many Australians are rightly asking how they can share in the benefits. After all, at the end of the day, mining accounts for less than two per cent of the total workforce. On the other hand, manufacturing employs a million Australians and has done so for 40 years, highlighting the incredible productivity of the manufacturing sector. We can come out of this boom with nothing to mine and nothing to make, or we can ensure that we are able to build the jobs, the skills and the opportunities right across all sectors of the economy, and that is why we are investing $34.4 million in the Buy Australian at Home and Abroad campaign. Australian manu­facturers do not need special favours. What they do need is a fair go, and we will work with the resources sector to identify opport­unities for Australian firms in major projects; we will work intensively with up to 180 promising Australian small- and medium-sized enterprises to build them into globally competitive suppliers; we will assist with more management training and advice about business opportunities through Enterprise Connect; and we will embed industry experts to procurement teams for major projects. It makes sense to buy Australian, and investors at home and abroad will know it. That is exactly what this government is seeking to do: to ensure that the opportunities are spread evenly. (Time expired)

Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Thank you, Minister. Is the minister aware that there are reports that Australian firms are excluded from major projects because they are not part of global vendor lists that those projects' proponents rely on? Minister, what is the government doing about this?

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is true that there are powerful global supply chains operating within the resources sector, and Australian firms should not be shut out by them; they should be part of them. Project developers who use the lists are trying to cut their costs by narrowing their options. It can in fact be a false economy. When they look past the lists, they may find better products at a better price in Australia, and that is why the government is helping them find Australian suppliers quickly and cheaply. Our Industry Capability Network—

Opposition Senators:

Opposition senators interjecting—

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Here we go again: the leader of the knuckle draggers faction has come to the fore on this matter.

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Ignore the interjections, Senator Carr. Ignore the interjections. Just address your comments to the chair. Senator Carr, ignore the interjections; they are disorderly.

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Our Industry Capability Network has worked with 17 major projects to identify local suppliers, and what we have seen through that process is that contracts for Australian companies have been yielded, worth some $300 million. (Time expired)

Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Thank you, Minister. Given that this initiative focuses on the firms supplying the resource sector, what is the government doing to promote opportunities for other firms?

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government understands that research and development are critical to creating opportunities for Australian firms, and that is why we have made room in a tight budget to boost innovation spending to record levels. We will invest some $9.4 billion in the coming financial year, a 43 per cent increase on the best efforts of the previous government. This would allow firms in every industry to find cleaner, cheaper and smarter ways of doing business. The CSIRO works directly with industry to develop these opportunities, and that is why we have committed a record $3 billion over four years for this vital national asset. More than 150 Australian companies have directly worked with the CSIRO to benefit from its technological breakthroughs. Many more have found a new competitive edge working with the CSIRO, using CSIRO to connect to partners across the globe. (Time expired)

Ron Boswell (Queensland, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Finance and Deregulation, Senator Wong. Senator, given that the Treasurer was too embarrassed to admit the total value of government debt in his budget speech on Tuesday night, can the minister, for the record, confirm that the government net debt has blown out to $107 billion and that the government will be spending $7.5 billion a year in interest payments?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I actually answered that question yesterday, Senator. I am happy to answer it again. Perhaps I was not as interesting as the good senator would like. The government's net debt position does peak at 7.2 per cent of GDP, $106.6 billion. I have answered that, and it is in the budget papers. I think the annual net interest payment the senator is referring to is in fact at the end of the forward estimates period, as opposed to the peak net debt year, but—

Opposition Senators:

Opposition senators interjecting—

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Interjections are disorderly. The minister is answering the question. Interjections are disorderly.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would also just remind the good senator that, as I outlined in some detail yesterday, Australia's debt position remains one of the best in the world: less than a tenth of the average net debt of other major advanced economies. Our net debt position peaks at 7.2 per cent of GDP; that of major advanced economies is in the order of 90 per cent of GDP—90 per cent versus 7.2 per cent. That is the position that this government has overseen in the face of the global financial crisis.

It might be helpful to the senator to consider what some of those in the markets have said about this issue. We know, for example, that Moody's has said that the Australian government debt remains amongst the lowest of all AAA-rated governments. CBA comments on the fact that 'the budget is dominated by savings measures'. The budget meets—

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Why is that? Because Howard and Costello did such a good job. Did you read Alan Kohler's comment? 'Any chief financial officer would be embarrassed by this budget,' is what he said.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That is from CBA. I know that you do not want to hear this, Senator Cormann; you do not want to hear what the markets are saying, do you? (Time expired)

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Cormann, constant interjection is disorderly; I just remind you of that.

Ron Boswell (Queensland, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Given that the spending decisions taken by this government have increased expenditure by around $19 billion in the past six months alone and that the forecast for the budget deficit in 2011-12 has blown out by $9.6 billion to $22.6 billion, how can this government ever be trusted to deliver a budget surplus?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator, there are a number of points in your question. I am sorry: I do not know where you have those facts from. If you are referring to the spend-save position in the budget as announced, the net spend-save position delivered by this government is in fact a return to the budget of just over $5 billion. We have delivered restraint in real growth and expenditure on average of one per cent a year. The average for Mr Costello's last five budgets was in the order of 3.6 per cent a year and, as I referenced yesterday, the last time a government delivered this sort of spending restraint was in the 1980s. If the good senator cares about the surplus and cares about debt levels then he should be very concerned about the path Mr Abbott is going down: seeking to oppose budget savings measures. (Time expired)

Ron Boswell (Queensland, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Minister, I turn 71 years of age this year. In my 71 years, Labor has only ever delivered six budget surpluses, an average of one every 12 years. Minister, will I have to live to be 83 before I see another Labor surplus budget?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Boswell, I acknowledge your longevity in this place, but I would this make this point in all seriousness: if senators on your side care about the budget surplus then you should be extremely concerned about the position that this Leader of the Opposition is taking. He is seeking to oppose responsible savings measures put forward by this government to return the budget to surplus—measures which you previously have voted for, such as those in relation to family tax benefits, without putting forward your own savings measures. It is not a responsible thing, Senator Boswell, for the conservative party in this place to be practising this sort of fiscal recklessness.