Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Finance, Senator Wong. The present Labor administration has delivered five budgets covering the financial years 2008-09, 09-10, 10-11, 11-12 and 12-13. Can the minister advise the Senate—

Senator Conroy interjecting—

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

Order, Senator Conroy! Senator Fifield, you are entitled to be heard in silence.

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr President. Can the minister advise the Senate how many of these budgets forecasted surpluses at the time of their presentation to the parliament?

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

I am sure the senator could easily jump on the Treasury website and have a look at past budgets. All of this information is on the public record. But I would make the point that the senator seems, as the opposition often do, to have forgotten a thing called the global financial crisis. It is quite extraordinary the way those opposite seem to airbrush that.

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

How can this be relevant?

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

I will take the interjection from the Leader of the Opposition. How can this be relevant? Why don't you go to Washington and say, 'How can this be relevant?' Why don't you go to Brussels and say, 'How can this be relevant?' This is ridiculous.

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I raise a point of order on relevance. The question was very straightforward: can the minister name which financial years the government forecast a budget surplus in their budgets?

Jacinta Collins (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for School Education and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, on the point of order: of course the answer the minister is giving is relevant to this question. She is providing very relevant context to any question around our economic standing and, indeed, our position with respect to a surplus.

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

Order! I am listening closely to the minister's answer. The minister still has one minute 22 to answer the question and I will listen closely to the minister's answer. There is no point of order at this stage.

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

If I could explain the relevance—obviously I need to—the fact that the government had to alter its fiscal strategy—

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern and Remote Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

He didn't ask you that.

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

Fiscal strategy is relevant to budget, Senator. That might be news to you, but the fact that the government had to alter its fiscal strategy to respond to the global financial crisis is entirely relevant to this question and entirely relevant to the jobs which have been created, the jobs which have been saved and the growth which has been maintained as a result of those fiscal decisions. Those opposite might want to jump up and take pathetic points of order to try to make themselves look like they are part of a schoolboy debating team—I use 'schoolboy' advisedly until Senator Fierravanti-Wells might stand up!—but it demonstrates their complete lack of understanding of what this economy faced during the global financial crisis—

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

You need to come to the question, Minister.

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

which, of course, resulted in the government making a decision in previous budgets to put stimulus into the economy.

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise on a point of order on the question of relevance. This was the only question: can the minister advise the Senate how many of this government's budgets forecast surpluses at the time of their presentation to the parliament? You did a few seconds ago ask the minister to come to the question. She entirely ignored you. She has got 15 seconds left of the time available to her. She has had plenty of context. Now can she answer the question? How many budgets forecast a surplus?

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, on the point of order: Senator Wong is giving a comprehensive response, not a little twee 'give us one word, yes or no', not a little twee 'give us the answer that we want'. Senator Wong is comprehensively debunking the question that she has been asked, and I ask you to rule there is no point of order.

Senator Fifield interjecting—

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

Order! Senator Brandis was quite correct: three seconds ago I did draw the minister's attention to the question and the minister still has 15 seconds. I do draw the minister's attention to the question. I cannot tell the minister how to answer the question, though. That is something I cannot do. Minister, you have 15 seconds.

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

Thank you. As I said, all of this information is available on the Treasury website. It is well known that in 2012-13 a surplus has been forecast. It is also well known that the Treasurer has made very clear, as a result of what is occurring with revenue— (Time expired)

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question which may be a little more straightforward for the minister to answer. Can the minister confirm how many of the government's budgets actually resulted in a surplus?

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

As the senator knows, this government has steered the Australian economy through a global financial crisis. That did include putting stimulus into the economy. If those opposite want to oppose that, they can explain to Australians why they think more people unemployed and an economy in recession is good economic management. They can explain that to Australians, because it is absurd.

In reaction to the 2012-13 budget I make this point: we have been up-front with the Australian people that, given what is happening to revenue and given what is happening to nominal GDP, a surplus is unlikely, and we will not cut spending to offset revenue downgrades if that would—

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise on a point of order on relevance. The minister has partially answered the question—she reluctantly conceded that it is unlikely there will be a budget surplus in the current financial year—but she still has not answered the question in relation to the previous financial years. The question was: how many budget surpluses has this government actually delivered?

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

There is no point of order. I have said that I cannot instruct the minister how to answer the question. The minister still has 11 seconds remaining to address the question.

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

I refer the opposition to the medium-term fiscal strategy, which was outlined—

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise on a point of order. The minister has got only three seconds left in her response. It doesn't actually take three seconds to say 'none'! Perhaps the minister is embarrassed to say 'none', but that is the only directly relevant answer to a very specific question.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Once again those opposite demonstrate their arrogance. They stand up and say, 'She will answer this way.' Mr President, that point of order has nothing to do with the question. The point of order is utterly without foundation and should be rejected.

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

I have already said I cannot instruct the minister how to answer the question. I stand by that and invite the minister, in the three seconds remaining, to address the question.

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

I was referring, in an effort to help those opposite, to the 2008-09 fiscal strategy. (Time expired)

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Minister, will you and the Treasurer go to the next election never having had your names on the cover of a budget that achieved surplus? How long will you and the Treasurer continue to blame every variable other than your own decision making for the failure to achieve a single budget surplus?

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

It is interesting, isn't it, that those opposite do not want to talk about the unemployment rate. They do not want to talk about the over 920,000 jobs this government has created. Another who definitely does not want to talk about it is on his feet. You hate the good news, don't you?

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern and Remote Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise on a point of order on relevance. How can this minister lecturing us on what we should have asked her possibly be said to be an answer to the question that she was asked? Don't say you cannot direct her what to do; you can sit her down if she is not complying with standing orders.

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

There is no point of order. The minister has 44 seconds remaining to address the question.

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

What those opposite are, in fact, arguing is that the government should not have put stimulus in the economy, the government should not have saved jobs, the government should have put 200,000 people and their families on the unemployment scrapheap and the government should have put the economy into recession. That is the Liberals' economic plan: let us put the economy into recession and let us put people on the economic scrapheap. That is not the Labor way. We are for jobs and we are for growth.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper.