Budget

Senator HENDERSON (Victoria) (14:37): My question is to the Minister representing the Treasurer, Senator Gallagher. When will the Treasurer introduce quantifiable fiscal rules to contain his spending spree?

Senator GALLAGHER (Australian Capital Territory—Minister for Finance, Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Women, Minister for Government Services and Manager of Government Business in the Senate) (14:38): Isn't it interesting that they're obsessed with fiscal rules when it didn't seem to bother them at all—

Senator Cash: Really?

Senator GALLAGHER: Well, you had a fiscal rule.

Senator Cash: How's your spending going?

Senator GALLAGHER: Here's a fiscal rule! Why don't we harass and hunt down people on income support to provide a saving to the budget, which is actually costing billions of dollars and is still tied up in court? How about that for a little fiscal rule!

Senator Henderson: Madam President, a point of order on direct relevance. I asked: when will the Treasurer introduce quantifiable fiscal rules?

The PRESIDENT: There's no need to repeat the question, thank you, Senator Henderson. I have reminded you of that frequently. I will remind the minister to answer the question on behalf of the government.

Senator GALLAGHER: I'll give you another fiscal rule. Do you remember when you promised surpluses every year but actually delivered none? Do you remember that? That rule went very well, didn't it? What about paying down debt when debt skyrocketed under you? That was another rule—'We'll pay down debt,' and you never did. It actually tripled under you.

Senator Henderson: Madam President, a point of order on direct relevance. The minister clearly does not know what fiscal rules are. Could she please address the question?

The PRESIDENT: Senator Henderson, the previous time you stood, I reminded you not to go off the point of order—and you did exactly that. I will draw the minister to your question and how it relates to the government. Minister Gallagher.

Senator GALLAGHER: Remember those who went to the last election promising to up everybody's tax? Remember—a tax increase for everyone. There's another fiscal rule from them. We had raise your taxes, never deliver a surplus and triple the debt. That's it. We have fiscal—

The PRESIDENT: Order! Senator Henderson, on a point of order?

Senator Henderson: Madam President, on direct relevance. I asked the minister to address my question, not go on this absolute rant which has got nothing to do with the question.

The PRESIDENT: Senator Henderson, the commentary is unnecessary. Every time you've stood and called a point of order I have reminded you of that. I have drawn the minister back to the question. I've asked her to answer it from the government's perspective. Minister Wong?

Senator Wong: President, I didn't intervene on the last occasion, but this senator has, I think, been quite wilful in her disregard for your rulings and exhortations. You have asked her repeatedly not to repeat the question.

Honourable senators interjecting—

Senator Wong: No. It is about respecting the Senate, respecting the President and respecting the standing orders.

Senator Henderson: Give me a break, Senator Wong.

The PRESIDENT: Senator Henderson, come to order please.

Senator Wong: Senator Henderson should stop wilfully disregarding your ruling in relation to how she deals with points of order, and I'd ask you to consider how that can be enforced.

The PRESIDENT: Thank you, Senator Wong. Senator Cash?

Senator Cash: On the point of order, the coalition is clearly going to require guidance for the balance of this parliament. Are we now saying—and we would ask for a ruling on this—you can only raise the words 'relevance' or 'direct relevance' with no further context? Because I would suggest that in the previous parliament, when we were in government for nine years, that was not the rule.

The PRESIDENT: Senator Cash, with respect, you have taken me out of context. Order! What I've asked senators not to do is put commentary around the point of order. I have, on every occasion that Senator Henderson has raised the point of order, reminded her of that and have also drawn the minister back to the question. I have been completely responsible in the way that I have responded to the point of order—but I will not have public commentary being made around questions. It's not the opportunity for senators to make commentary; it is the opportunity for senators to raise points of order. I accepted the point of order, and I have drawn the minister three times back to the question. Minister Gallagher.

Senator GALLAGHER: It appears that Senator Henderson hasn't actually read the budget, because if she had read the budget—it's actually quite early in the budget, and I accept that the budget is a number of books and you probably don't want to read all of it—there is a section of the budget that goes through the fiscal strategy. And in that, the fiscal strategy says we 'will improve the budget position', which we have. We've delivered two surpluses. We've improved the budget position by $207 billion—

The PRESIDENT: Minister, please resume your seat.

The PRESIDENT: Senator Watt, order! Senator Henderson.

Senator Henderson: Madam President, I would ask that you ask the minister to answer my question in relation to quantifiable fiscal rules.

The PRESIDENT: Thank you, Senator Henderson. The minister is being directly relevant to your question. Minister Gallagher.

Senator GALLAGHER: Our fiscal strategy includes improving the budget position. We've done that—the biggest fiscal turnaround of any first-term government ever. Our rules also include 'reducing gross debt as a share of the economy'—tick, done that. We've got debt down by $177 billion, and it's expected—

The PRESIDENT: Order! Senator Henderson, I haven't called you yet. Please resume your seat. Order across the chamber. We've just had both leaders on their feet talking about the need to be respectful of my rulings, and just then, in response to the final parts of the minister's questions, those on my left were entirely out of order. If your leader is on her feet that applies to the entirety of question time, not just the bits you choose to take or leave. Senator Henderson, first supplementary?

Senator GALLAGHER (Australian Capital Territory—Minister for Finance, Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Women, Minister for Government Services and Manager of Government Business in the Senate) (14:45): I don't agree with that and I don't agree with the imputation on the roundtable at all. I noticed the shadow Treasurer attended it, so I think you're casting aspersions on him and on his attendance at the meeting by that. Can I say that budget sustainability was a session on a published agenda that was released about the Economic Reform Roundtable. It has also been covered in the discussion of outcomes from the roundtable, so I don't know what aspect in particular Senator Henderson is seeking from that, but it was a section that was discussed. It was covered in the outcomes and it's been covered in the media.

The PRESIDENT: Senator Henderson, second supplementary?

Senator HENDERSON (Victoria) (14:46): What level of spending as a percentage of GDP does the Treasurer believe is in the best long-term interest of Australia?