Dr LEIGH (Fraser) (16:17): I am a fan of the US e-zine Slate. John Dickerson had a piece in Slate a couple of weeks ago that I thought was pretty apposite to Australian politics at the moment. It was titled 'Is there any place for Jeb Bush in the GOP?' and it was about the radical shift to the Right of the US Republican Party. The author quoted Jeb Bush as saying, 'Ronald Reagan would have … a hard time in the Republican Party' today, and wrote about the fact that the modern US Republican Party has now moved from a party of small 'l' liberalism to being a party of conservatism and reaction, a party that is defined by its anti-tax rhetoric. Grover Norquist has asked for all Republican candidates to sign his anti-tax pledge. Mitt Romney, the frontrunner, has done so, and a moderate like Jeb Bush is left with no place to go. Reading the piece I was struck by what has happened to the modern Liberal Party in Australia—a party that once stood for market values, that once stood for an open Australian economy, but that now increasingly stands against markets, whether they are markets in carbon or in water. It stands against an open economy, runs scare campaigns on foreign investment and spends its time trashing Australia's reputation in the world. There is an old Liberal Party that valued the role of the Australian Public Service, that saw the Australian Public Service as having a proud role to play in building a better Australia. The Liberal Party of Menzies believed in the Public Service, but we have just heard from the member for Canning what the modern Liberal Party thinks of public servants. He thinks they are people who feed on others. That is what he just told the House, that Canberrans, public servants, are people who feed on others. Mr Randall: They don't produce anything. Dr LEIGH: They don't produce anything; they feed on others. Those Canberrans who are listening to the debate today should be aware that the spokesperson for the modern Liberal Party has the view of Canberrans and public servants that they feed on others. Dr Mike Kelly: And Queanbeyans. Dr LEIGH: And people from Queanbeyan, as the member for Eden-Monaro reminds me. Mr Randall: Mr Deputy Speaker, on a point of order on relevance: the title of this debate is the sovereign risk that this government has brought to the Australian resources industry, not the bureaucracy in Canberra. The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Hon. BC Scott ): The member for Canning will resume his seat. This has been a very wide-ranging debate on both sides, I can assure you—I have been listening to the majority of it. The member for Fraser will be aware of the title of the matter of public importance, but he has the call. Dr LEIGH: Thank you, Deputy Speaker. In understanding Australia's current context it is critical that we understand the role that public servants play in good policy. When the global financial crisis hit, it was the work of public servants in FaHCSIA, in Treasury, in Finance and in PM&C that put together the rescue package that saved 200,000 jobs and tens of thousands of small businesses. When Queensland was hit by natural disasters, it was public servants who went up there and made sure that people got payments. It was public servants that made sure that rebuilding work was done. But the coalition intends to cut 12,000 public servants. In fact, the shadow Treasurer has said that 12,000 public servants cut out of Canberra is the 'starting point', so it may well be a bigger cut than that. I mentioned before that the Australian Liberal Party has taken a leaf from the Republican Party's playbook. It is libertarian Ron Paul who wants to cut 10 per cent of US public servants. The coalition say their starting point is seven per cent of Australian public servants. It was US presidential candidate Rick Perry who said he would get rid of three departments. The problem was he could not name them. Those opposite intend to get rid of three departments and at least they can name them—defence materiel, climate change and health—but of course they are just the start. Those opposite are often called 'deer in headlights', but I think describing them as 'deer in headlights' when they are faced with economic questions is really unfair to deer. I think they are much more like fish out of water. You know that thing you do when the fish comes out of water—you drop it in the bottom of the tinny and it flips and flops and flips and flops around. We had the 2010 budget reply. Remember, that was a great budget reply, when the Leader of the Opposition was going to set out the savings that the coalition would achieve. He passed the buck over to the member for North Sydney who in turn said, 'Oh, no, I am not going to set out the savings. I am passing that to the member for Goldstein,' who then turned up to the National Press Club with a performance so embarrassing that even his own adviser was left at the back of the room shaking his head as the member flipped and flopped around. On the $70 billion black hole, some of those opposite will say: 'We do not know anything about that figure. It is the first we have heard of it.' Others will say, 'Yes, that is our savings target and what a big one to meet'—again, flipping and flopping everywhere. When the member for North Sydney said that Australian entitlements should be cut, that we should have a Hong Kong-style welfare state, the Leader of the Opposition was again flipping and flopping, saying: 'No, no, no, we do not believe in cutting benefits at all. I worship at the feet of BA Santamaria. I do not believe in cutting benefits—' Mr Tudge: Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise on a point of order on relevance. The member has not mentioned sovereign risk once. He has been speaking now for 6½ minutes. We call on him to be relevant to the issue at hand. The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Hon. BC Scott ): Order! The member for Fraser is aware of the matter before the chair, but I remind both sides of the House that this has been an extremely wide-ranging debate and latitude has been exercised on both sides. I call the member for Fraser and remind him of the debate before the chair. Dr LEIGH: Thank you, Deputy Speaker. If there is a sovereign risk to Australia it is those opposite talking down the Australian economy. It is those opposite who are willing to say anything and do anything to find their way into power. It is those opposite who are not willing to speak the truth about the Australian economy. There is something economists have called a 'misery index'. It is inflation plus unemployment. I find it hard to think of a time when the misery index has been as low as it is today—five per cent unemployment, less than two per cent inflation rate—and at the same time we have got a cash rate lower than at any other time when those opposite were in office. There is only one member of those opposite who on economic questions does not look like a flopping fish out of water and that is the member for Wentworth. The problem is that when he sticks his head up to say things, as he did on the carbon price, for example, to make the point, his colleagues got a little uncomfortable. You will not find an economist anywhere that will tell you anything other than that the most efficient and effective way to cut emissions is by putting a price on carbon. When the member for Wentworth pops his head up to say things like that, of course, his colleagues get a little uncomfortable. 'Malcolm, come back down to the cool waters of populism,' they say, 'Come back down here. You do not look like a fish out of water up there, but really we would prefer that you came down here with the rest of the bottom feeders.' Occasionally, young people will come to me and say that they are thinking about joining the Liberal-National Party. I say to them: that is fine, but let me tell you a bit of your legacy; let me tell you what it means to be a conservative. When Australia was threatened in World War II, it was a Labor government that brought our troops home to defend our shores, and conservatives who thought we should defend the Empire. When gender discrimination reared its ugly head it was a Labor government that proposed the Sex Discrimination Act; it was the conservatives who said no. In a nation built on Indigenous lands, it was a Labor government who brought about historic native title— The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The member for Fraser has had a lot of latitude and I will refer him to the matter before the House. He can confine his remarks to the matter before the House. He has had a lot of latitude, I can assure you. The matter is about sovereign risk. Dr LEIGH: Thank you, Deputy Speaker. The sovereign risk that Australia faces is the sovereign risk of threats to economic confidence that come from those opposite running scare campaigns across the country. Barnaby Joyce says that a carbon price will raise the cost of a leg of lamb to $100. I say: pull the other leg of lamb, Barnaby!