Mr BRADBURY (Lindsay—Assistant Treasurer and Minister Assisting for Deregulation) (15:47): I am very pleased to be able to contribute to this debate on a matter of public importance relating to the economy and to add just a few facts to the debate—a few facts that were missing from the contribution from the member for North Sydney. Members will note that at no stage during the member for North Sydney's contribution did we hear anything about the OECD economic outlook that was released overnight. It is an important document that provides a snapshot of where the various economies across the globe are placed at this point in time. It is an important document because it gave a very big tick to the economic management of the Australian economy. In fact, that document reported: Restoring fiscal leeway while macroeconomic conditions are still favourable, and the terms of trade high, is welcome. It gave a big tick to our return-to-surplus strategy and it noted the fact that the Australian economy is the standout performer of all OECD economies. In terms of growth, the Australian economy will grow faster than any of the other advanced economies over the coming two years. In addition to that we have returned our budget to surplus. This is no trivial matter considering what is going on across the globe at the moment. It is worth reflecting on this point. If we have a look at the budget position here in Australia compared to other nations, what we see is that in 2011-12 in Australia we will be delivering a $1.5 billion surplus. That is 0.1 per cent of GDP—a surplus. Let us look at other economies in the OECD. Let us look at the United States. They will still be running deficits; their deficit will be 8.1 per cent of their GDP. The United Kingdom will be running a deficit at eight per cent of their GDP. Japan will be at 10 per cent of their GDP and Canada, another country that is resource rich, will still be in deficit to the tune of about 3.7 per cent of GDP. Mr Buchholz: What about Brazil and Norway? Mr BRADBURY: Well, you come in here and quote Brazil and Norway. The reality is that if you compare Australia to comparable economies we are the standout performer. We are growing at a rate that demonstrates that this economy today is seven per cent larger than it was pre-GFC. That is a very significant point to make. It is well worth having a look at what has been happening in other parts of the world. We have been growing 7.3 per cent today on that base pre-GFC. By mid-2014 we would have grown by about 16 per cent on that pre-GFC level. Look around the world: most of the advanced economies have not even returned their growth levels to the levels that they were at before the GFC. We are seven per cent larger. All of these indicators point to the underlying strength of the Australian economy, but the point that has been bought forward, the question for this MPI, goes to the issue of fiscal restraint and reining in government spending. I think it is important that we make a few points and point out a few facts about government spending under this government compared to government spending under previous governments. With regard to government spending as a percentage of GDP—the member for North Sydney comes in here and plucks out figures. He hits us with a volume figure and he does that to mislead the House. I think even the member for North Sydney realises that in a growing economy, if you maintain spending at the same percentage of the economy, then as the economy grows, overall levels of spending will increase. Mr Burke: No, he would not understand that. Mr BRADBURY: The minister points out that perhaps that is too complex. It has troubled the member for North Sydney to come to an appreciation of that. The real figure that we need to look at is expenditure as a percentage of the economy, as a percentage of GDP. In 2012-13, spending as a percentage of GDP will be 23.5 per cent. Across the forward estimates, we will be containing expenditure to below 24 per cent of GDP. That represents the longest sustained period of maintaining expenditure below 24 per cent of GDP at any time since the early 1980s. Compare the record of the Howard-Costello government with what we are doing now and what we are proposing to do for the coming four years. They were big spenders. They spent a lot more as a percentage of the economy than what we are doing. Perhaps the best indication of how tight a fiscal operation this government is running is that the opposition has not been able to propose a single savings measure. The Leader of the Opposition came in for his budget in reply speech—not a single savings measure. The shadow Treasurer went to the National Press Club—not a single savings measure. If the government was as bloated as these people would have you believe—if there was so much fat to cut—surely they could come forward with a single measure. Instead of coming forward with spending cuts, all they tell the Australian people is that they will take away some of those revenue sources. It is worth also having a look at the other side of the budgetary equation. It is one thing to look at what you are spending. We have already established that. Look at what we are spending as a percentage of the economy. We are spending less today than at any time through that previous government. Over a sustained period we have not been able to contain expenditure growth to the extent that we are doing now, not since the early 1980s. If you have a look at what is happening on the tax front, we are collecting tax at a lower percentage of GDP today than at any time under the previous government. Tax is 22.1 per cent of GDP. The amount of tax we are collecting is less today than at any time under the previous Howard-Costello governments. That is a fact you do not often hear, but it is a fact. They say that they want to repeal certain revenue sources such as the mining tax. When we first proposed a mining tax they said, 'We're opposed to the mining tax so we're opposed to every single one of the expenditure measures connected to it.' That is what they said. They came in here and they said to the 2.7 million small businesses in Australia, 'You don't deserve a tax cut. We'll vote against a tax cut for you.' And they did vote against tax relief for the 2.7 million small businesses in this country. Fancy that—a Liberal opposition. Menzies would roll in his grave. The party of business—that is what they would like to pretend. They came into this place and they said to 2.7 million small businesses around Australia, 'We're not going to give you tax relief. We'll vote against it.' And they did. When it came to a company tax cut, they said, 'We're against that as well.' They said back then that they were against the expenditure measures that were connected to the mining tax. We went into the budget and said, 'There's no point persisting with this company tax cut until we can secure a consensus in the parliament. We'll work through the business tax working group to deliver a cut to the company tax rate, but we won't keep pushing this one if we can't get the support in the parliament. If the Liberal Party want to stand side by side with the Greens and deny businesses a tax cut then we'll find a better way to spread the benefits of the mining boom.' So we have. We continue to invest in superannuation. I am not sure what the latest is on that side. They came out and said they would support retaining the increases in superannuation, but they have been a bit quiet on that recently. They are still opposed to investing in infrastructure, presumably, even though that money will be spent. On investing in small business tax relief, they came into the parliament and voted against the instant asset write-off. Yet small businesses all around the country will be lining up to take advantage of it from 1 July. When we announced that we would spread the benefits of the mining boom to families right across this country through an increase in family tax benefit part A and a supplementary allowance, they came forward and said they would support it. At least, that is what they said in the first instance. We heard so much about this principled position that they could not support cuts to the company tax rate or the instant asset write-off because they did not support the tax that funded it. Now, all of a sudden, they support the expenditure but do not support the tax. So how are they going to pay for it? They have a $70 billion black hole and it just keeps getting bigger. The only announcement you could remotely describe as having any substance in the Leader of the Opposition's budget in reply speech was a spending measure. He did not have a price tag but it was a spending measure. The $70 billion crater—he is out there with his shovel digging it—is getting bigger and bigger. The capacity to dig craters of this nature could only add to our efforts as far as fielding the mining boom and extracting more resources in parts of this country. This is a government that is low taxing—22.1 per cent of GDP—lower than at any time under the previous government. This is a government that, when it comes to expenditure as a percentage of GDP, will be containing expenditure over a sustained period at lower levels than in the early 1980s. On both fronts we are lower taxing and lower spending than the previous government. The member for North Sydney came in here today and had the hide to start lecturing this government about expenditure and where expenditure cuts should be made. If it is that easy a job he should be able to come forward and announce one or two expenditure items that he thinks need to be made. Have a look at what this government has already done. We have already achieved, in this budget alone, $33.6 billion worth of savings measures. That adds to the savings measures we achieved previously. We have made $100 billion worth of savings measures over the last four years. If you think you can still find additional savings measures, come forward and identify them. You hear those on the other side talk about the precarious nature of the Australian economy. What a load of rubbish! We understand that there are challenges in various parts of this economy, but look at the underlying fundamentals of the economy. We have low unemployment, at 4.9 per cent. We have contained inflation. We have growth at levels that the rest of the advanced world could only dream of and a record pipeline of investment. We have a strong economy. But we want to spread the benefits of the boom and that is why we have announced a range of measurements in the budget that will ensure the benefits of the boom are being spread. Those opposite want to come in here and lecture people about debt. Our net debt is to peak in 2011-12 at 9.6 per cent of our GDP. They talk about us overburdening the country with debt. Opposition members interjecting— Mr BRADBURY: The member opposite says 'What was it when you came in?' Well, there was this thing called the global financial crisis. And do you know what? We stood up to the challenge and we invested in supporting jobs. Mr Robb interjecting— Mr BRADBURY: The member for Goldstein says that they wasted money. I will tell you what: if it were left up to him, hundreds of thousands of Australians would have been out of a job. We would have gone into recession. Instead, we were one of the only advanced economies in the world to avoid recession. There is no excuse for these people—no excuse for the member for Goldstein. At least the Leader of the Opposition's excuse was that he slept through the debate on the response to the global financial crisis. He did not come in here. At least he can say, 'I didn't vote against the government's package to stimulate the economy.' He can say that. He can put his hand on his heart and say, 'I didn't vote against the stimulus package,' because he did not. He was asleep in his office and did not come in on the most important debate that this parliament has dealt with for half a century. Mr Christensen interjecting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Hon. BC Scott ): The member for Dawson has already been warned. Mr BRADBURY: This was the most important economic debate that we have dealt with and he was not even here to vote for it because he fell asleep. He slept through it! Whilst the Leader of the Opposition might have slept through the global financial crisis, the rest of the world has not. And we acted to support hundreds of thousands of jobs. Since 2007 we have created three-quarters of a million jobs in this country post GFC. When the GFC hit, 27 million jobs were shed around the world. These are the facts of our government's economic management. We have managed the economy so that it is a strong economy, but now we want to spread the benefits of the boom. We are the only advanced economy that has handed down a budget surplus. All the others are miles back in deficit. We are returning to surplus, and these people, who were high up when it came to spending and higher when it came to taxing, want to come here and lecture us. Australia is a standout performer of all world economies and you should stand up and be proud of that rather than criticise. (Time expired)