Dan Tehan
Wannon · Liberal Party · Australia
“We all remember the budget speech of this year, which had all those toxic taxes and broken promises. Those toxic taxes and broken promises are getting bigger by the day, especially the broken promises. Who remembers the Treasurer saying: 'Reforming and strengthening care.”
“I move: That subparagraph (6)(b) in paragraph (1) of the motion be amended to read: "(b) Opposition member as its deputy chair who shall act as chair of the committee at any time when the chair is not present at a meeting of the committee;" The Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade has had a very long tradition of…”
“I think it's really important that that continues, and I hope that the government will support this amendment, which would continue that long tradition and make sure this very important committee can continue to do that important work.”
“I move: That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the member from Wannon from moving the following censure motion immediately: This House censures the Minister for Defence Industry and Minister for Pacific Island Affairs for comments made today at the National Press Club—”
“on indulgence—This is obviously an issue between the teals and the government. There's obviously been some disagreement about how the House should be managed. Our hope is that the teals and the government will be able to work it out and that this issue won't further delay all the bills.”
“I can tell you that people will vote with their feet at the next Victorian state election unless this is fixed—and fixed quickly. They're sick of standing on their feet for the whole three hours because of this failure.”
The complete record
Every one of 371 lines we hold for Dan Tehan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 8.
“Mr Speaker, I have a question for you concerning the administration of the House as it relates to today's matters of public importance. Can I begin my question by stating that I am in no way challenging or dissenting—”
“I move: That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the member from Wannon from moving the following censure motion immediately: This House censures the Minister for Defence Industry and Minister for Pacific Island Affairs for comments made today at the National Press Club—”
“It's an absolute disgrace. There are more broken promises from those opposite, more taxes and more spending. And now you are crippling older Australians who are waiting for aged care. It's a disgrace.”
“We all remember the budget speech of this year, which had all those toxic taxes and broken promises. Those toxic taxes and broken promises are getting bigger by the day, especially the broken promises. Who remembers the Treasurer saying: 'Reforming and strengthening care. There's $3 billion to deliver more beds, more packages and better aged care for older Australians'? We all remember now what that better aged care is all about—AI bots to make sure that poor old elderly Australians who are waiting for home care packages cannot get their policies considered properly. It's all being done by an AI bot. That's how those opposite think you should conduct your policies when it comes to aged care. Worse than that, we've seen under the Albanese Labor government 4,812 people die while they've been waiting for those home care packages.”
“on indulgence—This is obviously an issue between the teals and the government. There's obviously been some disagreement about how the House should be managed. Our hope is that the teals and the government will be able to work it out and that this issue won't further delay all the bills.”
“I think it's really important that that continues, and I hope that the government will support this amendment, which would continue that long tradition and make sure this very important committee can continue to do that important work. Of course, there will be hefty debates within the committee about various things, but what we would like to see is that long-term tradition of a member of the government as chair and then a member of the opposition as deputy chair. That's why I'm moving this amendment. I made sure we notified the Leader of the House that we would be doing this.”
“I move: That subparagraph (6)(b) in paragraph (1) of the motion be amended to read: "(b) Opposition member as its deputy chair who shall act as chair of the committee at any time when the chair is not present at a meeting of the committee;" The Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade has had a very long tradition of having a chair from the government and a deputy chair from the opposition parties, given its long-term standing and importance to the nation. As a former diplomat, I know this committee has always worked in the national interest, has carried out incredibly important work on behalf of the nation and, on the whole, has always acted in a very bipartisan way.”
“I understand the pressures you are facing, and I understand your complete and utter dismay at what you saw in the budget and how it's going to put further pressure on you. Enough is enough. Seriously. I say to you: the coalition knows and understands the pressures you're facing. We are putting together a package that will make your life easier, not harder, and we'll be announcing that over the coming months. I look forward to further engaging with you over the coming months as well.”
“I can tell you that people will vote with their feet at the next Victorian state election unless this is fixed—and fixed quickly. They're sick of standing on their feet for the whole three hours because of this failure. The other issue that I would like to raise today is what is happening to small business in this country and the failure of the Albanese Labor government to do anything about it. All we're seeing from the Albanese Labor government is regulation upon regulation and tax upon tax on the small business sector, including in my electorate. I thank the farmers, the retailers, the hospitality businesses and all those other small businesses that have had discussions with me over the last few months. I understand that you're hurting. I understand that the government is doing nothing to help you.”
“The Warrnambool-to-Melbourne rail line has been an issue that keeps dogging the Labor government both at the state and the federal level. I say to both the Albanese Labor government and the Allan Labor government: it's time you got it right. We still have elderly passengers having to stand or sit on the floor when taking the more than three-hour trip. We have young children and their mothers not being able to find seats. This is despite the coalition government providing over $460 million in funding for this line when we were in government. The incompetence of the Allan Labor government and the lack of interest from the Albanese Labor government in what is happening to passengers on this rail line literally beggars belief. Enough is enough. It needs to be fixed. It needs to be addressed.”
“I move that so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent me from moving the following motion immediately: that this House condemns the Albanese Labor government for its dirty deal with the Greens—”
“I move: That so much of standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the member for Wannon moving immediately the following censure motion: That this House censures the Prime Minister for his budget of broken promises and toxic taxes betrayal.”
“Still, if our circulated amendment were to pass, the coalition would support this bill because we'd take out the 'bring the CFMEU to Canberra' part and deal with the Fair Work Commission part. But it doesn't. That is why we will not support this bill. We will not stand by and allow the government to rush through under a gag motion this appalling piece of legislation which brings the CFMEU back to Canberra and basically opens the taxpayer up to enormous cost overruns, which is the last thing we need as a country at this moment.”
“Yesterday's gag motion—this was gagged—from the Leader of the House will mean that there will be no opportunity for the opposition to speak to other amendments. This matters because, at this stage, the opposition has circulated an amendment which tries to achieve the same objectives as the amendment moved by the member for Wentworth. I understand that the member for Wentworth's amendment will be considered first, therefore obviating the opposition's amendment. Without Labor's gag, the opposition may have been able to move its amendment first. That's what we were going to do. As it stands, Labor's gag motion prevents the normal consideration-in-detail process from occurring.”
“Talk about damned by your deceit. Talk about being absolutely damned by your hypocrisy. I've talked about the 'wedge-islation', and this is where it becomes important as to how the opposition is going to deal with this bill. The coalition supports practical reforms that improve the operation of the Fair Work Commission—we have been clear on that. But we cannot support the bill in its current form while it contains these appalling provisions that will bring the CFMEU to Canberra. We cannot support that. The government should split the bill. That is why the opposition has circulated detailed amendments to that effect. We don't want the CFMEU coming to Canberra. Why those opposite do is beyond me, but we do not. This is where it goes to the 'wedge-islation'. I want to make very clear what the government has done here.”
“This is what he said on 3 May 2022: 'For this guy, everything is an opportunity to play politics. He doesn't have legislation, he has "wedge-islation". They sit around the cabinet. They don't think about the national interest. They think about how they can wedge Labor on this issue.' Seriously, the hypocrisy knows no bounds. I can go on and on, but I will give one more example. It's like Pinocchio's nose growing. It's example after example after example; it just grows and grows and grows. He said: My opponent is always looking for an argument, always looking for a disagreement, never looking for a solution. … … … I think really people are sick of a government that has 'wedgislation', as I call it, looking to wedge the Opposition rather than legislation. Talk about damned by your own incompetence. Talk about damned by your own words.”
“It's a government really in search of an agenda and a plan. Well, you've been damned by your own words, Prime Minister. This is what he said at a doorstop as opposition leader in May 2022: 'This is a guy who never looks to bring people together, who never looks for unity. It's always just looking for wedges and always looking for division.' Once again, damned by your own words, Prime Minister. This is what he said on 10 May 2022: 'I want to bring people together. I think we've had a decade of division, a decade of a Prime Minister who is always looking for the wedge. What we need to do is actually work out what our common interests are.' I can tell you: this bill is 'wedge-islation' and there is no common interest in it. And yet you're happy for it to be rammed through the parliament in this form. It is a disgrace.”
“Then, when he addressed the caucus, when he addressed all the Labor Party members, this is what he said: We want to be more inclusive. We want to make sure there's less shouting and more delivery. The former government sat around and talked about how to wedge the other side of politics. We're not really interested in that. And they just sat back and let him be dishonest. You can't make this stuff up. You cannot make this up. That's at his first caucus meeting as Prime Minister, after his first press conference as Prime Minister. And then, as opposition leader, in the House of Reps on 17 September 2019 he said: The objective is not to promote legislation; it's to promote 'wedgislation'—it's about trying to find legislation that the Labor Party will oppose. This is a great example of it.”
“It beggars belief that they would be trying to do it. And it not only beggars belief that they're doing it, but so does the way that they're doing it. It's so underhanded. Because guess what they've done. They've put it in with another bill that is about improving the Fair Work Commission and how it goes about its job and trying to make it more timely. And guess what the Prime Minister said about this type of 'wedge-islation'. This is what he said on the record, and he's said it numerous times on the record—and once again it shows you how dishonest he is. This is what he said at his first press conference as Prime Minister on 23 May 2022: I look forward to leading a Government that makes Australians proud. A Government that doesn't seek to divide, that doesn't seek to have wedges … That was at his first press conference.”
“You've got the most incompetent minister the Commonwealth has ever seen, the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. Not only did he change the contract arrangements, which has seen a blow-out from $6 billion to $12 billion, but they're now forecasting it could go as high as $42 billion. Guess what they've done with Snowy? They've also done a workplace relations deal that's likely to add billions and billions of dollars. So you can take what the minister for climate change has done and just say, 'Well, that's what's going to happen across the board now with all these Commonwealth procurement proposals.' It beggars belief that they would want to do it, especially when you can see the damage and the harm that has been done across the nation where state Labor governments have done this type of thing.”
“What the government is trying to do is, without even putting in place proper protections, look after their mates. It just goes to show you what the priorities of this government are. Their first priority is to make sure you're taxed more. We've got Sir Tax-a-lot, the Treasurer, wanting to find more and more ways to tax you. That's the first thing they want to do. They want to spend more, and they're trying to find every which way they can to spend the taxpayer dollar. That spending, which is at record levels, is going to increase even more now because they're going to make sure that major projects have a dirty deal with the union movement on them. What's that going to lead to? It's going to lead to time overruns and cost overruns. If you want an example, have a look at Snowy Hydro.”
“They've warned that the provisions may unfairly exclude businesses lawfully operating under awards, including small businesses in the building and construction industry. If you're a business, lawfully going about what you do, but you don't have the preferred union contract that the government wants you to sign up on, then, bad luck, you're not going to get the deal. Why would they be doing this, especially when it comes to the building sector? They want their mates in the CFMEU in on the deal. It's an absolute national disgrace what they're trying to ram through the parliament. What does the Housing Industry Association say? They have raised concerns that the bill effectively fast tracks the Secure Australian Jobs Code while that process is still in consultation and development.”
“Let's have a look what serious industry groups are saying about what the Labor Party are trying to ram through with this bill. The Business Council of Australia has warned that public money should go to businesses that can deliver, not businesses that have signed the right union agreement. The Ai Group has warned that the proposal risks undermining freedom of association. It undermines freedom of association by opening the door to governments forcing employers and employees to strike deals with unions in order to commercially deal with the government. I wonder who they've got in mind. They're going to force companies to do deals with the CFMEU. Good on you, Albanese Labor government. That's just going to do wonders for value for money for the Australian taxpayer. What does Master Builders Australia say?”
“Then go to Victoria, the state which is completely and utterly broke, where we've seen the CFMEU not only infiltrating workplaces but then also bringing with it organised crime into those workplaces. Now, we're seeing from judicial inquiries that there is $15 billion worth of corruption in these major projects in Victoria. What does the Albanese Labor government do? It decides that it'd better follow what's happening in Victoria and what happened in Queensland. This is appalling. It's atrocious. That is why we will oppose this legislation. We oppose the way the government is going about it as well. Once again, it shows we have a dishonest Prime Minister who says one thing before an election and then does the complete opposite after—but I'll get to that later.”
“This bill should really be called 'Bringing the CFMEU to Canberra', because that is what this bill is all about, and the deceitful and dishonest way the government is ramming this bill through is an utter disgrace. It will have enormous consequences for all major federal government procurement processes. What it will mean is we will see cost blowouts on all of those. We will see cost overruns on all of those. We will see time delays. It will be an absolute debacle. I cannot believe that this government is doing this. It only has to look at where state governments have done this kind of dirty deal to see what the implications are going to be for this nation. Look at Queensland under the previous Labor government, and have a look at the disasters that occurred because of legislation like this.”
“I say this as a word of warning, because it never goes away that the government with the Greens are always looking to do things together—we've seen them do a very dangerous deal with the Greens on the budget—and the diesel fuel rebate, sadly, is always in their sights. What we should be doing—”
“I think that many Australians but, in particular, the government failed to understand very early on how important diesel, in particular, is to our economy. It still drives our mining sector, our agriculture sector and our land transport sector. It absolutely drives them. Without diesel, we're in a world of pain. I say this to the government that not only do we have to make sure that we can refine and that we've got enough supply of diesel, fertiliser, jet fuel and other fuels; we've also got to understand that you've got to make sure they're affordable. That's what the excise relief does. It makes sure they are affordable.”
“Anyway, the whole way he does everything, sadly, would be funny if it wasn't so serious what he's doing to the cost of energy in this country and what that's doing to households and industry. But I turn back to this point here. The other lesson from this is: have we learnt a lesson? Because we are going to continue to need fossil fuels into the future, and we are seeing a lack of interest in actually making sure that we can produce those fossil fuels ourselves. We have to make sure that we can produce the oil that we need. We have to make sure that we can produce the gas that we need. We've got to make sure that we can refine that oil to make sure that we can become much more self-sufficient again when it comes to the key drivers of our economy.”
“So he headed off overseas with his begging bowl to make sure that we had diesel, jet fuel, unleaded petrol, urea, and fertiliser—all critically important. I don't think we'll ever forget that, just as the Prime Minister was heading off to Asia to make sure we had all those things, we had the minister for climate change saying, 'None of my counterparts is talking to me about fossil fuels.' So here's the Prime Minister out begging for fossil fuels in our region, and the minister for climate change is there saying, 'Oh, no-one wants to talk to me about fossil fuels.' Of all the bizarre things that he's done and said, that was the best of them all. His own prime minister, his own leader, is out there begging for fossil fuels, and he's saying, 'None of them wants to talk to me about it.' It's just bizarre.”
“It's always highly, highly amusing when the Minister for Climate Change and Energy gets up and he quotes that I and other members here kept calling on him to get serious about this national fuel crisis because he was asleep at the wheel and that we were going to have trouble by the end of March, by the end of April, by the end of May or by the end of June. You name it, there were problems. It was because he was doing absolutely nothing about it, and he wasn't interested in doing anything about price either. What happened in the end—and we all remember this—is that the minister for climate change was left behind. The Prime Minister went overseas with his begging bowl because the Prime Minister all of a sudden understood that there was a real problem here.”
“We are supporting the Treasury Laws Amendment (Fuel Excise Relief No. 2) Bill 2026 mainly because the idea of giving fuel excise relief was the coalition's. We went out, we announced it and we made sure that we put pressure on the government, and the government followed. It goes to show that, when the government follows the opposition, when the government follows the coalition, the government actually gets it right. They should do it more often because, whenever they follow their own noses on things, they get it so terribly wrong. The budget is the latest case in point. When they listen to the coalition, they get things right. This is the clearest case in point that you will see. How did we get here? We got here because the government was asleep at the wheel when it came to what was happening with the fuel crisis.”
“It was our idea, so you have our support. That's clear. So why wouldn't we just deal with that and then deal with the controversial IR bills? It's even worse than that because the IR bills come in two parts. We are, on the whole, supportive of one of those parts, but we're not supportive of the other one. So why would you bundle it all together like this, unless you just want to be completely and utterly cynical and literally just say to the Australian people, 'We're happy to say one thing before an election and happy to do the complete opposite after the election'? That is why we are moving the amendments to this. I thank all the Labor MPs who have sat there and listened. I'm hoping that, given what I've been able to say to you, you will now see the light, understand how important it is and all come and vote with us.”
“I think that is one of the messages that came through on Saturday. People do have conflict fatigue. Given those words by the Prime Minister himself, I move an amendment to the suspension motion moved by the Leader of the House: That paragraphs (2) and (4) be omitted. We do this because I think the Australian people are deeply concerned about what is happening at the moment with this government. The government has made very strong commitments before an election and then seems to be doing the complete opposite after the election. I think there is a growing cynicism within the Australian people because of this. They want to see us saying what we mean and then doing what we mean. This is just another unnecessary example of this. The government knows, when it comes to the fuel excise, that it has our support.”
“I say this because this is what the Prime Minister said as opposition leader: And I think really, people are sick of a government that has 'wedge-islation', as I call it, looking to wedge the opposition rather than legislation. I've been constructive as Opposition Leader. He also said: He doesn't have legislation. He has wedge-islation. They sit around the Cabinet, they don't think about the national interest. They think about how can we wedge Labor on this issue? How can we wedge Labor— everything this guy does. And then, in his first press conference as Prime Minister, he said: I look forward to leading a Government that makes Australians proud. A Government that doesn't seek to divide, that doesn't seek to have wedges, but seeks to bring people together for our common interest and our common purpose.”
“I thank the Leader of the House for acknowledging that there are parts of this that we all agree with—in particular, that we leave so that those who want to can go to the War Memorial. I appreciate the fact that he's acknowledged that because it is critically important in this place that things like bipartisanship continue when it comes to things like the War Memorial, our veterans, defence et cetera. I greatly appreciate that. That spirit is highly acknowledged. The leader also spoke about what some of these other motions are about. What they do is bundle the uncontroversial fuel excise bill into the same motion as the controversial IR bill. The issue is that the government is hoping that no-one will notice. We just think that, once again, this is completely the wrong way to do things.”
“Independent modelling out today shows rents will go through the roof. This is a dishonest and deceitful Prime Minister who cannot look the Australian people in the face without telling them porkies. Enough is enough, Prime Minister. Get your act together. Get real with the Australian people. Be upfront with them, and stop taxing them to death.”
“Who said this? 'If successful, I'm determined to restore a greater sense of responsibility to the office of prime minister, a deeper respect for the Australian people and for the integrity of our democracy, real accountability and delivery. I will lead a government that keeps its promises.' Well, we will hear again today, sadly, more deceit and more dishonesty from this Prime Minister. And why? Because his so-called changes to his deceitful taxes are meaningless. They're useless. They'll do nothing. It will still mean that we'll have the highest-taxing government on income. That's the Albanese Labor government. When it comes to taxing capital, it's the highest-taxing government in the world. When it comes to what's happening to rent, they're being driven through the roof.”
“Who said this: 'My word is my bond. I'm a Prime Minister who will promise to do things and then go and do them. I think that's how you restore faith in politics'? And who said this beauty: 'I don't lie to them'? He's sitting right there! And what did he do? We've just seen the greatest act of betrayal that this parliament has seen in 20 years. You are all party to it—”
“We support the motion, but we would note that we wouldn't be in this situation if we hadn't had this gigantic gagging through divisions going on. But we support it. Question agreed to, with an absolute majority.”
“At the end of this year, when the Office of the Presidency is no longer needed, do you think the minister is going to keep the Office of the Presidency, just to make him feel good, or will it go? Can we get an answer to that? Is the Office of the Presidency only for this year, or will there be another reason for the minister to keep the Office of the Presidency and the 30 staff working in it? It would be great to get an answer to all of those questions today.”
“Do you have any idea about this? There is a blowout of such significance—seriously, there are going to be gale-force warnings soon because of this minister. So we want to know what each individual department is going to do. Last of all, what we'd love is some real honesty around the Office of the Presidency. Did the minister whisper to the secretary: 'Could you name it Office of the Presidency, because that'd make me feel really good. I'm blowing all these programs to kingdom come, so I need something to make me feel like I'm sort of doing my job'? What I'd love to know is how many staff will be ongoing in the Office of the Presidency after this year.”
“Under what regime would that be good governance, apart from that of Old Blowout, who seems not to care that everything blows out. Green hydrogen—why did you cut $1 billion out of the green hydrogen scheme? Is it because it is completely failing? There's another billion in there. Are you going to blow that as well? Please, can you be upfront about what is happening with green hydrogen. Are you going to blow another billion dollars on green hydrogen? We would love to know the answer to that. There's something else we'd like to know. In the budget papers it says that you've got no idea what each individual department is spending on net zero. That's what the budget papers actually say—that you do not know what each individual department is spending on net zero. So how much is each individual department blowing on net zero?”
“It's because the Capacity Investment Scheme promised 40 gigawatts of power across 75 projects yet Senate estimates just confirmed only one project has actually been built. So how much money is being poured into this scheme and what's the blowout in the budget? That is what we would like the answer to. Please, the Australian people deserve some transparency around this scheme, which is absolutely failing. We have the Cheaper Home Batteries Program blowout. It's unbelievable. It was budgeted for $2.3 billion and it's now $8 billion. It blew out by so much that the regulator had to put money out the door. The question I've got is: is it good governance when you blow a scheme out so much that the regulator, who's meant to oversee it, is the one who's funding it?”
“It's a shame Minister Bowen isn't here to answer these questions. What a surprise. But, because we've seen blowout upon blowout upon blowout upon blowout—and I think that the minister's starting to get a bit of a nickname as 'Blowout'—it's no understanding that he's not here. I would hope that these questions might be passed on to the minister, who is getting the nickname 'Blowout'. We turn to the Capacity Investment Scheme. What is the true cost? What is the true cost of the Capacity Investment Scheme? There's a very simple answer. I understand that with every single project there might be—and I only say might—a valid reason as to why they might be commercial in confidence. But there is no reason why the whole program shouldn't be. And do you know why?”
“I move: That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Wannon moving the following motion immediately: That this House requires that questions on the second reading of the Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Reform No. 1) Bill 2026 and of the Income Tax Rates Amendment (Tax Reform No. 1) Bill 2026 not be put until such time as every government Member has spoken during the second reading debate. If it's good enough for the Prime Minister to speak on his budget of broken promises, it's good enough for every single member here to do the same. Oh, you're going to gag again! What's the problem with your budget of broken promises? Why won't you—”
“This is why this must be sent to the economics committee for a hearing—it has to be. Last week we asked the Treasurer what was going to be carved out or what wasn't going to be carved out, and he could not answer. So it must be sent to the economics committee, because we need the government to understand its own budget. If it can't understand its own budget, what hope have the Australian people got of understanding it? Of course they can't do that. So we have to make sure that this goes to the economics committee.”
“I move: That the Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Reform No. 1) Bill 2026 and Income Tax Rates Amendment (Tax Reform No. 1) Bill 2026 be referred to the Standing Committee on Economics for consideration and an advisory report by 30 December 2026. In question time today, it became really clear that the government doesn't know its own budget. You can't believe it, but that is where we have ended up. The government does not know its own budget, so we need to refer the budget to the House Standing Committee on Economics for reporting back to this House. I'll just give you a few examples. We asked the Prime Minister whether the budget increased taxes by $77 billion. He didn't know! And yet it's in his budget papers. We asked the Minister for Housing whether she could define a new dwelling. She couldn't define a new dwelling.”
“I move: That new paragraph (24) be inserted before paragraph (3) as follows: "questions on the second reading of the Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Reform No. 1) Bill 2026 and of the Income Tax Rates Amendment (Tax Reform No. 1) Bill 2026 not being put until such time as every government Member has spoken during the second reading debate". There are a couple of reasons why we are doing this.”
“Once you get to the detail, you start to see, in particular, the unintended consequences which come from broken promises and from complete and utter spin. This is why this budget needs to be examined, and it's why these bills need to be examined. We've said we will do anything we can to get this parliament to examine these bills and then to throw them out. I say to the Prime Minister you have a chance. The Prime Minister has a chance. He can show some courage. He can say, 'Yes, I told the Australian people one thing before an election and I did completely the opposite after the election.' The Prime Minister could have the courage to front up and say that is what he did. In doing that, he has not only embarrassed himself; he has embarrassed every single member of the Labor Party caucus. All of them have been embarrassed—”
“He's popped up and said, 'I've got questions and queries about this.' The list goes on and on. The Housing Industry Association have come out and said they don't like it. The Business Council of Australia are out saying they don't like it. The Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry are out saying they don't like it. COSBOA are out saying they don't like it. As a matter of fact, I think there are only two people in this country who do like this budget: the Prime Minister and the Treasurer. I don't think there are too many other people lining up behind it. Of course, there was all this spin at the start, and some people got sucked in with that spin. I would say to a lot of people: always look at the detail, because this government's very good at the spin.”