Jim Chalmers
Rankin · Australian Labor Party · Australia
“It's why we have delivered and are delivering an ambitious budget defined by reform and resilience and responsible economic management. We've been delivering for the Australian people while the member for Hume has been destroying the Liberal Party. We've been delivering for Australians. He's been destroying the once great Liberal Party.”
“I acknowledge the member for Gellibrand and thank him especially for his work on Asian capability and the big report that he has just released as the chair of the education committee. Today is obviously a very important day.”
“We don't just acknowledge those challenges; we are addressing them. That's why we are delivering more tax cuts for Australian workers, more pay rises for people on awards and the minimum wage and a fairer tax system for first home buyers.”
“It's because every time the Australian people need them to vote to help them with these real pressures that they face, they vote to make things worse rather than better. They leave this parliament today more divisive and more divided than ever. We leave this parliament today delivering for the Australians who sent us here.”
“On Friday, we learned that the deficit for the year just finished will be smaller than anticipated at budget time, and we know from the AOFM this week that our debt will be $200 billion less than the trajectory we inherited from those opposite. If those opposite had their way, there'd be bigger deficits and more debt.”
“The member for Macquarie is a wonderful representative of workers and small businesses and families in her beautiful part of Australia. Today is a really important day, as the Prime Minister said a moment ago. We are delivering tax cuts.”
The complete record
Every one of 706 lines we hold for Jim Chalmers, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 9 of 15.
“As a key member of the economics committees of this House and our caucus, the member for Bennelong knows that responsible economic management is a defining feature of this Labor government—creating jobs, getting real wages growing again and rolling out cost-of-living relief. Tax cuts are a really important part of that, because they recognise that when Australians earn more they should keep more of what they earn as well. That's why we cut taxes last year. It's why we're cutting taxes next year and why we're cutting taxes the year after that. Every taxpayer is getting three tax cuts because of this Labor government. That means we are returning bracket creep. We're getting average tax rates down. And it means a fairer tax system for workers and especially young people.”
“They had spending as a share of the economy up around a third. We have spent a great deal of time and effort cleaning up the mess that we inherited in the budget with a couple of surpluses, a smaller deficit, $200 billion less of Liberal debt, saving on interest costs, and $100 billion in savings. The member for Fairfax might look like Scott Morrison. He might be undermining his leader like Scott Morrison did, but more and more he sounds like the member for Hume, and it didn't work out real well for the member for Hume.”
“It's why it is so important that we have been able to improve the budget compared to the mess that we inherited from those opposite. It's why it's so important that we are rolling out those tax cuts, rolling out the cost-of-living relief and strengthening Medicare—to try and ease some of the pressure that we acknowledge Australians are still feeling around the kitchen table. As I understand it, the shadow Treasurer gave a little speech about some of these issues a moment ago. We have heard these kinds of speeches before. The speech that the member for Fairfax gave sounded exactly like the speeches the member for Hume used to give. But, whatever speeches they give down the road, they can't obscure the fact that, when they were in office, they delivered nothing but deficits. They doubled the debt even before COVID.”
“As the Prime Minister acknowledged a moment ago, and as I acknowledged earlier on, the annual result is higher than we would like, but it is much, much lower than what we inherited from the coalition when we came to office. The flat 0.0 inflation result in October was driven by falls in electricity and fuel prices and a moderation in housing costs. But there was a tick-up in the annual number, and that, in part, reflects temporary factors, such as the timing of those state energy rebates, and also volatile items, such as travel prices. Again, as the Prime Minister and I have both said today, this is why it's so important that we continue to responsibly roll out the cost-of-living relief that those opposite oppose.”
“I thank the member for Bass for her question and also for the massive contribution she's already making as a new member of this place. With your indulgence, Mr Speaker, I acknowledge that my mate the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government's brother is in the House. Michael is in the House, as is his wife Kerryn. We welcome them from the member for Corangamite's electorate. Thanks for the wonderful job you did in helping to raise the minister for infrastructure. New figures from the ABS did show today that prices were steady in the month of October but did tick up through the year in the inflation figures.”
“They want to smash investor confidence and weaken our economy with a position on net zero which is all about their internal politics and not about the national economic interest. What has become abundantly clear, as we finish the year, is that the opposition finishes the year focused just on themselves, recklessly divisive and hopelessly divided. The government finishes the year united, focused on the cost of living and working very hard to deliver every day for the people who sent us here.”
“Economists expect that the unwinding of some state energy rebates will push the headline number up a bit tomorrow, and that's why they have encouraged us to focus largely on the underlying number. But, whatever those numbers tell us tomorrow, inflation will be much lower under us than it was under those opposite when they left office—when they were throwing more and more fuel on the fire when inflation was absolutely skyrocketing on their watch. It's bad enough that they left us with a trillion dollars in debt, skyrocketing inflation and falling real wages. It's bad enough that they opposed cost-of-living help and voted against tax cuts for the working people of this country. Now, they want to push power prices up, not down.”
“At the same time, we delivered two surpluses in our first year and a much smaller deficit in our third year in office. It is a fact—from their own documents, which they released at election time this year—that, if those opposite had won the election, there would be less help for people doing it tough. There would be not tax cuts, there would be bigger deficits and there would be more debt. That's why nobody takes them seriously on the economy. Even with all of the progress that Australians have made together on our economy in recent years—whether it's halving inflation, creating 1.2 million jobs, getting wages moving again or seeing interest rates cut three times this year already—we do know, we do acknowledge, we do understand that many Australians are still under pressure, and we will get a sense of that in tomorrow's inflation numbers.”
“The member for Griffith is an outstanding advocate for those wonderful suburbs to the south of Brisbane, delivering every single day since she was elected for the people who sent her here. This government is all about delivery: delivering help with the cost of living in the most responsible way that we can; delivering two more tax cuts—three in total; delivering cheaper medicines and more bulk-billing; delivering student debt relief from this week; delivering smaller deposits and building more homes; delivering a 12 per cent super guarantee and boosting the low-income offset; delivering more paid parental leave and paying super on paid parental leave; delivering fee-free TAFE; and delivering cheaper home batteries and help with electricity bills.”
“Also, if they really cared about lower electricity prices for Australians, they wouldn't have come up with this economic insanity of trying to run interference on an orderly transition to net zero in our economy. Now, I'm asked about energy CEOs. I've made it clear that, whether it's Frank Calabria from Origin, the dozen energy retail CEOs who issued the report, Mark Collette from Energy Australia—”
“Those are not conflicting objectives, because the global shift to net zero is a massive economic opportunity for our country, for our economy and for its people. I think if anybody is scratching around for a reason why those opposite are unfit for office, it's all these questions that suggest that Australia should not have an influential voice in the direction that the world is taking on energy. On this side of the House, we're providing electricity bill relief, we had the gas caps, we've got the battery subsidies, which are working extremely well, and we're introducing cleaner, cheaper, more renewable, reliable energy into the system. If those opposite really cared about power prices for Australians, they would support our efforts to introduce that cleaner and cheaper energy.”
“Tony Wood of the Grattan Institute said: The existing, ageing coal plants will continue to be retired or become very expensive to maintain … There is really nothing in the Liberals' announcements that will reduce power prices. We know what's really going on. Those opposite have completely vacated the field when it comes to rational, responsible economic policy. We see in Niki Savva's book that they're all lining up to dump on the former leader. They're all trying to blame Peter Dutton for their woes. In Peter Dutton's defence, look what he had to work with over there: the least talented, most divisive and most divided front bench in memory. (Time expired)”
“Joel Gilmore, an expert from Griffith University, said: It's very clear that relying on coal and gas is going to be more expensive than renewables. To fight against net zero is fighting against gravity. Rob Wheals from Squadron Energy said: We know that Australia's coal fleet is nearing the end of its economic and technical lifespan with coal plant outages driving high price periods. Coal is killing affordability and reliability. What about Frank Calabria from Origin? He said: … the cost of renewable energy and battery storage is increasingly competitive … which means our cost of energy is expected to be more economical through a combination of renewables, storage and Origin's fleet of peaking power stations.”
“Australia's energy transition is irreversible; there is no turning back. In arguing to abandon net zero, those opposite are arguing for even higher power prices. They are smashing investor confidence and investor certainty, and they would be weakening our economy as a consequence. For what? Just so they can win this unedifying race to the far right in their own party room—one after the other trying to outdo each other on having a more extreme position on net zero. When it comes to renewables, and when it comes to the orderly transition to net zero, this is what a dozen energy retail CEOs have had to say: … the least cost, lowest impact pathway is an energy system dominated by renewables … and firmed with battery storage, gas and pumped hydro, as I just said.”
“Thanks to the honourable member for his question. Those opposite have been quoting an Australian Energy Council report. I think I heard shadow minister Tehan quoting from that report earlier on. Either they are being tricky or they are wilfully misrepresenting the report of the Australian Energy Council. Here's what it says: The AEC supports the transition to net zero emissions by 2050 on the premise that the least cost, lowest impact pathway is an energy system dominated by renewables (wind and solar, including rooftop solar) and firmed with battery storage, gas and pumped hydro. There is generally broad alignment across industry about this energy mix … They also say: AEC members understand the urgency of climate change and the crucial role the energy industry must play to support Australia's net zero ambitions.”
“He also said: Economics will win out in the end and if base load power can be stored in particular, that's an exciting thing for the environment and everyone's hip pocket. He says: In my own electorate, people are self-sustaining through solar. The reality is that type of disruption is happening and that is an exciting thing not only for the environment, but for the hip pocket.”
“Thanks to the Leader of the Nationals for his question. As we have made really clear and as the relevant experts—the Prime Minister read out a few of them a moment ago—have made really clear, Australia's best chance to put downward pressure on electricity prices is from introducing cleaner, cheaper, more renewable and more reliable energy sources. That, for a long time, wasn't an especially controversial proposition; even those opposite held that view. I'm asked this question by the Leader of the Nationals. The Leader of the Nationals said once before, when he had a more sensible position on this, that it was a good thing that renewables were coming on. He said: The disruption that's happening with the technology, moving towards renewable energy, particularly in storage for base load, is exciting. I think it is a good thing.”
“We're revitalising national competition policy. We're strengthening and streamlining the foreign investment regime. And we're reforming EPBC, which will deliver faster approvals for projects that are in Australia's interests and faster knockbacks of projects that are not. Also, on Friday I'll meet with the state and territory treasurers to advance our very substantial agenda to make our economy more productive and competitive across the federation. We know, as a government, that we have much more work to do. But we have made good progress, cleaning up the mess we inherited from those opposite as well as modernising our economy. We've made good progress since the Economic Reform Roundtable as well. We acknowledge that in the lead-up to the budget we will do even more.”
“So, what we are doing—with our tax cuts, with our approach to the labour market—is ensuring that more Australians are working, earning more and keeping more of what they earn, at the same time as we roll out cost-of-living relief in our economy. Two more tax cuts are on the way. We've got more bulk-billed GP visits, because we know that means less pressure on families. We've got cheaper medicines. And, as the education minister said a moment ago, we're providing student debt relief. At the same time as we're rolling out that cost-of-living relief, creating jobs, getting wages moving again and creating opportunities in our economy, we're also modernising Australia's economy over the medium and long term. We're approving more homes. We're slashing tariffs. We're winding back red tape where we can.”
“I thank the member for Swan. It was only last week that the employment minister and I joined with the member for Swan to celebrate the news that Australia has just ticked over two consecutive years of real wages growth in our economy—the eighth consecutive quarter of real wages growth in our economy. That comes after real wages had been falling for five consecutive quarters when we came to office. In fact, real wages were falling sharply. They are now growing again. That's a deliberate design feature of our economic policy. So, that's the news we got last week. The week before that, we learned that unemployment had gone down once again and is, under this government, the lowest average unemployment rate of any government in half a century—1.2 million jobs, four in every five of them in the private sector.”
“But, while those opposite are divided, this government and this Prime Minister are delivering. A considered, orderly, responsible transition to cleaner, cheaper, more reliable energy is an important part of our economic plan, and there's a good reason for that. That's because this will strengthen our economy and create more opportunities for more Australians, and that's what this side of the House is all about. That's because we are a mainstream government, delivering for the people who send us here, and we won't be distracted by the daily madness that we see over there.”
“The alternative to this is a disorderly transition, which would create investor uncertainty and would cost our economy dearly. The Treasury has made it clear, in their modelling document, that the only thing worse than a disorderly transition to net zero would be the policy that we think that they have now agreed to—the only outcome worse than a disorderly transition would be if we abandoned net zero entirely, which is what those opposite are now calling for. Abandoning net zero would be economic insanity of the highest order. What they are contemplating over there would be economic extremism of the very worst kind. What this shows is that their extremism isn't just some kind of phase they're going through; it's now their permanent state. That is the most divided, most divisive, most extreme and least credible opposition in memory.”
“I appreciate the question from the member for Banks, who brings a great deal of experience, expertise and collegiality to our team, and I thank him for his contribution. The key conclusions from the detailed Treasury modelling that we've released are that an orderly transition to cleaner, cheaper and more reliable energy will boost investment, lift living standards and strengthen our economy. That's why it's a golden opportunity for our economy, and that's why it's our policy. A really important part of this, and a really important part of making our economy more productive as well, is making it easier and faster to build more reliable renewable energy. That's why our EPBC reforms are good for our environment and good for the economy, because they'll help attract the investment that we need in an orderly energy transformation.”
“If he wants to be honest about the view of the Reserve Bank, I encourage him to check out what the Reserve Bank governor said about the two surpluses that we have delivered and the fact that, in the third year, the deficit is much smaller than what we inherited. Because of all of that, debt is much lower compared to other countries and also, I would say, compared to what we inherited from those opposite. The last point I would make is that the shadow Treasurer is precisely the last person that I will take advice from when it comes to responsible economic management. He is the guy that wanted to borrow hundreds of billions of dollars to build nuclear reactors, which would push the price of electricity up, not down.”
“The shadow Treasurer really ought to know that. In a week where the opposition leader's judgement has been repeatedly called into question, I wanted to say that I think it's a credit to the strategic nous of the Leader of the Opposition to give the shadow Treasurer a question, because nothing does the shadow Treasurer's leadership ambitions more harm than to stand him in front of a microphone that's turned on. I already answered this question earlier in the week, and I made it very clear earlier in the week that. If he is saying that the budget is the primary determinate of movements in interest rates in our economy, we've had three interest rate cuts this year, including two interest rate cuts since the budget I handed down from this dispatch box in March.”
“Not for the first time, the shadow Treasurer's foot is in his mouth. The reason for that is that the Reserve Bank made it very clear, in the course of coming to its decision earlier in the week, that government spending had nothing to do with it. They didn't mention it in the press conference. They didn't mention it in the press release. When they released their updated forecasts, they downgraded their expectations for public spending in our economy. I acknowledge that there are a number of challenges, but one of the welcome developments in our economy is that the private sector has been taking over. In fact, over the last two or three quarters, the private sector has been resuming its rightful role as the primary driver of growth in our economy. In fact, for the last two quarters, public demand has made no contribution to growth.”
“To be fair to the opposition leader, they have all gone mad. They have all gone, as my predecessor would have said, troppo. And the Australian people will pay the price for their extremism. (Time expired)”
“They said: The economic costs to Australia of not pursuing net zero would be significant and consequential … They said: Australia is likely to face a higher cost of capital in international … markets if it does not pursue net zero. This is the economic insanity that those opposite look likely to adopt. What they are proposing is absolutely insane in economic terms, and that's what the Treasury modelling document has made very clear. The shadow Treasurer used to support net zero. In fact it was only last year he told this House 'there is bipartisanship when it comes to achieving the goal of net zero by 2050'. But what has changed and the reason he's now undermining his leader—as we read about in today's media—is that the economic vandalism, the right-wing extremism and the opportunism now infects every member of those opposite.”
“That's why, when we released our 2035 targets, we put out the Treasury modelling that supported the decisions that we have been making to get that cleaner and cheaper, more reliable energy into the system. We know that, when you provide that certainty and you provide that clarity, then investors can invest in the energy that we desperately need in our economy and in our communities. That's what an orderly transition is all about. The Treasury modelling concluded that the only thing worse than a disorderly transition to net zero is the policy position that those opposite will now adopt. The least responsible course of action would be to abandon net zero. The Treasury said: Not pursuing net zero by 2050 risks lower economic growth, reduced investment, missed export and employment opportunities, and higher electricity prices.”
“Thanks to the member for Sturt for the question but also for the helpful role that the member is playing already in our climate and economic policies as a relatively new member of this place. The member for Sturt understands, and we understand, that the transition to cleaner and cheaper, more reliable energy is a golden economic opportunity for our country, for our economy and for our people as well. Our economic agenda is all about making the most of this big economic transformation to net zero. We know that what's making the electricity network less reliable is the ageing coal fired part of the network. As it becomes less reliable and as more and more of those generators come out of the system, the onus is on any responsible government to replace it with cleaner and cheaper, more reliable energy.”
“They actually cut these programs for Foodbank. They also opposed our tax cuts and our efforts to boost wages. They opposed our cost-of-living help. So the point that I'm making, in considering the idea put forward by Foodbank, is that we have restored the funding that those opposite cut. That's because we know the important work that Foodbank and others do. We've also found other ways to help people who are under pressure: energy bill relief, permanent increase to working-age payments, rent assistance, tax cuts, boosting real wages and the like. We're a Labor government. We're always looking for ways to help people with the cost of living—especially the most vulnerable. Foodbank is the same. It sounds like the member for Bradfield shares our interest too. (Time expired)”
“It is a source of some pride to me—and, I think, to Minister Rishworth, who did the work on this in the last term of the parliament—that this government is providing an additional $20 million each year to help food and emergency relief organisations. We took that decision in an earlier budget. Some of the organisations in the member for Bradfield's electorate are benefiting from that—the Salvos, Vinnies and Lifeline, I think, just to name three—and it means that our total investment in these services has gone up to $460 million over five years. The Leader of the Opposition also asked about Foodbank, I think, in her first question to the Prime Minister. But what was missing from the opposition leader's question was that, when those opposite were last in government, they cut $20 million a year from these programs.”
“We also know that a lot of businesses are already doing the right thing, absent the implementation of a tax incentive like that, and I thank those businesses who are making those donations to Foodbank and other like organisations for the work that they do. I want to shout out, as well, the Assistant Minister for Productivity, Competition, Charities and Treasury. We've already done some substantial reforms to support charitable giving, including a new DGR category to support community focused giving. We also know that there is more than one way to help these wonderful organisations doing the right thing by people in our local communities.”
“I thank the honourable member for her question. I think this is the first opportunity that I've had to congratulate her on her comprehensive victory in Bradfield, and I thank her for her question about a very serious issue and a seriously terrific organisation, which is Foodbank. I am aware of the report—the analysis and the ideas in the Foodbank report—that has been put out today. I take the opportunity to thank them for the tremendous work that they do in communities right around Australia, helping people who are doing it tough. I'm aware of that specific idea about the tax incentive. I think, from memory, there was also a Senate committee that looked into a similar idea. We take those kinds of suggestions seriously.”
“If he were honest, he would point out that debt is $188 billion lower, because of our efforts over recent years, than it was under the trajectory that those opposite left us with, and our efforts to get the Liberal debt down mean that Australians are saving tens of billions of dollars in debt interest. So I welcome the question from the shadow Treasurer. I hope he asks me a number of questions about this, because the contrast between our responsible economic management and the mess that they left us couldn't be clearer.”
“That's what the Reserve Bank governor actually said about the government's fiscal position. While we're on the topic of being honest about the fiscal position, if the shadow Treasurer were honest about the budget position, he would acknowledge and admit and confess that they ran nine budget deficits and we have run two budget surpluses. He would point out that he had average real spending growth at 4.1 per cent; we've got it at 1.7 per cent. He would acknowledge that there were no savings in their final budget, when inflation was absolutely galloping; we found $100 billion of savings, because we see that as part of responsible economic management.”
“The only mention was in the detailed forecasts which were released, which would downgrade their assumptions about government spending going forward. From time to time, reluctantly, it's on us to point out the egregious lies being told by those opposite about our economy. If they were honest, they would say that the Reserve Bank governor drew no link whatsoever between the government's budget position and the decision that they took yesterday. But the governor, on earlier occasions, has made this point about the government's budget: … we have got relatively low compared with many other countries, relatively low debt-to-GDP ratios. Our deficits aren't—we've had a couple of surpluses and the most recent deficit, in fact, is they're quite small as well.”
“I'm pleased that the member for Fairfax has taken a brief break from undermining his own leader to ask me a question about the budget and about yesterday's decision by the Reserve Bank to keep interest rates on hold, partly because it gives me a welcome opportunity to point out an egregious lie that was being pushed around the gallery this morning on morning media by the Leader of the Opposition. The Leader of the Opposition said, completely untruthfully and dishonestly, that the Reserve Bank yesterday called out the government's spending when it came to the decision that they took independently at the board level. That never happened. In fact, government spending wasn't mentioned by the Reserve Bank governor yesterday. It wasn't mentioned in the board statement.”
“So I'm very happy to take as many questions as he can muster when it comes to the forecasts and when it comes to the fact that, even with the revised forecasts, the Reserve Bank is expecting inflation under this government to be considerably lower than the higher and rising inflation left to us by those opposite.”
“If he wants to talk about what the Reserve Bank governor thinks about the government's fiscal position then perhaps he could read into the Hansard , as I'm about to do, what Governor Bullock said last week when she was asked about the fiscal position. This is what Governor Bullock had to say: … we have got relatively low— debt— compared with many other countries, relatively low debt-to-GDP ratios. Our deficits aren't—we've had a couple of surpluses and the most recent deficit, in fact, is … quite small as well. This view that the Reserve Bank governor has was shared by Fitch Ratings last week when they reaffirmed our AAA credit rating.”
“They do acknowledge, as we do, that there are still inflationary pressures in the economy, but they say, when you compare quarter on quarter, they expect there to be a moderation in December. That's not necessarily my opinion; those are the words that the Reserve Bank put out in their Statement on monetary policy about half an hour ago. So he should be honest about it. Similarly, when it comes to this idea—which is wrong—that government spending is the reason why we have seen an unwelcome tick-up in inflation in the most recent data, if he wants to say that government spending and government budgets are the decisive factor in interest rate decisions then he needs to explain those three interest rate cuts this year, including two after the March budget.”
“I don't think the shadow Treasurer has thought through his question, because if he had, or if he understood the forecast released half an hour or so ago, or if he was being honest with the House and therefore with the Australian people, if he was talking about the forecast, he would point out that the Reserve Bank has revised down the contribution made by public spending to the economy. Either he doesn't understand that—which is troubling—or he does understand that and he's trying to be dishonest about it. Equally troubling. When it comes to the Reserve Bank's forecast on inflation, the point that they have made in their Statement on monetary policy today is that they consider a number of the factors which drove up the inflation number in the most recent data to be transitory.”
“But, if those opposite want to claim that budgets are the decisive factor in interest rate decisions, then they've got to explain those three interest rate cuts this year, including two interest rate cuts which came after the budget in March. We will continue to work through the issues in our economy, the challenges in our economy, in the most responsible, considered and methodical way. We've made a lot of progress together in our economy. We know there's more work to do, and we've acknowledged that throughout.”
“We've got inflation down, we've kept unemployment low, the economy has continued to grow, the private sector is recovering in welcome ways, we've got real wages growing and interest rates have fallen three times this year. But we always know that there is more work to do. If you have a look at the forecasts which were also released with the Reserve Bank's decision today, you will see that, when it comes to government spending, in the Reserve Bank's own forecasts they've actually downgraded the contribution made by public spending in our economy. I think that does torpedo some of this dishonesty that comes from those opposite about the role of government spending. I point that out, acknowledging the usual politics will be played by those opposite.”
“When we came to office, trimmed mean inflation was almost five per cent and rising; it's now been within the target band for three consecutive quarters, albeit at the top of the target band now. If you look around the world, inflation ticked up in September for every major advanced economy except the UK, where it was flat but much higher than it is here. Once again, as I did in the answer a moment ago, I acknowledge—we acknowledge—that, even with this progress we've made, Australians are still under pressure. Those three interest rate cuts are providing a bit of relief, but we know that many Australians would have preferred to see more relief delivered today.”
“As honourable members would be aware, today the independent Reserve Bank kept interest rates on hold at 3.6 per cent. I acknowledge that many Australians would have wanted to see more rate relief at this meeting, but this decision was widely anticipated by markets and widely expected by economists. It is the case that inflation is much lower than we inherited from those opposite, and that has given the Reserve Bank the confidence to cut interest rates three times already this year. Those three interest rate cuts reflect the very substantial progress we've made in our economy together. When we came to office, headline inflation was 6.1 per cent and rising; it's now around half of that.”
“If they really cared about the cost-of-living pressures in communities right around this country, they wouldn't have opposed our efforts to make medicines cheaper. I could go on. But I hope they get the point: there's a difference between hoping for cost-of-living pressures, which is their approach, and doing something about them, which is our approach.”
“But, more than acknowledging that people are still under pressure despite the progress we've made together, we're actually doing something about it. When Australians are under pressure, this building, this House of Representatives, has two choices: to do something about it in the most responsible way that we can—which has been the approach of this Albanese Labor government—or to oppose that cost-of-living help and to take the most irresponsible course of action, which is the course those opposite have adopted. So I finish by saying this: if those opposite really cared about the cost of living, they wouldn't have opposed our tax cuts. If those opposite really cared about electricity prices, they wouldn't have opposed our efforts to give people a bit of help with their electricity bills.”
“We got the deficit in the third year down to a fifth of what we inherited from those opposite. We got the debt down by $188 billion, saving Australians $60 billion in debt interest compared with what those opposite left them. If you look right across the board, average unemployment under this Prime Minister is the lowest of any government in the last half a century, and there is the progress we've made together on inflation, and the fact that unemployment is 4½ per cent—historically low, and part of an average unemployment rate much lower than what was left to us by those opposite. We're under no illusions about the challenges in our economy. We take those challenges seriously, and inflation is one of them.”
“When there are good developments in the economy, I share the credit with the Australian people. And I, as Treasurer, and this government take responsibility for working through the challenges in our economy. Having taken responsibility for cleaning up the mess that was left to us by those opposite, I think it's time for those opposite to acknowledge as well and to take responsibility for the fact that they had inflation running twice as high as it is now, and they had huge deficits as far as the eye can see, and they racked up a trillion dollars in Liberal debt. They doubled the debt even before the pandemic. So we take responsibility for working through the difficult issues in our economy. We're getting real wages moving again. We've got inflation down to half of what we inherited. We delivered a couple of surpluses.”