Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
 Download Current HansardDownload Current Hansard    View Or Save XMLView/Save XML

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Monday, 17 September 2007
Page: 28

Mr RUDD (2:11 PM) —My question is again to the Prime Minister. Can the Prime Minister confirm that since the last election his government has spent $93 million on advertising its extreme industrial relations changes, $25 million on a campaign to promote the government’s climate change credentials and $69 million on superannuation advertising? Why won’t the Prime Minister commit to informing the parliament today how much taxpayers’ money has been spent on government advertising since 1 January this year and how much more taxpayers’ money the government plans to spend on advertising before the next election?

Mr HOWARD (Prime Minister) —I do not really have a lot to add to the answer I have previously given but since the Leader of the Opposition asked me the second question and before he asks me the third question I happened to come across in my files a very colourful—no, I won’t say it is colourful; it is not very colourful as it is rather dully written—booklet that says, ‘Queensland the smart state: water for the future’. Now this is a very expensive booklet that was widely publicised by the Queensland government. It puts me in mind of the Labor Party’s three-mines uranium policy, which really said that there was good uranium—that is the uranium you get out of the three mines that were opened under Labor governments—and there is bad uranium—and that is all the other—so I suppose that, if you sort of plagiarised that description to government advertising, this is good government advertising, because it is Labor government advertising, and any other government advertising is bad advertising because it is not Labor government advertising. I rest my case.

The SPEAKER —Has the Prime Minister completed his answer?

Mr HOWARD —Yes, Mr Speaker.