Download Fragment

Monday, 19 September 2011
Page: 10511

Mr OAKESHOTT (Lyne) (16:22): As someone who was part of the agreement—an agreement that included representatives of all members of this chamber—to establish a parliamentary office in this term, I am at a loss why we are seeing so much trouble in passing this legislation. Likewise, I was a committee member of the Joint Select Committee on the Parliamentary Budget Office, along with Barnaby Joyce, Kelly O'Dwyer and Christopher Pyne. The three coalition members, the government members, the Greens and I unanimously supported various recommendations for the establishment of a PBO. Again, I am at a loss as to why we are now struggling to turn this into legislation.

We are building a service for this House. We are not building a service for the executive. There was an important question asked at the end of the last engagement over this piece of legislation—I think it was last Tuesday night, when, thankfully, we adjourned so that we could all consider our positions. Further work has obviously been done by all of us. As far as I can see, questions that I was raising at the end of that debate regarding the difference between Treasury and the Treasurer seem somewhat spurious, at the very least.

Mr Hockey: Spurious!

Mr OAKESHOTT: Spurious, the member for North Sydney. I am increasingly—

Mr Hockey: You have been stiffened up by them, have you?

Mr OAKESHOTT: Not at all. The member for North Sydney thinks I have been stiffened up, sticking up for an independent parliamentary budget office, a service of this parliament agreed, by members of his own party, to be put into legislation twice in the last 12 months.

Mr Briggs: Stop verballing people, Rob.

Mr OAKESHOTT: I am not verballing anyone. The big question that I wanted cleared up at the end of the last debate was: can any member of this chamber, including the member for Mayo, confidentially ring the Parliamentary Budget Office and ask for work to be done on any topic of their choice? The answer is yes.

Opposition members interjecting—

Mr OAKESHOTT: You can have another go, all of you. I am happy if you have information that proves this wrong. The question then is: does the Parliamentary Budget Office, whoever the independent CEO is, have rights of confidential access into Treasury? The answer is yes.

The member for North Sydney shakes his head. I ask him, please, to get up and tell me his views on why that advice is wrong. Let's get to the heart of whether a confidential process, as a service for members of parliament in this chamber, with nothing to do with the Treasurer and nothing to do with the executive, actually applies. The only point in all of that is whether the Treasurer signs off on a budget or not. It is illogical if we, as a chamber, are asking for a Treasurer not to sign off on the budget. If we accept that then we accept that the figures that are used from the Treasury as the starting point for the process of PEFO, and other similar documents as part of the Charter of Budget Honesty, already apply. What seems to be in place is a direct attack on the independence of the Treasury. I have heard that from speakers twice now.

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop: It is not independent.

Mr OAKESHOTT: The member for Mackellar confirms that. The shadow Treasurer and the shadow minister for finance sit either side of the member for Mackellar as she directly attacks the independence of the Treasury.

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop: Correct.

Mr OAKESHOTT: She again confirms it: 'Correct.' We have silence from the two key finance officers of the coalition. This is a direct attack on the independence of the Treasury. If that is the case—if that is the point of your position in this debate—why on earth did you waste this parliament's time in the last 12 months by participating in a process that arrived at unanimous recommendations? That process involved Barnaby Joyce, Chris Pyne and Kelly O'Dwyer. Why on earth did you waste 16 days after the election reaching an agreement over these proposals for a better parliament? Please explain your position as to why you consider this is not confidential and why it is not independent.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Hon. BC Scott ): I remind all those who are speaking in this debate to refer their comments through the chair, not at the chair. It is not 'you' or 'your'; it is not 'me' and 'you'.