Senator COOK(3.03 p.m.) —I move:

That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Assistant Treasurer (Senator Kemp), to a question without notice asked by Senator Cook today, relating to the effects of competition policy on rural and regional Australia.

Today I asked Senator Kemp a question on competition policy. I asked him that question directly because the Leader of the National Party in this place, Senator Boswell, had obviously sought to undermine the government's position on competition policy by alleging, as has been widely reported, that jobs would be lost and there would be a giant vacuum cleaner sucking jobs out of rural and regional Australia, to quote the remarks attributed to Senator Boswell.

The question I asked of Senator Kemp was: could he tell us how many jobs were lost? Senator Kemp, in his primary answer, dodged that question. He did not answer that question. In taking advantage of the supplementary question, I pointedly asked him again whether he could answer that question and, if he could not answer that question, whether he would go away, find out and come back and tell the Senate what the answer to that question was. Again, he pointedly declined to do so.

That raises a very serious consideration in this chamber. It raises a very important consideration, as well, beyond this chamber. National competition policy has been an issue in which there has been a degree of national bipartisanship. That part at least was acknowledged—

Senator Kemp —Yes, I was surprised at it too.

Senator COOK —I see Senator Kemp strutting the floor and, in progress, acknowledging that point again. It has been a matter of national bipartisanship. But we do know that the National Party and others have been out to try and wreck national competition policy and its implementation in the states. We do know that the National Party has a record of succeeding in changing this government's position when it wants to. It did so on the diesel fuel rebate issue for farmers; it did so on the ships capital grants scheme.

Senator Ferguson —No, that was not so.

Senator COOK —I hear Senator Ferguson interjecting. I understand it might do so on the Taxation Laws Amendment Bill (No. 3) when it comes to taxes on cooperatives.

Senator Sherry —And the reef tax; that will change.

Senator COOK —I have an interjection which I acknowledge from my colleague Senator Sherry. Although it has been vocal on reef tax and while it has certainly suggested that the government will change its position on reef tax, so far it has not succeeded. I hope it succeeds on the reef tax, I might add very quickly.

It is very important that this nation knows where it goes at all levels of government in this country when it comes to the implementation of the important reforms on national competition policy. A government pursuing those reforms should be able to say where it believes there will be greater efficiencies and enhanced competitiveness in the Australian economy because of those reforms. We do not pursue change on national competition policy for the sake of national competition policy. We pursue it for the sake of economic growth for not only better income levels in the economy but also more jobs for ordinary Australians.

If this government remains silent on the point of what jobs will come from this important reform, then either the government has not given the thought necessary to carry the reform through and succeed—or it is at least opening itself and exposing its flank to be attacked by the National Party to bring those reforms down—or it is enabling the states to crawl out of the commitments that they have made.

There is a gaping hole in one of the areas of this budget the government so loudly lauds in this chamber: there are no forecasts in the budget that has been brought down this year on where the jobs growth will be. There is no forecast on what the outcome for employment for Australians will be. The government keeps telling us this is a well received budget. It is not well received by the unemployed; there is no guidance there. It is not well received by the marginally employed who look at the prospects of a slow economy with slack demand creating more unemployment in their areas.

Here the government is pushing an important reform from the foundation—strong and true—of bipartisan support. But it needs to make the case in the terms of not, `We want competition policy,' but where the jobs are. If it cannot answer the allegation made by Senator Boswell, it really ought to close up shop and hand it back to someone who can make that case and can pursue those reforms.

I particularly want to know how many jobs there will be in Western Australia. The Court government in Western Australia—which has prematurely gone to the polls just this week—for the first time since the war before Christmas wants to argue that this government cannot show what those employment figures really are. (Time expired)