Senator FAULKNER (Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) (2:24 PM) —My question is directed to Senator Hill, representing the Prime Minister. Minister, is it true that the Auditor-General, with yesterday's damning report on the million dollar Federation Fund, has now exposed this government's financial mismanagement in at least eight adverse reports dating back to 1997, including the first Telstra sale where the Auditor-General found that taxpayers were short-changed by $12 billion because the government undervalued the share price; Commonwealth property sales, which showed that taxpayers will be paying millions of dollars more in rent than they have received from the sale process; and the IT outsourcing shambles? Is it not also true that not only has the minister for finance gone to war with the Auditor-General but now the Prime Minister is effectively telling the Auditor-General to go and jump in the lake as well?

Senator HILL (Minister for the Environment and Heritage) —Senator Faulkner invents these things. Yesterday's report was not an adverse report. It was a helpful report—helpful to this government and helpful to future governments. Senator Faulkner does this every time an Auditor-General's report comes out. He interprets it in a way which he believes would serve his short-term political interests and he basically communicates in that sense. I thought the Australian of 12 February last year expressed it well in relation to one of his previous exercises, stating:

All honourable senators can read the Auditor-General's report of yesterday. What those opposite wanted to find from that report was evidence of bias, but was it there? Of course it was not there. In actual fact, if you look at that report, you will find it was particularly generous to Labor seats. Did Senator Faulkner say that in his question? Of course he did not say that in his question.

Senator Faulkner —Because we all know that the Auditor-General criticised the process; you know that.

Senator HILL —If Senator Faulkner wants to talk about rorts of rent, he should refer himself back to his own party and to the Centenary House rort. Millions of dollars of taxpayers' money is being paid to the ALP because when the ALP was last in government they set a rent to be paid by the taxpayers that was beyond any economic value. That is a national disgrace. That is the real rort.

Senator Bolkus —You know that that is not the truth.

Senator HILL —It is the truth. Millions of dollars above rental value is paid by the taxpayer to the ALP because of a deal that the ALP did when they were last in government. That is a rort. The Labor Party could write a letter—Mr Beazley could write a letter today—and say, `We will only take the market rent', but will they do that? No. They would prefer to take the millions of dollars in excess of market rent paid by the Australian taxpayer. That is a rort. That is what the ALP should be putting their mind to—not this nonsense that they are inventing within the Auditor-General's report. This was a useful Auditor-General's report that helps in the administration of discretionary grants in this case. I have talked about one particular difficulty that it raised, which is going to have to be settled in the future, and I would invite Senator Faulkner to look at it in those constructive terms.

Senator FAULKNER —Madam President, I ask a supplementary question. If the report is `not adverse but helpful'—they are your words—why then have Mr Slipper and Mr Fischer criticised the Auditor-General for the timing of the tabling of the report and suggested, in Mr Slipper's case, that the Auditor-General is `playing politics'?

Senator HILL (Minister for the Environment and Heritage) —I do not know the answer to that, but what I can tell you, and I think the Senate will be interested to know—

Senator Faulkner —Madam President, I raise a point of order. If Minister Hill does not know the answer to the question, should you not ask him to sit down? He is not going to take it on notice. That is the question. He has indicated that he does not know why Mr Fischer and Mr Slipper have made those outrageous, slanderous comments about the Auditor-General. He said that the report is `not adverse but helpful'. If he cannot answer it, that is the end of the matter.

The PRESIDENT —I heard what the minister said. He was going on to say something else. I have no knowledge yet whether or not it is relevant to the question that has been asked. If he proceeds I expect him to be relevant to the question that has been asked.

Senator HILL —I draw to the attention of Mr Slipper and honourable senators that, interestingly, the coalition held some 64 per cent of the electorates but got 40 per cent of the funding. The Labor Party held 32 per cent of the electorates and got 44 per cent of the projects, representing some 60 per cent of available funding. If it was a rort, it was a rort in favour of the Labor Party.

Honourable senators interjecting—

The PRESIDENT —Order! We are wasting question time.