Peter Costello (Higgins, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Hansard source

I thank the honourable member for Stirling for his question. The Australian Bureau of Statistics today released its publication on births in 2005 and reported that the number of births registered was 259,791—a 2.2 per cent increase over 2004 and the highest level since 1993. The publication also disclosed the total fertility rate, the number of live births per female over their reproductive life. The total fertility rate in 2005 was 1.81, up from 1.77 in 2004 and up from the long-term low of 1.73 in 2001. This means that Australia is one of the few countries in the world that has managed to increase its total fertility rate in recent decades. The fertility rate went into long-term decline in 1961, falling from 3.55 to a low of 1.73. Now it has recovered to 1.81. Australia compares favourably with countries such as Spain, Italy, Greece, Germany and Japan, which have total fertility rates of 1.3. Our total fertility rate is slightly higher than that of the United Kingdom but lower than that of the United States, which is at 2.0.

Although that is welcome, the fact of the matter is that unless the total fertility rate is 2.1 we are still below replacement level. Because we are below replacement level, the ageing of the population continues. The proportion of those of retirement age compared with those of working age continues to grow. But, as I said earlier, the good news is that Australia’s total fertility rate has increased and we are one of the few countries in the Western world that has managed to do that. That occurred in calendar year 2005, precisely seven months after the May 2004 budget. That budget introduced the maternity payment, which is a payment now of $4,000 on the birth of each child, and it is warmly welcomed by parents around Australia. In addition, in July 2004 the government increased the rates of family benefits, we provided additional childcare places and subsequently we announced the introduction of the childcare rebate. It was during that budget that Australians were urged to have ‘one for mum, one for dad and one for the country’, and it appears that some Australians have taken up the challenge.

I should also say that one of the things that was introduced as part of the More Help for Families package back in 2004 was an annual payment of $600 in family allowance to each child in respect of every year. Even today, every family that qualifies for family allowance on an annual basis is eligible for $600 per child. For two children a family get $1,200 and for three children they get $1,800. What is more, that is real money. It is money that goes into the bank, it is money that comes out of the bank, it is money that can buy goods and services and it is money the Australian Labor Party tried to abolish. Few will forget when, during the 2004 election, the member for Lilley—Mr Gilligan over there—ran around Australia claiming that abolishing the $600 payment would not matter, because it was not real money. This is real money, alright, and the families of Australia know it to be the case.

See this speech in context