Alex Somlyay (Fairfax, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

It is my pleasure to speak in this debate on the appropriation bills because this is the best budget that I have seen in my 18 years in this place. This budget is responsible, cleverly crafted and carefully targeted by the Treasurer. This again demonstrates that the Howard government is a compassionate government. It is a caring government which is unashamedly pro-family and pro-small business. Every budget is remembered for two aspects: firstly, its macroeconomic effect—whether the budget is expansionary, contractionary or neutral, and whether the fiscal outcome will have an influence on monetary policy—and, secondly, whether there are new policy initiatives, ideas and directions that will be significant enough to make the budget a memorable one. In that regard I do not mean the cliches that have dominated past Labor budgets like those under former Treasurer Keating, when he referred to the recession we had to have and the budget that brought home the bacon and nonsense like that. When I say that this budget is cleverly crafted and carefully targeted by the Treasurer, I mean that the government is continuing to nation build.

Successive budgets have established and built on national savings. Anyone who has been involved with the budget process will know that the two aspects I have mentioned do not give a true indication of how much work really goes into the more mundane or less controversial—but no less important—parts of the budget process. I am specifically referring to the expenditure side of the budget: the interaction between Treasury and finance portfolio departments. It is hard work to achieve the fiscal discipline demonstrated by the Howard government over the past 11½ years, and I know that from personal experience in my time as a minister in the first Howard government. Every dollar of expenditure in every program of every department is revisited over and over again by our dedicated and competent officials in these departments. There is much negotiation and some good old-fashioned horse trading involved in delivering a good budget which is fiscally responsible.

Under the Howard government, there are no smoke and mirrors involved in our financial management. Other speakers on this side have referred to the $96 billion debt we inherited from the Keating government in 1996. The $96 billion debt came about as a legacy of successive budget deficits under Hawke and Keating Labor governments. A budget deficit has to be financed. It has to be financed by loans or by printing money, as the Whitlam government did. Loans have to be repaid, and they have to be repaid with interest. The interest bill in Labor’s last year of office was $8.5 billion, yet they plunged the government further into debt and they hid the debt from the Australian people. Labor were borrowing money to pay their interest bill. In the week before the election in 1996, the then Minister for Finance, the current member for Brand, told the nation that the budget was in balance. The week after the election, when we had won, Treasury officials revealed to the new Treasurer, the Hon. Peter Costello, what we, in opposition, had really suspected—that the budget was in deficit. But we had never suspected that it was in deficit to the tune of $11 billion, further adding to federal government debt. Labor equals deficit and debt. It is in their DNA.

I was on the JCPA, the Joint Committee of Public Accounts, when it recommended to the Keating government that it adopt the fiscal responsibility model operating in New Zealand. That was under the chairmanship of Les Scott, who was a member of that government. This recommendation was not accepted because, as it turned out, the last thing that the Keating government wanted to be required to do was to tell the truth about the state of Labor’s financial mismanagement.

One thing we did in government was introduce the Treasurer’s Charter of Budget Honesty. Together with the Financial Management and Accountability Act and the Auditor-General’s Act, we reformed the finances of the Commonwealth. I was Chair of the Joint Committee of Public Accounts that examined and recommended these financial reforms. Why did we introduce that Charter of Budget Honesty when the Labor Party refused to? It was not because we did not trust ourselves to tell the truth about the nation’s finances. We do trust ourselves. It was because we did not trust Labor. We did not trust Labor then, nor would we in the future. In 1996-97 that was fresh in our minds. Under the charter, at election times, governments are forced to tell the truth about the books. We never want to see a new government forced to face the financial mess that the Keating government left the Howard government. People voted in 1996 believing that the Keating government had a balanced budget. They threw the government out in a landslide. It was ‘annihilation’—to coin a phrase. Imagine what the result would have been if people had known how broke the nation was, with it being $11 billion in deficit.

It is an empirical fact that the Labor Party cannot handle money. Labor cannot run away from it. It is a historical fact. If we look at the current situation in the states, the Labor state governments have a cumulative debt. That is the Labor way; as I said before, it is in its DNA. We have enjoyed the results of strong economic management by the Howard government for so long that we have forgotten what Australia was like under the management of Labor—debt, high deficits, high inflation, high unemployment and recession.

This budget builds on the prudent management of the economy over the past 11½ years. It builds on the surpluses of previous budgets and adds to the stock of savings in the Future Fund and now in the Higher Education Endowment Fund, which provides capital funding for the future expansion of our universities. It enables us to help those in need with welfare. It enables us to help refugees, pensioners and the disabled. It enables us to encourage new industries, which provide new employment. This government is about economic stability, which enables us to be in a position to help people help themselves and to support those who cannot.

Even as we suffer the worst drought in 100 years, this budget assists farmers who are struggling in these trying times. That is what prudent budget planning is all about. The fact that we have paid off Labor’s $96 billion debt frees up revenue to use in a more positive way. The Treasurer has grasped that opportunity to deliver a very positive budget. I believe that the Treasurer in this budget has encapsulated what being an Australian is all about. As a society, we strive to create wealth and share that wealth with those in our community who are unable to support themselves. We must balance care for our community with care for the environment, while not forgetting to plan for the future welfare of our people, our economy and our environment. We are able to help Australians achieve their aspirations; that is what this budget is all about. I welcome all its positive, sensible initiatives—the education support for students and staff, the measures to address trade skill shortages, the income tax changes, the childcare changes and the bonus payments for pensioners, seniors and carers.

I am particularly delighted by the initiative in the area of dental health. I am Chair of the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Health and Ageing. We tabled a report on the financing of health services last year in which we recommended that the government should address the question of dental health care. That is something I have been advocating and working towards for some time. This budget provides funding for the establishment of a new regional dental school and for encouraging city students to undertake their dental training in regional settings. These are positive and important initiatives for future dental care. It is a proven fact with the medical profession and health professionals that, if you train a doctor or a dentist in the bush, it is more likely that they will stay in the bush. So, if we want doctors, dentists and other health professionals to work in the regions, training them in the regions is very important.

What really gave me personal satisfaction was the immediate help offered to people who are suffering while on dental waiting lists. For the first time the budget, through Medicare, recognises that oral health is linked to primary health care. The amount of $378 million has been allocated over four years for additional Medicare funding for patients whose dental health is impacting on a chronic medical condition. If they are referred by a doctor, a Medicare benefit of up to $2,125 per person per year will now be available for dental treatment in the private sector. Not only will this private sector care provide fast and efficient relief for those patients; it will also take pressure off the public waiting lists.

Dental health is not a federal issue; it is the responsibility of state governments. However, as I have said, as Chair of the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Health and Ageing, I have seen how the states have neglected dental health. I have seen the misery and the escalation of problems caused by this neglect. I know that the waiting lists in my seat of Fairfax on the Sunshine Coast are totally unacceptable. It is not acceptable for someone who is in need of dental attention to have to wait not weeks, not months but years for an appointment under our state health system. It really begs the question as to why we need state governments, when we see them failing to accept their core responsibilities in health and education. That is a big thing for me to say. When I entered this House, I was an absolute ‘states’ righter’, but I have changed my view over time.

I have a lot of contact with schools in my electorate and I am constantly impressed by both the students and their teachers, but I believe that state government is again failing them in the areas of curriculum training, support and opportunities. I am anxious to make sure that the Sunshine Coast, my electorate, gains maximum benefit from the new budget initiatives. The Minister for Education, Science and Training, Julie Bishop, has agreed to come to my electorate in the winter recess to explain to education authorities the budget changes, particularly education authorities at the University of the Sunshine Coast.

The plan to assist parents with a primary school child who needs extra tutoring to reach national literacy and numeracy benchmarks is a wise move because it will catch learning problems early, before the child slips too far behind and becomes demoralised. A little help with literacy and numeracy at the primary school age can prevent major problems from occurring in secondary schools and can affect future life opportunities for those children. It benefits the children and their teachers and parents and, in the long run, our society. I am also happy to see that teachers in schools will be recognised and rewarded for achievement in professional development. I have to ask again what the states have been doing. How did they let the standards in our schools deteriorate so much that the Commonwealth has had to step in to rectify the situation?

There are so many more great initiatives in this budget. There are the Higher Education Endowment Fund, the tax cuts, the bonus payments to seniors and recipients of carer payment and carer allowance, investment in transport infrastructure in rural areas and water and the environment. Australians have had all this good news in the budget, but what have we had from the Labor Party and sections of the media, who seem to have their own agenda? We have had only negatives.

I must say that the Sunshine Coast Daily, the daily newspaper in my electorate, was fixated on finding negatives in the budget. The media across Australia accepted the budget pretty well, but the local media in my electorate did not want to publish any good news. It was only interested in trying to find stories about people who, it believed, did not benefit directly from the budget. It only wanted to do stories on people who had missed out. It was determined to find losers in the budget. However, I think it will be looking for a long time, because there are no losers in this budget.

When budgets were delivered many years ago, people would read the documents anxiously in order to find out what charges, fees and taxes had gone up and how they themselves would be negatively affected. The expectation of the community now is that people should get a dividend out of the budget—and that is exactly what Treasurer Costello has delivered. The budget should not be seen in the microsense of ‘what benefit do I get?’ It should be seen as good, stable economic management that allows jobs, productivity and the economy to grow, because in the long run that provides opportunities and benefits for all of us. It takes more than compassion to help the disadvantaged and needy in our society. Certainly, you need heart and compassion to recognise and understand the needs of others, but you also need the resources of a strong, stable economy to pay for whatever help is required. I commend the Treasurer for his work in building such an economy. This budget continues to nation build and I commend it.

See this speech in context