Michael Johnson (Ryan, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I regret to divert for a moment, but I will state on the record for those who will read this speech in the future that courtesy and respect for the opposition, as shown by colleagues in the parliament, should be noted. A member of the opposition is unable to express his thoughts without some discourteous intervention by Labor MPs. For the record, I note that.

As I said, the coalition does not contest the fact that we are going through remarkable global economic challenges, so there is a case for government to play a part and stimulate commercial and economic activity. We do not contest that. For those who try to persuade differently, I think it does them a great disservice and discredits them. It is about the amount that one spends; it is about where one draws the line. We do not know what is ahead, we do not know what is in the pipeline and we have no idea whether or not we are at the very beginning of a decade-long financial crisis. We do not know the timelines, so we must row forward with great prudence as to how we spend hard-earned taxpayers’ money.

We support the $4.8 billion in payments to pensioners. In fact it was the then Leader of the Opposition, Dr Brendan Nelson, a man of remarkable integrity and compassion, who called for the government to pay some respect to pensioners to make their lifestyle a little bit more generous. If one does not endorse what I say, all one needs to recall is the fact that aged Australians got on the streets of Melbourne and stripped down to make a political point. It is an affront to the government that they would have to do that to make their political point. They could not do it through normal channels of communication and representation; it took some very courageous pensioners to make a political point of such significance before the payment was made. We acknowledge that; it was important.

We support the business expenditure of the government because that is important. At the end of the day, it is about the creation of additional wealth. Small businesses and medium sized businesses create jobs in this country. Governments do not create sustainable jobs. It is very important that businesses in Australia get the support that they deserve. I have received so many communications, via email and telephone, about the opposition’s position was in contrast to the government’s position. I want to highlight that because I think it really does distinguish the position of the Labor Party and the Liberal-National coalition. The proposal that we put forward as an alternative was to pay a portion of the superannuation guarantee levy on behalf of small employers for the next two years. This measure, as the Leader of the Opposition indicated, would meaningfully help small businesses. It would improve the cash position of small businesses and, as a consequence, reduce the cost of employment and directly contribute to preserving jobs.

Anyone who receives money from the government is, of course, not going to turn their back on it. Who would turn their back on the money? The questions that need to be raised are these. Is this sustainable? Is this prudence in the context of what lies ahead? We do not know what lies ahead, so one cannot just continue to give money to individuals to spend as an artificial stimulus to the economy. So, if we are going to spend this kind of money, the federal opposition supported something along the lines of $20 billion—half the amount that the government passed in the parliament. We felt that there was a better way to stimulate the Australian economy. I certainly endorse that, particularly with the creation of wealth.

There is the idea of supplying pink batts, for example—that is, free ceiling insulation for some 2.7 million homes. All Australian homes that are owner occupied are entitled to free ceiling insulation, worth up to $1,600, if their home is currently not insulated. Anyone who thinks this is a strategic, targeted and common-sense allocation of taxpayers’ money is misdirected. That is not sustainable. To use American vocabulary, that is just Labor pork-barrelling. (Time expired)

See this speech in context