Shayne Neumann (Blair, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

They are a curious coalition opposite. They are not the Liberal Party and the National Party; they are Friedmanite fundamentalists and climate change deniers. We had a rant from the member for Wide Bay. He spent the whole time talking about the ETS. He did not talk about the policy of his own leader and his own political party—whatever they call themselves in Queensland; I think it is the LNP these days. Guess what his policy is? His policy is to actually cut jobs, to cut 12,000 a year. His policy is to cut 12,000 jobs a year from the Queensland Public Service and to gut $1 billion from the state budget. Guess what will happen then? Services, health and education will be cut back. Guess what will happen then? There will be job losses in the Public Service. The coalition claim that their policy is to support jobs. It is not; it is actually to cut jobs. Labor’s policy in Queensland—and Anna Bligh has taken this to the people—is jobs, not cuts. That is what our policy is: to support jobs. Those opposite are supporting cuts. That is what their policy is. Labor’s policy in Queensland is 100,000 new jobs in three years. We have a target. Under Premier Beattie we achieved our target of reducing the unemployment rate to five per cent. I have every confidence that Premier Anna Bligh will achieve her target of 100,000 jobs over three years.

But guess what—I have every confidence that the LNP leader, Lawrence Springborg, will achieve his target as well: 36,000 jobs lost over three years. I have every confidence he will achieve his target because that is what he stands for: job cuts not the provision of jobs. That is their policy in Queensland and that is what they are saying. Guess what would have happened if by some miracle the coalition had squeaked home in their nightmare election on 24 November 2007—it would have been a world of Work Choices, the great policy of job insecurity. The coalition’s failure to deal with the issue of Work Choices is what this is about. It is all seen through the prism of their leadership tensions. They feign concern about job losses, and you can see the gleam on their faces when we talk about job losses. We are talking about the real face of job insecurity—the men, women and children in Australia who are actually facing job insecurity, job loss and financial insecurity.

So what are those people opposite pursuing? They are pursuing a policy of procrastination. They are pursuing a policy of not dealing with the leadership tensions opposite. They are pursuing a policy of trying to frustrate issues like alcopops reform and trying to stop our ETS getting through the Senate. They refuse to rid their body politic of Work Choices. That is what they are about. They are not just the architects and authors of Work Choices; they are the apostles of Work Choices. They are devoted to it. It is their alpha and their omega; their beginning and their end; their genesis and their revelation. That is what they are all about. This whole debate today is about stopping a concentration on getting rid of Work Choices. Those opposite are actually pursuing this myth that somehow they are the champions of jobs, that somehow they are the champions of economic reform and that somehow they are the champions of full employment.

In fact we on this side of the House are the ones who instituted economic reform in this country. We internationalised the economy. We got rid of the dead hand of McEwen-like protectionism. We brought in the Trade Practices Act. We developed a superannuation industry that ensured that the Australian public got support. That is what we did. Those opposite are wedded to their 19th-century ideological obsession with Work Choices. If they were on this side of the House, what would they have? They would have Work Choices—stripping away the terms and conditions, stripping away redundancy entitlements and making the public of Australia more insecure. Tell the truth. That is exactly what those opposite would be doing. They are the apostles of Work Choices—the devotees and the disciples of Work Choices. That is what they are about. They have drunk the Kool-Aid. They are the true believers—they just cannot get rid of it. That is what this is all about—it is about cuts, not jobs.

We on this side of the House are the people who are bringing forward economic security strategies and the Nation Building and Jobs Plan. We are the ones who the people are listening to. I would like to mention a couple of things. School buildings and other infrastructure does not build itself. Workers do it—tradesmen, plumbers, architects and carpenters. I have a few letters from some of the schools in my area. I am sure those opposite would have also received these sorts of responses. I have a letter from Principal Robert Mills of Raceview State School. That is the biggest primary school in my electorate. Some 935 children go to that school. It is a great primary school. My two daughters went there, so I was involved in the school life there. They are going to build a new multipurpose hall, extension resource centre and library with the money they are going to get. He is effusive about what it is going to do for the local economy.

Peter Doyle, the Principal of Brassall State School, the third-biggest primary school in my electorate, wrote to me. The coalition promised and promised to give him some money for a multipurpose hall. Guess what? We are delivering the multipurpose hall. We are doing it for the 731 students. That school is going to get millions of dollars. Peter Doyle is very happy. I have been to Peter Doyle’s school, Brassall State School. It is a great little primary school down the road from my office.

I have a letter from Bethany Lutheran School. Neil Schiller is the principal there. I visited him and had a look at their development and their redevelopment. Guess what Neil had to say? He said: ‘This funding could not come at a better time for us. The library that we can build with the money is far in excess of what we could have done under the grants under the BGA. There are no area guideline restrictions under BER, meaning that we can build a facility that will service a school of 400.’ They have a school of 200 currently, so it will not just cover the population of the school. ‘That is just awesome,’ he says, ‘and allows us to provide the sort of library that our school will need rather than having to add it in a few years time and end up with a facility not nearly as good.’

Leichhardt State School, a little primary school of 198 kids, is really struggling. I visited that school and met principal Lee Gerchow. That particular school really does need a massive injection of funds. They are going to build a new multipurpose hall, extension resource centre and science, innovation and technology centre. They are getting millions of dollars.

I think that those opposite should listen to this next point. I have received an email from Mr Phillip Manitta, who is the new principal at All Saints Primary School at Boonah. All Saints Primary School is a nice little school. There are 200 kids who go to that school. This is what he says: ‘Dear Shayne, just a quick email to pass on our sincere thanks to Kevin Rudd, to you and to your colleagues for the funding being made available to all primary schools. This is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to add infrastructure to many schools, which will go a long way in making the education revolution become a reality. As you know, All Saints Primary School Boonah has experienced phenomenal growth over the last five years. Your generosity in making this funding available has allowed us to bring forward by at least five years the infrastructure we need to ensure we can continue to deliver the best learning outcome for our students. In fact this funding has allowed us to make our dream for Frank Street become a reality. We are already an active organisation within the Boonah community. We would welcome further interaction with the wider community when they come and make use of our new community infrastructure. At All Saints we hope to use the funding to build a multipurpose building on Frank Street.’

I went and had a look at that school with the Labor candidate for Beaudesert, Brett McCreadie—and I hope he wins and beats Pauline Hanson and the LNP candidate in the Queensland election. The LNP candidate does not do anything down there. He runs around and breaks into all kinds of things, like Big Brother. He wants to promote his rock group. But in fact he does nothing for the area. Brett McCreadie, a former soldier and union official, will do a great job if the people of Beaudesert vote for him. This is what Phillip Manitta says at the end of his letter: ‘As an educator I praise you for your foresight and courage in delivering a package to primary schools that will not only benefit our current students but those of future generations.’

That is what we are doing. We are investing for future generations in employment, infrastructure and community life. All those people in regional and rural areas who fail to support this, thus failing to support infrastructure development, community infrastructure funding and roads funding in rural and regional areas in Queensland as well as other states, should hang their heads in shame, because the Rudd Labor government are investing for future generations, as Phillip Manitta said so wonderfully well and eloquently in his email to me. Those people who voted against the ESS and the Nation Building and Jobs Plan should really have a good look at themselves. (Time expired)

See this speech in context