Margaret May (McPherson, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Ageing) Share this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak on Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2009-2010 and cognate bills. I want to take some time today to address some of my own concerns about the appropriation bills and the budget that was brought down just over two weeks ago and indeed some of the concerns that my constituents have raised with me over the last fortnight. There is no doubt that the budget plunges this country into enormous debt. In fact, we can look forward to years of debt. With a budget deficit of $58 billion brought down, there is no doubt we have a debt bomb, and this country is going to pay for this debt for many years to come.

The government wants to lay blame for the debt and deficit. This is a government who said they were going to stop the blame game, but they are back at it and have certainly started to point the finger. There is no doubt we live in difficult times and, yes, we are having a global financial crisis the likes of which we have never seen before. But I believe Australians are looking for leadership at this stage and they deserve a government that can make tough decisions and not buy votes with reckless spending. We all know in our own lives that whatever we put on the credit card has to be paid for. All Australians will come to the realisation that one day the credit card debt that is being racked up at the moment is going to have to be paid. I believe we now have a legacy of reckless spending—a budget deficit and a debt that will take us well into the future. It is going to impact very heavily on our children and our grandchildren for decades to come.

We have heard some very big numbers being bandied around over the last two weeks, but I would like to put some of those big numbers on the table today to put some of that debt into perspective—what these numbers will mean for the future, what they will mean for every Australian in this country. The word ‘billion’ seems to slide off people’s tongues with little regard for its enormity far too often these days. However, the Rudd-Swan deficit is equivalent to $10,000 worth of debt for each man, woman and child in this country. It is a $58 billion deficit. People might say: what does this matter? It will certainly matter in 2012-13, when the annual interest bill paid by the Australian people will be $8 billion—yes, $8 billion, which is more than the Commonwealth spends each year on infrastructure and housing combined. High interest costs will mean less money for public services like hospitals and schools and less money to address the needs of an ageing population—and I will have more to say on that a bit later.

It is projected that there will be more than one million unemployed Australians by 2010-11. Those unemployed will include someone in your family, a friend, your neighbour. Someone you know is going to lose their job. An extra 500,000 people have become unemployed since Mr Rudd was elected to office in 2007. Net debt by 2012-13 will be $188 billion, and that figure does not include the National Broadband Network—another $43 billion—or indeed the Ruddbank. Spending decisions since the 2007 election account for $124 billion. That is $124 billion spent in just 18 months. What a spending spree. In other words, two-thirds of the debt owed by taxpayers in 2012-13 will be due to spending decisions taken by the Rudd government in the past 18 months—spending that has not proven to be the economic stimulator that we were promised.

This is classic Labor: spend like no-one is watching the bottom line. But let me say to the Prime Minister, the Treasurer and all Labor members of parliament: we are watching and we will hold you to account. The Australian people will not accept such a sloppy destruction of the nation’s balance sheet—a balance sheet that the coalition left in the black. A surplus was left to this government when we lost government in 2007. Mr Rudd was not elected with a mandate to destroy our economy. He was elected as an economic conservative, a statement that seems laughable two budgets into his term as Prime Minister.

A lot has been said by Mr Rudd about our bottom line compared to the rest of the world. When the coalition were in government we made it our aim to be the best in the world. World leaders show the others how it is done, as the coalition did in the past. We went into the global financial crisis with a solid surplus, and Mr Rudd and Mr Swan, the Treasurer, have squandered the hard work of the coalition under John Howard and Peter Costello.

I want to talk about how the locals of McPherson have been hoodwinked by this budget. Mr Swan announced in his budget speech:

… $365 million towards a light rail corridor for the Gold Coast …

Imagine my surprise to read in the budget papers:

The Government has made provision for a possible equity contribution of $365.0 million in 2009-10 in relation to the Gold Coast Light Rail project.

Nothing but smoke and mirrors—’a possible equity contribution’, if the Queensland Labor state government can find some private partners for the project.

Mr Rudd wants to know what a coalition government would do to stimulate the economy. How about some infrastructure projects that deliver long-term economic benefits to local communities? Today I would like to propose a project for the Gold Coast that I hope Mr Rudd and his government will consider and adopt as policy. This idea would stimulate small business and the tourism industry on the southern Gold Coast by funding the extension of the train line from Varsity Lakes, which is nearly completed, to the Gold Coast Airport at Coolangatta immediately. Consider this: we have an international airport located at Coolangatta that is not serviced by any transport other than private vehicle, taxi or tour bus. The Gold Coast is the sixth largest city in this country. It is ludicrous for international passengers to get off a plane and not be able to get any public transport from the Gold Coast Airport. In my view, there is still no plan to address these needs of the Coolangatta airport. The state government, which looks after public transport on the Gold Coast, has no plan.

In the year to 30 December 2007, 850,000 overseas tourists visited the Gold Coast. I believe these tourists should be met with welcoming arms and easy access to our beautiful beaches, our theme parks, our stunning hinterland and our tourist spots. Instead they are stuck. I cannot tell you how many then contact my office to raise this issue with me. Small business would like to see the airport precinct developed more, with public transport as an option for those people arriving on the Gold Coast.

On the subject of small business, it is my belief that this budget does not help the 2.4 million small businesses that drive Australia’s economy. Small businesses are the engine room of our economy, and the 15,020 small businesses in McPherson need a break. The government want to stimulate the economy. I say to the government: to stimulate the economy give small business a break. The Labor government want to keep unemployment low—well, encourage small business to hire and employ people. If you want to help small business, you need to see their cash flow grow. The small business tax break offered is nonsense because small businesses are under cash flow stress and they cannot afford to buy any new equipment and qualify for the scheme.

Small businesses in my electorate are screaming for practical help from the Rudd government and it is falling on deaf ears. In particular, I have been contacted by dozens of restaurants that will be adversely impacted by the award modernisation process of the Rudd government. The Deputy Prime Minister’s Forward with Fairness IR policy has an ironic title given that it is completely unfair to lump restaurants and caterers with staff costs equivalent to those for hotels and casinos that stay open 24 hours a day. Award modernisation is just one example of how Labor continues to mismanage the economy and contribute to the unfavourable conditions currently faced by small business.

Restaurants in my electorate—and many of these restaurants have been operating for many years servicing our community and the tourists who visit the Gold Coast—are predicting that labour cost increases of up to 20 per cent will inevitably lead to higher consumer costs and job losses. And dare I say that many of them have indicated to me that they will be closing the front door. The coalition does not support any policy that results in increased unemployment and inflationary wage outcomes.

Unemployment on the Gold Coast has doubled in the last 12 months, after reaching a record low under the previous coalition government. It was no fluke that the coalition government presided over low unemployment. Our policy supported small business to employ staff and retain them. The coalition recognised that small business is the engine room of our economy.

Labor has missed the point once again with its present policies. It is enterprise that creates jobs, not government. McPherson residents have been let down by this government, and shamefully so. Not only have the Rudd government let down Australians; they have done it in a deceitful way, by giving with the one hand and taking with the other.

There is no more obvious example of this than their blatant disregard for the health and wellbeing of older Australians. I welcome the increase in the age pension in this budget, which came after the Rudd government rejected calls from the coalition to increase the pension last year. Across Australia young and old urged the government to recognise how tough it is for age pensioners, particularly single age pensioners, to make ends meet. Earlier this year I tabled a petition calling on the government to recognise just how difficult it is for age pensioners in this country. More than 7,000 people signed that petition calling on the government for an increase in the single rate of pension, and I am delighted that that has happened. However, it did take more than a year for the government to recognise how tough they were doing it. They ignored the stripping-off of clothes by our age pensioners in a Melbourne street and they ignored the legislation the coalition put on the table last year calling for that increase, so pensioners had to wait 12 long months to see that money come through, and they are not going to see that increase in their pensions until September this year. However, I would say, on a note of caution, to our senior Australians: they should be aware that the dismal state of the budget will affect them even with their pension increase.

Australians will work longer, will retire later and will live on less under the irresponsible changes to superannuation in this budget. The superannuation co-contribution scheme has been cut by a third, from $1,500 to $1,000, and tax relief on voluntary super contributions has been halved. The coalition encouraged people to save for their retirement. Many will be shocked to learn that this Labor government is not supportive of people planning for their retirement.

I am concerned that senior Australians will now pay more for their health needs, with this Labor government having broken their promise to leave the 30 per cent private health insurance rebate and Medicare safety net untouched. We heard from the Prime Minister, hand on heart, and the now Minister for Health and Ageing that they supported the private health rebate, and here we see in this budget—only their second budget—that they have attacked the private health rebate.

Labor’s changes to the Medicare safety net will have wide-ranging effects on local residents who try to access essential services such as obstetrics, reproductive technology and cataract surgery. It is disappointing that, with our ageing population, the Treasurer has presented no plan as to how he will sustain the pension rise and balance the books for the future.

Self-funded retirees have received a slight reprieve, with the government quietly backing down on their proposed changes to eligibility for the Commonwealth Seniors Health Card, and so they should. We strongly opposed these changes from the outset and it is only because of pressure from the coalition and seniors groups that this government accepted that the proposal—the one they put on the table—was wrong. Now this measure, which was part of last year’s budget, has been quietly withdrawn. But they are not doing anyone a favour because while they give with the one hand they take with the other, having made cuts to the private health insurance rebate.

The 52,659 residents of McPherson with private health insurance will pay the price for the Rudd government’s sustained attack on private health insurance. The Rudd government hates choice and is pushing those who choose to provide for their health needs and that of their families onto the public health system.

Another broken promise that will adversely impact on my electorate of McPherson is the NBN, the National Broadband Network—more aptly named the ‘nonsense broadband notion’. First Mr Rudd was going to spend up to $4.7 billion on the rollout of a national broadband network, providing fibre based services to 98 per cent of Australians. Now Labor wants us to believe in a plan to construct a $43 billion network, likely to require a taxpayer contribution in excess of $21.5 billion, to be rolled out to around 80 per cent of the population. But when is this to happen? The key elements of affordability and commercial viability to encourage a partnership with the private sector are the obvious missing details. In the absence of a business plan or cost benefit analysis, the Australian people need assurances that such a massive government investment is going to work. It is a risky plan. We need more details. The coalition are committed to ensuring Australians have universal, reliable and affordable access to fast broadband services. Where we differ from Labor is on how that is to be delivered.

I would like to put on the record, in the few minutes I have left, a few comments about the aged-care sector. The Rudd government’s massive debt and deficit ignored a Senate report, a Productivity Commission report, industry leaders and its own National Health and Hospitals Reform Commission report when it callously overlooked the embattled aged-care sector in this year’s budget. I believe this government is not serious about addressing the challenges of an ageing population in this country. The Rudd government’s poorly targeted cash-splash handouts and reckless spending have come at a high cost to the aged-care sector, which has missed out as a result.

Wayne Swan was quoted on 8 May as saying:

… the federal budget will contain reforms to address longer-term structural problems caused by the ageing population.

What he says and what he does are two completely different things. The Rudd government has completely failed to recognise the impact an ageing population will have on the aged-care sector. If Kevin Rudd were serious about caring for senior Australians, aged-care infrastructure would not have been excluded from the $22 billion infrastructure package and the two previous stimulus packages. It is disappointing that investment in the aged-care needs of an ageing population is not a Rudd government priority. Investing in local aged-care infrastructure would have provided long-term economic and social benefits and created vital local jobs. There were no reform measures in this budget to improve the availability, quality, flexibility and sustainability of aged-care services throughout this country. Under the current policy settings, older Australians will not be able to access the quality of and the choice of care they want and need. It was a discouraging budget from a consumer and service provider perspective.

One comment worth noting was in Budget Paper No. 2. The Treasurer and the Minister for Finance and Deregulation stated:

The Government will continue to consider the longer term needs of the aged care system, taking into account relevant recommendations in the final report of the National Health and Hospitals Reform Commission.

We can only hope that the absence of major reform measures in the budget may reflect the timetable for the NHHRC report. The final report is due to be released in June.

We know that baby boomers—people reaching the age of 65 in just over a year—will be looking for those aged-care services in the future, whether those services are delivered through an aged-care facility or at home, and we know the aged-care sector is under a lot of stress at the moment. The industry has said it and all those reports have said it. I think it is disappointing that in this budget we did not see anything for aged care for the next 12 months. We saw cuts in the budget but nothing to assist with the infrastructure needs of the aged-care industry and, indeed, for those people requiring aged-care services in their own home.

See this speech in context