Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Hansard source

It is good to hear the Minister for Trade in fine form today. The member for Flynn asks a question concerning the importance of dealing with economic reform and the importance of its impact on the region that he represents. The government is committed to keeping the economy strong and to delivering a fairer share for all working families. That is why, when the nation was threatened with the global financial crisis, we did what we had to do to keep Australia out of recession. That is why we are committed to bringing the budget back to surplus in three years time, three years ahead of time. That is why, as of 1 July, the government will deliver its third set of tax cuts for working families. For someone who is on about $50,000 a year, that represents a tax cut of nearly 20 per cent. Keeping the economy strong has also enabled us to increase our investment in the hospital system of Australia by 50 per cent and to increase our investment in infrastructure, including the installation of a national broadband network. Also, on this day and in this sitting fortnight the government, as a result of keeping the economy strong, will deliver Australia’s first paid parental leave scheme—an important reform for the nation. So we have 12 years of inaction on the part of those opposite, and the scheme is brought in by this government in its first term in office.

The government has continued to do the job that we began to keep the economy strong and to deliver a fairer share for working families. That is reflected in what we saw in the labour force data which came out only last week. This is worth emphasising. Unemployment in this country is 5.2 per cent. Furthermore, employment has grown by 2.6 per cent through the year to May 2010. This is the ninth consecutive rise in the number of people engaged in full-time employment. If we compare that with the unemployment data we have seen from around the world, it is galvanising. There is 5.2 per cent unemployment in Australia. In the United States it is now up to 9.9 per cent; France, 9.9 per cent; Canada, 8.1 per cent; and the UK, eight per cent. But actually look at the numbers of people who are losing jobs and gaining employment. In the US, nearly six million people have lost their jobs. In Canada, nearly 100,000 people have lost their jobs. In the UK, more than half a million people have lost their jobs. In the euro area, 3½ million people have lost their jobs. In Australia, we have added 255,000 more jobs during the period of this crisis.

Part of keeping the economy strong means also delivering on long-term economic reform. That is where tax reform comes in as well—boosting Australia’s global competitiveness by ensuring that we are bringing our company tax rate down; boosting also Australia’s level of national savings by some $85 billion over the decade ahead, an important buffer for the future against future external shocks; boosting also superannuation for working families, and for a 30-year-old now there is a $108,000 difference for the future; and boosting also investment in infrastructure, funding the rail, road and ports needed by our resource sector and those communities that support it. It is interesting to see where this tax reform debate has got to. We on this side of the House support tax reform in the mining industry and for the country at large. We support it, but also the principle of tax reform based on profits as opposed to production is now embraced by the government, by the Minerals Council of Australia and by most of the major miners—they believe that reform is necessary for the sector. There is just one person who opposes that, and that is the Leader of the Opposition, who says that no reform is necessary, that a production based tax through royalties should be retained and that the mining companies are paying too much tax. The whole country says we need reform for the mining industry tax arrangements based on profit, not on production. The Leader of the Opposition says no.

This brings me to the electorate of Flynn and the impact of what we are proposing for future infrastructure investments. Each time I have been to the honourable member’s electorate I have been presented with one request after another by the Gladstone Regional Council of their needs. Those opposite, if they have been to Gladstone, would have noticed one thing: you see an array of ships out there waiting to be loaded at harbour. I notice that those opposite raise questions about this and they find it amusing. When you look at export dollars for Australia being lost from a failure to invest in infrastructure, that is no laughing matter. It means we have to make a difference. When I was in Gladstone most recently with the member for Flynn, the Gladstone Regional Council then were embracing the needs of the region and discussing how to support the future housing requirements, transport needs and roads construction for the big expansion of its local population coming off the back of the mining sector and that broader community.

The bottom line is this: the region in Central Queensland faces a desperate need for infrastructure and it therefore needs greater investment in infrastructure. That is why the government has brought forward a regional infrastructure fund which is designed to deliver better infrastructure for the people of Gladstone, for the people of Mackay, for the people of Karratha, for the people of Kalgoorlie and for those communities which support our mining industries. That is what the regions of Australia are crying out for.

There has been a lot of speculation over the processes concerning tax reform. I wish to inform the House that, as of the week that has just gone past, consultation and negotiation continue with our major mining companies. Some of those companies are a long way down the path towards agreement; others are still some distance away. This is a tough debate from which the government does not retreat because it is a necessary part of long-term economic reform.

See this speech in context