Craig Kelly (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Firstly, I would like to declare an interest in this motion on our TAFE system. My sister-in-law was a TAFE teacher and I would certainly like to see governments at all levels continue to invest in TAFE and skills training. Paragraph 3 of this motion calls on the government at all levels to provide funding and to continue to invest in TAFE. But you cannot walk into this chamber and call on governments to provide funding, as this motion does, unless you are prepared to say where the money is coming from. Already, we have seen this Labor government make unfunded promises of $120 billion—and these are getting bigger by the day. We have had promises of additional billions for disability, defence, education and dental services—all very worthy causes. But this government does not have a clue how it is going to pay for these or where the money is coming from. To make these massive unfunded spending commitments is simply to hoodwink the public. So the member who moved this motion calling for extra funding should start coming clean with the Australian public. Does he support higher taxes? Does he support more government borrowing? Or are the claims that Labor will provide billions for everything nothing more than a cruel hoax, a repeat of the infamous carbon tax promise?

Our TAFE system plays a crucial role in providing high-quality education, vocational education and training, to provide the skills that Australians need to have the opportunity in our ever-changing economy. This reminds me of a recent conversation I had with the father of two young sons who shared with me his aspirations for his two boys. He did not particularly wish them to have a university degree, but he hoped they would pick up an interest in learning a trade and going to work for themselves—as plumbers, carpenters or other tradesmen. He made the correct point that a trade career is often better paid, offers significantly more work flexibility and a more fulfilling, enjoyable life than sometimes a university degree would.

But if governments are going to continue to subsidise training through TAFEs around the nation, it can only be done if it is funded on a sustainable basis. And a sustainable basis simply means that governments cannot spend money that they do not have. I know this may be a very novel concept for those on the other side of the House but, if we want to have sustainable funding for our education system, governments cannot spend money they do not have.

The member for Blair, in his contribution, talked about many of Labor's spending programs, which have run up a combined deficit of $174 billion. He also talked about Queensland. I understand the position in Queensland. It is worth having a look at the interim report of the independent Queensland Commission of Audit into Queensland's financial position. I think the member for Blair would do well to read this. It said:

In recent years, the Government of Queensland embarked on an unsustainable level of spending which has jeopardised the financial position of the State.

The deterioration in Queensland's financial position results from a lack of fiscal discipline—

exactly what we see here in this chamber with Labor as well. The report concluded, under paragraph 1.4, entitled 'The Consequences of Ill-Discipline':

Queensland's financial position is unsustainable. The State is currently locked into a debilitating cycle of over expenditure, ever-increasing levels of debt, and crippling increases in debt servicing costs. A major task of fiscal repair is imperative to prevent further damage to the future prosperity of the State.

Where was the member for Blair when all this mess was being created? I find it amazing that those who came in here and complained the loudest, against those who have the unenviable job of cleaning up the mess that Labor state governments have made, were mysteriously mute and failed to even raise a whimper when this mess was being created in the first place.

Our TAFEs provide a very important part of our education system. We must fund them, but we can only fund them on a sustainable basis with money the government has. (Time expired)

See this speech in context