Shayne Neumann (Blair, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Indigenous Affairs) Share this | Hansard source

I do speak in support of the member for Fraser's amendment. We do agree with much in this particular legislation, the Tax and Superannuation Laws Amendment (2014 Measures No. 1) Bill 2014. The previous speaker talked about the Commission of Audit. If Labor's so-called scare campaign in relation to the impact of a GP tax was completely baseless and fallacious, it could be dispensed with right now. The Minister for Health, the member for Dickson, could walk straight into this chamber and actually rule it out unequivocally and without any reservation whatsoever. But we saw in the recent in Griffith by-election that he was in 'witness protection' the whole time—not able to say anything on the issue. The Liberal candidate in Griffith first came out in support of the $6 tax that you would have to pay every time you go to visit your GP and then he backtracked as far as he could. Fortunately, the good people on the south side of Brisbane had the guts, the courage and the wisdom to elect Terri Butler as the new member for Griffith. She will be a fine addition to this place and will make a great contribution, I am sure. I have known her for a very long time. She, like me and like the member for Port Adelaide here, strongly believes in the universality of a healthcare system.

Being from Ipswich, my local member for many, many years was Bill Hayden as the former member for Oxley, and now he is a good constituent of mine. He and Dallas are up there on their farm around the Somerset Dam, in retirement. He has always been a well-respected and venerable person in our electorate. Bill was instrumental in Medibank—the forerunner, of course, to Medicare. It has been Labor and only Labor which has established the most important reforms we have seen in this country—the PBS, Medicare, the age pension, superannuation and the NDIS. It is only Labor that makes the great reforms.

I will deal briefly with a few of the schedules in this bill and indicate our support in relation to them. We do support what the coalition government wants to do in terms of cracking down on promoters of schemes that result in illegal early release of superannuation. That is in schedule 1. In relation to schedule 2, we support the introduction of administrative directions and penalties for contravention relating to self-managed funds. They include the administrative penalties and also the education rectification directions. These are important, we think, to deal with noncompliance, and so we support them. In schedule 3 the bill makes amendments in relation to the net medical expenses tax offset, which will end by the 2018-19 income year. There will be transitional provisions in relation to that.

We also support some of the other sensible measures in schedules 1 and 2. We think that they are important to improve the honesty and integrity of the superannuation scheme, and schedule 3 needs to be supported as well. I will not go into schedule 4. The member for Fraser talked about a number of organisations which get deductibility advantages, deductible gift recipient status, which will assist them in their charitable purposes.

Like other speakers in this debate, and dealing with the amendment proposed by the member for Fraser, I want to talk about the universality of our health system, its affordability and the need to prevent the creation of a two-tiered system of health care by hitting vulnerable Australians. I also want to talk about the need for superannuation to assist vulnerable Australians. I am concerned about what I felt was the most outrageous and disgraceful thing the coalition took to the last election, and that was getting rid of the low-income superannuation contribution rebate. This will put 20,900 Blair individuals, principally women, in the position of being taxed an extra $500 a year. We are talking about 3.6 million low-income earners across this country who will end up being taxed at a higher rate than they should be. At the same time, the coalition have made clear—by their actions and their deeds—their support for the approximately 16,000 people who have assets of about $2 million by making sure that they do not pay their fair share in superannuation tax, effectively giving them a big boost to their superannuation balances

On the one hand they are taking away money from low-income families and, on the other hand, they are giving tax breaks to those people that average Australians—middle- and low-income Australians—would think would be very wealthy people.

This shows the priorities of the coalition government. It is never about struggling Australian families; it is always about 'giving it' to struggling Australian families. It is always about helping the rich and not making the rich pay their fair share of tax. They show by their policies their priorities—for example, taking away the schoolkids bonus from about 19,000 children in my electorate and the 1.3 million Australians who would get the schoolkids bonus to assist with their cost-of-living pressures. The coalition think that it is okay to take that money away from mums and dads who need that money for their kids' schoolbooks, textbooks, IT needs and their sporting and recreational school related needs. So, by their policies, those opposite show their true colours.

In the areas of superannuation and health care, they really show their true colours. We have heard protestations from those opposite, saying that the health system is out of control and we are going to be bankrupt. The previous speaker, the member for Riverina, even said that the whole of the New South Wales health budget would subsume the New South Wales government's budget. Let us put this in context. Australia spends about 9.1 per cent of its gross domestic product on health care. Compare that to Sweden, Britain Spain, New Zealand, Canada and France, who all spend more. New Zealand spends much more—about 17 per cent of its GDP.

There have been allegations and remarks by those opposite that the sword of Damocles is hovering over our health system, when in fact they know that that is not true. I defy anyone of those people opposite to go to another country and say that they prefer their health system to our health system. Our health system is not perfect—no health system is—but it is a darn sight better under a Labor government than it ever was when those opposite were in the Howard government, the Fraser government, the Menzies government or any of those other conservative governments.

We first brought in Medibank and had to fight to retain it, lost it and brought it back as Medicare. We fought election after election after election on the importance of the universality of health care in this country. The coalition had an almost road to Damascus conversion experience in 1996. John Howard used to call it a rort, just as the current Prime Minister used to call superannuation a con job. They fought against it and they have always opposed in their hearts and in their DNA the universality of health care. That is why they will not come into this place—they just will not—and rule out a GP tax that every Australian will pay when they go and see a doctor. That they will not is such an affront to us and so offensive to the Labor Party because we strongly believe it is important.

Last weekend in my electorate I launched our petition in this space. We launched it at the Winston Glades shopping centre in Flinders View. We did it 500 metres from where I live in that suburb. It is important that people stand up for Medicare. It is one of the most important defining aspects of Australia's cultural, political and health life. When we were in government we were proud of our health system. Those opposite are now in government and they are not proud of the health system. We made reforms to make Medicare stronger, and what are they doing? They are proposing and teasing us with 'reforms' to make Medicare weaker. We supported a system where your Medicare card mattered. In my electorate, the Medicare coverage is 88 per cent. When the current Prime Minister was the health minister of this country it was 67 per cent. When we left office it was about 82 per cent or better. We made a difference in primary health care across this country.

So do not give us this fake claim that the coalition are the best friends of Medicare. The coalition have never been the best friends of Medicare. Year after year and election after election they opposed Medicare and took a policy to the Australian people that they would get rid of it. It has only been in the last couple of decades that they have finally accepted that they cannot do it. But they will attack it, not front on but with guerrilla tactics on the side—like the GP levy. That is what they will do.

We invested an enormous amount in health infrastructure. The member for Riverina was in here talking about some of the great things that were done in his electorate. When I was Parliamentary Secretary for Health and Ageing and travelling around the countryside I visited numerous hospitals and facilities that we created with money that we invested. We saw 11,000 more doctors, 26,000 more nurses, and more doctors in regional and rural areas. And we had the National Party over there effectively defunding the health systems, and their colleagues and comrades in the states and territories did nothing about it. We invested a huge amount of money in better health training for doctors and shorter emergency waiting times. We saw the 'growing up smiling' package, which has made and will make a big difference. We saw the wiping out of the dental waiting lists in public hospitals, with the investment of a huge amount of money. In my area, the Ipswich and West Moreton area, we saw a five-year waiting period wiped out in a matter of months through the investment of a million dollars or more put in by a Labor government. That is what we did when we were in office. Those opposite would not have the wit or the wisdom to do anything of the kind.

On superannuation, which this legislation deals with, I want to talk about a couple of issues.

See this speech in context