Anthony Byrne (Holt, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise with pleasure to speak on Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2014-2015 and cognate bills Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 2014-2015, Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2014-2015 , Appropriation Bill (No. 5) 2013-2014 and Appropriation Bill (No. 6) 2013-2014.

Reflecting on the budget brought down by the Treasurer just over a couple of weeks ago, what immediately struck me—as someone who represents a large constituency in the outer suburbs—is the disproportion of the bulk of heavy lifting that has to be done by those in the outer suburbs to address the budget crisis that this government talks about. But what also struck me is that I recall that the previous government paid a very heavy price for a broken promise. That broken promise, in the public's mind, was that there would be no carbon tax. I was discussing this with a colleague the other day: this budget contains not one broken promise but 20. I have never seen a set of circumstances where a government has misrepresented the facts so brazenly and so often, and has come to the community and said, 'well, you are expected to make this sacrifice'—particularly those people in the outer suburbs. One of the things this budget does is that it is a complete contradiction of the Howard government legacy. I think, in many ways, John Howard got it right. John Howard got it right when he recognised the need to remove the fuel indexation excise in 2001, and to increase family tax benefits to many families in my electorate.

When we got into government, we further developed the infrastructure needed for people that live in the outer suburbs. We did this through the BER and National School Pride programs; through grants to areas such as the Chisholm TAFE in Cranbourne, the Casey RACE aquatic centre, and the Casey Fields athletics track and playground; through additional funding for much-needed roadworks; and through emergency payments to emergency relief providers such as the Cranbourne Information &Support Service, the Casey North Community Information & Support Service, and the Casey Cardinia Community Legal Service. We created a headspace centre in Dandenong and we approved and were implementing a headspace centre in Fountain Gate, with a planned early intervention psychosis centre coming over the top of those two. We were also committed to building multicultural community harmony. We did this through grants to the multicultural communities in my electorate. John Howard and Kevin Rudd understood that there is a risk when you move out to the suburbs, which are developing and growing, but they do not have the social infrastructure that is required. Often they do not have the roads that are required to sustain the population increase. And to illustrate this point, if you look at a facility like Albert Park, for example, in Melbourne, with its Olympic swimming pool, soccer field, elite track, wonderful lake, golf course, gymnasium precinct and picnic grounds—no such combination of facilities exists in my area, with the exception of a laudable attempt by the City of Casey in the form of the Casey Fields precinct.

This budget is saying that if people make the journey in the outer suburbs to build a new life for themselves and their kids, they are being disproportionately punished. Frankly, they don't think that is fair. Instead of building up and strengthening our local communities, this budget has cut people's entitlements and level of security whilst curtailing their opportunities. One thing that John Howard always talked about was the aspirational class and creating opportunities.

There is no doubt that the Australian economy faces challenges in providing new levels of security such as funding the National Disability Insurance Scheme and providing new opportunities for young people under the Better Schools Plan, particularly when there are revenue shortfalls. The answer to these challenges is not to destroy people's confidence in the Australian economy, not to eliminate opportunities but to create them and grow the economy and constrain expenditures in areas that do not threaten that growth and families' capacity for opportunity.

The biggest concern out of this budget relayed to me is that my electorate comprises manufacturing workers, retail workers, trade workers, construction workers, which accounts for almost 40 to 45 per cent of employment in my constituency. These people use cars and they do not get the fuel rebates that the mining or the agricultural industry get. They do not get rebated for the petrol that they use. In 2001 John Howard, knowing that he had a problem in the outer suburbs, removed this fuel excise indexation. Do you know what would have happened had he not removed it? A very illuminating paper from the Parliamentary Library said that 'the current rate as it stands at the present period of time of this fuel excise'—customs duty, if you want to include that as well—' is now 38.143c per litre.' If the fuel excise indexation had continued before John Howard intervened, it would now be 55c per litre.

So is that what this government wants, because it is now reinstating that fuel excise indexation? How on earth do you think that a price increase over that period of time in petrol from 38.143c to 55c per litre benefits people who rely on cars and utes to get their families around and for employment opportunities? It is just crazy thinking. If you look at the total revenue for it over the forward estimates period, it is about $4.15 billion but, as I said to you, $1.8 billion of that is rebated. I do not represent a lot of mining workers; I represent tradies, I represent construction workers, retail workers and other workers and a lot of mums and dads. They are driving their kids around the place. They are not going to get a rebate. They are just going to be slugged with this fuel excise increase.

It disproportionately involves people from the outer suburbs. It is effectively reinstating an outer suburbs tax. I do not think that is fair and I think the government should seriously be reconsidering it because the constituency that I represent is not silly. It is a wise constituency and it knows when it is not being told the truth, and they certainly do not believe they are being told the truth with respect to the budget overview macroparameters but also the reasons why they have to be targeted in this particular way. They just do not accept it.

Another issue that was raised right off the bat was the introduction of the $7 GP tax. As I said, I have a lot of families in my area and they need to go and see their local doctor. You raise the price of petrol but then to give them an additional burden, an additional tax, you put a $7 GP tax on their visits. Notwithstanding some pretty interesting comments from those opposite about Medicare being overused and overserviced, that is not what people in my electorate think when they have a sick child. They need to take the child to a GP. If they have two sick children, they have to go to the doctor's twice. They do not think they are being overserviced by their GP; they are trying to make their kids well. They are trying to make sure that those kids do not infect other kids if there is an issue.

We have tens of thousands of young people in my electorate. When your have outer suburbs growth-belt areas, they of course have a disproportionate call on general practitioners. They need those general practitioners, because there is nothing more important than the health of their children. I have two children and we have had to use GP services. Was I overusing the service? It is quite a stunning, values based statement to be making. It is a statement that could be made by a party that represents those living in the inner city, not the outer suburbs. I have spoken to GPs in the area and they are mortified about this particular introduction of a new tax. I have spoken to Dr Ariane D'Argent, Dr Stuart Rumble, psychologist Stephaine Chu and a constituent Helen Jolliffe about this. They say it affects everybody. It absolutely does affect everybody and there is no compensation for it, regardless of what is being said.

In addition to imposing this new tax on doctor visits, the Abbott government has decided to make the Medicare safety net less fair from 1 July 2016 by cutting $270 million and transferring these costs onto families. The elderly, who are a group who have sacrificed much to make this country the country that it is, are already not going to the doctors. These are the people that need to go to their doctors to ensure that their ongoing use of medications continue. You save as much money by people going to a general practitioner and picking up an early diagnosis of an issue in that age group.

What are you saying to people with mental illness? If you are going to the doctor and are trying to get an assessment or a diagnosis, you do not want to go to hospital because, believe you me, going to an emergency ward seeking some sort of understanding of what your condition might be is not the best way to go. Our whole health system channels us towards a general practitioner as the gate keeper to the entire medical system. So young people with mental health issues going to doctors are then having to pay an additional $7. The implication is, according to the government, if they keep on going to the doctors then they are using the system. It is a horrible, values based suggestion to make and it disproportionately affects people in my constituency.

Locals in Holt have also found out that they are going to have an additional $100 charge to see a medical specialist, which is another hidden nasty. In outer suburbs, in growth spot areas, they rely on public hospitals. What we see in the budget in 2014 is that it cuts funding for three local hospitals that service residents in my electorate. Between 2014 and 2018, the Monash Health network of hospitals stand to lose $122,536,072, which includes funding to the Casey Hospital, the Cranbourne Integrated Care Centre and the Dandenong Hospital.

Last year, in 2013, the previous Labor government had a $107-million funding shortfall for all of Victoria. There was a disagreement between the Liberal state government and the federal Labor government about funding. Do you know what it did as a consequence of $107 million shortfall for the entire state of Victoria? It started closing hospital emergency wards. They started basically going down the pathway of shutting people's access to hospital emergency wards. So if three critical hospitals in a growth network were going to be closing their emergency wards when a much smaller amount of money was going to be taken out of their system, you will have a substantial problem on your hands when they get told that they are going to lose $122 million. Again, what do I say to people that I represent in my constituency? If you get sick, do not go to a GP because you are going to get charged $7. And if you go to an emergency ward at Casey Hospital, it might be closed because they are the measures that are going to have to be contemplated by the state government because of this health funding shortfall, and the precedent occurred last year. The precedent occurred when $107 million was taken out of the system and then, by the way, the federal Labor government reinstated that $107 million to ensure that emergency departments were not closed. So this is not going to be the case with the Abbott government.

Medicare Locals being abolished was another broken promise. They were told they would not do that. I have a great Medicare Local called the South-Eastern Melbourne Medicare Local—I call it SEMML. It basically was awarded the budget for headspace in Dandenong. It got it up and running in four months and it is a great enterprise.

What has happened as a consequence of the Medicare Locals being abolished is that the SEMML was awarded a tender to establish a headspace in Narre Warren at Fountain Gate. We have a real problem with youth suicide in my area and that is why I have campaigned relentlessly to ensure that there was a headspace in Dandenong and a headspace in Fountain Gate. I was very confident, given that SEMML had been awarded the contract for headspace in Fountain Gate, that young people that I represented were going to get a community-friendly service that they desperately needed and deserved. What has happened with the abolition of this excellent Medicare Local who has successfully been running the program and the headspace in Dandenong has resulted in uncertainty because it has been delayed.

To the health minister: given the level of youth suicide that we have had to endure in our area and after campaigning to get a necessary facility that was promised by the government, if you think we are going to accept delay you are delusional. That is just not going to happen. Young people in my area deserve these services. We will campaign day and night until they get the services that they deserve, that they need and that they were promised. This government is now callously delaying it. That is unacceptable and we will continue to campaign until that gets fixed.

We talk about pensioners. They have sacrificed and laboured for our country's good and they are being told that people shifting into that age by 2035 are going to have to work until they are 70. That sounds great, but not if you are a construction worker, not if you are a tradie, not if you are someone who works with your hands like so many to in my area and not if you work in manufacturing. This is a budget of broken promises and lost opportunity which disproportionately affects people in our suburbs. I ask the government to reconsider some of the more pernicious measures that have been introduced in this budget.

See this speech in context