Pat Conroy (Charlton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Members in this place will often talk about the values that define them and their political party. I am a member of the Labor Party, because it is built on the principles of fairness, equality and social justice. It is incumbent on members of the Labor Party to fight against those acts that seek to destroy, inhibit or remove fairness, equality and social justice from our society.

This budget is not fair. This budget will worsen inequality in our society. This budget will deepen the divide between the privileged and low- and middle-income Australians. True to our fundamental values, Labor will fight this budget.

Let me start by calling out the deception of the Prime Minister and his confected budget emergency. There is no budget emergency. Australia has a triple-A credit rating, one of only 10 economies in the world. Our net debt is 12 per cent of GDP compared to the average of 74.7 per cent of GDP in advanced economies around the world. Our deficit is 1.2 per cent of GDP compared to the average of advanced economies of nearly five per cent. Spending is not out of control; in fact, between 2009 and 2013, this period was the lowest four-year period of real spending growth in 23 years.

Designing a budget is about choices. This government has used a confected budget emergency to resurrect Margaret thatcher's infamous 'There is no alternative' doctrine. This doctrine was used by Thatcher to rip apart the social fabric of the UK, and this is clearly the intention of the Prime Minister and Treasury.

The fact is there are many ways to place the budget on a trajectory to return to surplus in a reasonable time frame. There is no justification for the vicious cuts and targeting of the most vulnerable contained in this budget. For example, if the terms of trade follow the trajectory closer to that forecast by the market or indeed the Reserve Bank, Commonwealth revenue will be significantly higher than that forecast in the budget. Another part of the budget surplus would involve scrapping stupid and expensive policies such as Mr Abbott's 'rolled gold' paid parental leave scheme or Mr Hunt's subsidies for polluters scheme.

For that matter, scrapping the emissions trading scheme not only destroys any chance we have of reducing carbon emissions effectively in this country; it also removes the source of revenue for the Household Assistance Package. These are all choices. There are alternatives. To suggest otherwise is a falsehood, one that is made by a patently heartless and mendacious government.

A fortnight has passed since this budget was delivered. I, like many members in this place, have spent much of the time in the community talking to people about the impact it will have on them and those around them. At street stalls, in meetings and telephone calls, in letters and emails, the message is clear: this budget is unfair. It is unfair because it asks less of the privileged and the powerful than it does of ordinary people and those less fortunate. It is unfair because it supports multinational corporate tax minimisation, while young people looking for work suffer. It is unfair because it destroys egalitarian principles which are the bedrock of our society.

Every person is entitled to quality health care and education regardless of how much money they have or where they live. Take for example Betty, a pensioner from Blackalls Park in my electorate. Betty contacted me and told me that for her the most important part of living on a fixed income is planning ahead. She works out her budget well in advance, factoring in the cost of household bills like water, energy and rates. Betty is worried about the changes to indexation of her pension because she knows that this means her bills will go up but her pension will not rise in line with the increase. She is fearful of losing concessions on her bills as a result of the 1.2 billion cut to the national agreement which supports these measures. In her last quarterly electricity bill, Betty received a seniors discount of $57. Her water bill for the last quarter was reduced by $87. She received discounts on her council rates, car registration and she is entitled to reduced fares on public transport as a result of these concessions. On Sunday night when asked about concession changes, the New South Wales Treasurer, Andrew Constance, a Liberal said:

I think it is a cruel and callous cut. It is one which needs to be reversed.

There are 18,400 people in Charlton like Betty who live on a pension. These people have contributed to our country, have raised families and have paid taxes. They deserve our support. Instead, they face having their pensions and concessions cut as a result of this budget. In the words of Betty, these pensioners have been 'deceived by the Prime Minister and his budget of lies'. This is just one example of the cost shifting embedded in this budget, which transfers responsibility from the federal government to states and territories for a range of measures. Principal among them is the combined $80 billion cut to health and education, a move the New South Wales Liberal Premier has quite rightly called 'a kick in the guts'.

In the Hunter region alone, almost $220 million will be ripped from public hospitals over the next five years. As the husband of a nurse, I know of the wonderful work doctors, nurses and health professionals do in our health system. I also know that this system is under increasing pressure. Why would this government abandon their responsibility when it comes to the health and wellbeing of people in my area? Because they are ideological opposed to public health care.

This budget cuts funding for public dental services and bulk-billed optometry. This budget raises the cost of medicines for all Australians through changes to the PBS, including for some 42,000 health care concession card holders in my electorate. This budget destroys Medicare. It asks every person, regardless of their circumstances, to pay $7 every time they visit a doctor, a measure which will cost the people of Charlton around $6 million in the next year alone. This budget clears a path for states and territories to charge the copayment for general practitioner attendances in hospital emergency rooms.

The destruction of the Medicare system has been condemned by countless health academics and economists, including the AMA, the College of Emergency Medicine, the Doctors' Reform Society, the Public Health Association, the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners, the Consumer Health Forum and the Australian Healthcare and Hospitals Association. The arrogance of Tony Abbott and Joe Hockey, who believe they know the health system better than those who work in it or, indeed, rely on it, is astonishing. Let me quote a doctor from the GP superclinic in my electorate, Dr Wolf Du Plessis, whose practice in Morisset bulk bills around 600 patients a day. An article in the Newcastle Herald last week stated:

… the $7 tax … will cause 'death, disfigurement and disability'.

  …   …   …   

'Some people will end up dead,' Dr du Plessis said.

…   …   …

'Many people who come here don't have the money to pay. Often single mums come in with three children all sick.'

His practice saw people in their 90s, who did not have enough money for food.

'GPs are not supposed to be tax collectors,' he said.

Last week, the architects of Medicare publicly contradicted the Minister for Health by making clear that bulk billing is not a safety net; it is intended to be universal. They also said that there is no such thing as too much bulk billing and made clear their views that there is no evidence that people who will be most persuaded by price are the ones who are less sick.

I will now speak about the shocking cuts to Australian schools, which represent a very clear betrayal of Australian parents, students and teachers. This budget cut $30 billion from education. This is the biggest cut to school funding in Australian history and is clearly visible from the budget papers. In my electorate, schools are angry, parents are angry, teachers are angry. They have 30 billion reasons to be angry.

See this speech in context