Brett Whiteley (Braddon, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak on this matter of public importance. For those that are listening today by radio or online, and for the small number in the gallery, let us put a few fundamental pieces to this puzzle in place—very important pieces, I have to say. Do the people on the other side realise—I am sure that they do—that, as a result of their efforts, their 'fiscal efforts', if you could call them that, over seven years, we are now borrowing $100 million every day just to fill the gap between revenue and expenditure?

We will have a $36 billion deficit this year. We are paying $1 billion every month in interest. We have an ageing population. We are living longer. And those people opposite want to put their heads in the sand and make believe that there is nothing going on, nothing to be seen here; we need to do nothing; we can continue to do what we are doing.

I will tell you, Mr Deputy Speaker, that I heard an intervention over there earlier to the members for Bass and Lyons and me that asked: why don't we tell Tasmanians that? Well, actually we have. I give the people of Tasmania in our electorates more credit than those opposite give. I actually believe that, deep down, the people of my electorate—and I am sure in Bass and Lyons—understand the enormous task that we are facing.

We have two choices here. We can take the Leader of the Opposition and the Labor alternative government's plan, and that is to live by this philosophy that really we are in the business of estate planning and that hardworking taxpayers across Australia should fund into part pensions the inheritance of many. That is where we are heading: the idea that I should accumulate funds and live entirely off the interest and maybe a part pension and not even contemplate for one moment that I may have to draw down on my capital to see my days through. No. We are growing a culture in this country that suggests that the hardworking taxpayers should continue to contribute to my lifestyle to the day they put me in the box so that my kids can be rich. That is wrong. That is wrong, and it should be called what it is. It is not about estate planning. It is not about that at all.

In 1971—

Mrs Elliot interjecting—

Mr Conroy interjecting—

Just listen; you might learn something. In 1971, when I was 11, if I walked down the main street of my town, I would meet seven people aged between 15 and 64 before I met a person aged over 65. Today, I will meet fewer than five people who are aged between 15 and 64 before I meet someone aged over 65. It might be interesting to note that, in not too many decades, I could walk down that same street and I will meet fewer than three people who are aged between 15 and 64 before I meet someone aged 65.

Now, I have another term for people aged between 15 and 64. In my upbringing, I think we call them workers—taxpayers. I will just put the sums in place for those opposite. The reality here is that right now—for those listening to this and watching today—eight out of every 10 individual taxpayers in this country are stepping up for the welfare bill in this country. Eight out of every 10 individual taxpayers in this country are paying the welfare bill.

If you think that that can go on, well, knock yourself out. You take that vision, that plan, to the Australian people. I will tell you what has happened in the last 10 hours or so. As of yesterday, The Australian reported from very good sources that the Greens and the Australian Labor Party were going to support this. They woke up. They woke up this morning; Bill went out in his pyjamas, picked up his Australian, and there was the Newspoll: Mr Twenty-Eight Per Cent. That is what this is about. It is another diversion, and it is all about him. (Time expired)

See this speech in context