Josh Frydenberg (Kooyong, Liberal Party, Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Hansard source

Look at what Labor does not what Labor says. Its six years in office saw more than 500,000 jobs lost in small business alone. Labor rotated ministers like no tomorrow—one every year. Labor saw businesses, big and small, suffocated by more than 21,000 new regulations. This is the Labor Party that brought to you the carbon tax and the mining tax—those jobs-destroying taxes which sent investment offshore. This is the Labor Party that gave us Grocery Watch, Fuelwatch, overpriced school buildings, and the tragic pink batts fiasco. So, when it comes to looking at what Labor says, it is more important to look at what Labor does.

In contrast, the Abbott government, in two years in office, has delivered more than 330,000 new jobs. This year alone, 163,000 new jobs have been created—nearly four times the pace of new job creation under those opposite. If you look at female workforce participation, it is now at the highest level since we started recording those numbers: 171,000 more women are in jobs today than at the time of the 2013 election. The shadow Treasurer talks about the unemployment rate of 6.3 per cent, which we accept is too high and which we are trying to get down. Let us not forget that when the shadow Treasurer was the Treasurer, on 2 August 2013 in his economic statement, he predicted 2014-2015 unemployment numbers to be 6.25 per cent. So the rate is very much consistent with what the Treasury numbers were when Labor was last in office.

Then if you look at our headline economic numbers, the March GDP quarter growth was 0.9 per cent. That is higher than it was in other comparable developed economies, including all the G7 economies. We have seen retail sales up 4.9 per cent over this time last year. Export volumes are up five per cent year on year, as we see the dividends from the heavy investment. 223,000 new companies were registered in 2014. Ten out of the last 12 months have seen rises in the job advertisements, project approval times have been halved and we have seen $1 trillion worth of projects approved by this government. The most recent project we are debating in this chamber is one that will create 10,000 jobs as a result of the Adani investment in coalmine in Queensland. If Labor would get out of the way, those jobs would actually be created.

If you think about small business, one of the things that we need to do is to introduce more flexibility into our labour markets, so we said at the last election that we will get the Productivity Commission to produce a report into the workplace relations sphere. What the unions and the Labor Party do? They kiboshed it before the report even hit the desks of those in this place. Some of the issues it talked about were unfair dismissals, penalty rates, greenfields and statutory contracts. They were all on the table from the same organisation that gave us the NDIS, namely the Productivity Commission. But those opposite will not undertake any reform in the workplace relations sector unless, of course, it betters the position of the union movement, who they are beholden to.

The union movement only represents about 12 to 13 per cent of private sector workers in this economy and in this country, so 88 per cent of private sector workers decide not to join the union. But the other side of the political divide is completely dominated by former union officials and union members on their side of politics, and that dictates their bad policy in this place. If we are serious about getting youth unemployment down from around 14 per cent—where it is today—and if we are serious about getting unemployment down from 6.3 per cent, we need serious workplace relations reform.

In the other place—the Senate, where the red seats and the red carpet rule—those opposite blocked the reintroduction of the Australian Building and Construction Commission, which was effectively a cop on the beat that came out of the Cole royal commission in 2004 and which produced a $6 billion annual productivity dividend to the Australian economy. But what did Labor do when they got into office? They got rid of it. Not because it was not creating jobs—it was—and not because it was not policing building sites—it was—but because it was a bit uncomfortable for their friends in the union movement.

Did you know that the number of days lost to industrial disputation per 1,000 employees before the ABCC came into existence was 224 days? 224 days were lost to industrial disputation per 1,000 employees before the ABCC came into effect; after the ABCC came into effect, that number fell to just 24. That is what job creation is about: less dimes spent industrial disputation, lower costs for buildings and more of a green light for investment.

I could go on. What about our infrastructure projects? Just listen to these numbers. The WestConnex project—and I see the member for Bennelong there; it is in his state of Sydney—creates 10,000 jobs directly and indirectly. The Bruce Highway, with a $3.6 billion contribution from the Australian government, will create 10,000 jobs. This Pacific Highway duplication will create 4,000 jobs and 12,000 jobs indirectly. NorthConnex will create 8,700 jobs. The Western Sydney airport, which we made a decision on after half a century of indecision, will create 4,000 construction jobs and 35,000 jobs by 2035. What about in my state of Victoria, where the East West Link was shovel ready to create 6,000 jobs? Those opposite basically turned a blind eye when their friends in the Labor Party and Daniel Andrews, the Premier of Victoria, ripped up that contract and introduced serious sovereign risk into my state.

What about Labor's job-destroying multinational tax policy, which will cost jobs? The deputy secretary of Treasury, Rob Heferen, was at Senate estimates on 2 June 2015. When asked, 'Would this policy cost jobs?' Mr Heferen said, 'Yes.' What about what the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry said about Labor's policy on multinationals? They said that it will make Australia a less attractive place for international investment, thereby pushing projects offshore and hurting jobs. What about what the BCA said about Labor's tax policy? They said that it has the potential to slow economic growth and further diminish Australia's competitiveness.

Mr Husic interjecting—

Colleagues on this other House, if you want to know why those opposite and the member the Chifley are not ready for government, it is because of this very question that was put to the shadow Treasurer. The shadow Treasurer was asked this at a doorstop interview on 6 June:

The Treasury deputy secretary said a senate estimates this week that Labor's multinational tax policy would cost jobs if it was ever implemented. Given this revelation, are you still committed to the policy?

Chris Bowen, the shadow Treasurer, answered: 'Absolutely.' That says it all. The Labor Party has a $50 billion-plus blackhole in their costings. They left us a legacy of escalating debt that is reaching $667 billion and an interest bill of $1 billion a month that is growing to $3 billion a month, which means that money flows offshore that cannot go to hospitals, roads or schools. That was their legacy and now they have the hide to come into this place to move a motion about jobs.

There is one last point I want to mention, because this is the red carpet to job creation in this country: our free trade agreements with China, Korea and Japan—three booming and strong economies in our region. We know tens of thousands of jobs will be created by the China free trade agreement. We heard in the parliament today that the Leader of the Opposition, when it comes to free trade agreements, says one thing in private and another thing publicly to his friends in the union movement. We support jobs and we are the only party that delivers real jobs.

See this speech in context