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

Before the election we told the Australian people we would not block the appropriation bills. It has been our principled position certainly since the 1970s and before. We have had experience with the coalition blocking appropriation bills or deferring them. I recall the instance of the 1975 dismissal crisis. In not blocking appropriation bills, Labor always acts responsibly to ensure that the function of government continues for this year and every other year, regardless of whether we are on the Treasury benches or, indeed, in opposition.

That does not mean we are supportive of the government's management of the economy. In fact, we would call it mismanagement. In late September it was interesting to look at the final outcomes in relation to the budget for the 2015-2016 year. What it showed was that the deficit for 2015-2016 had soared to $40 billion, eight times bigger than was estimated the day Tony Abbott became the Prime Minister of this country. We saw the net debt reach $296 billion at the end of the last financial year, which is $77 billion more than was projected when Labor lost office in 2013. That comes on the back of the coalition's previous budget, which projected a net blow-out by over $100 billion in 2016-2017.

I recall the many statements from the former member for North Sydney, then shadow Treasurer, Joe Hockey, saying that there was a budget emergency. I remember opposition leaders saying this repeatedly when we were in government, talking about debt crises and Labor's alleged mismanagement of the economy. They never talk like that anymore, because the figures really show the true situation. The Turnbull government expects us all to show gratitude for a $35 billion blow-out in the deficit and a $77 billion blow-out in net debt in 2015-2016. This is all at a time when they want to give $50 billion in tax cuts to the corporate sector, including $7.4 billion in tax cuts to the big banks. Having had six positions to avoid a royal commission, they should simply do what the Australian public wants, and what Labor urges, and have a royal commission. Giving multinational companies $50 billion in tax cuts makes the budget situation much, much worse, and I think it clearly jeopardises our much cherished and hard-won AAA credit rating.

This is a government that when in opposition said that they would 'deliver a surplus in our first year and every year after that', to quote the then member for North Sydney and the shadow Treasurer. But we know they like to point the finger at us and ignore the action that we took to protect this country during the global financial crisis. 'Global', 'financial' and 'crisis' are three words that they refused to acknowledge when in opposition and almost never acknowledge now they are in government.

It was eight years ago that the Labor government took one of its most important decisions: the first stimulus package and bank guarantees that oversaw the fact that we would protect our financial system during the global economic meltdown over Christmas 2008. Bernard Keane of Crikey in 2010 wrote of the Labor government, with the Treasury and the Reserve Bank:

They stabilised our banking system, kept credit flowing, and launched two waves of stimulus that put a floor under falling consumer confidence and employment.

He went on to write that Henry's advice—that is, Ken Henry—to then Prime Minister Rudd and Treasurer Swan to 'go hard, go early, go households' was the 'playbook for a spectacular policy success'.

But what have we seen from the Abbott-Turnbull governments? They have plunged us into further debt, they have risked our AAA credit rating, they have overseen spiralling deficits since the 2014 budget—which would have to go down as one of the worst budgets in history, notwithstanding the smoking of cigars and the dancing in the then Treasurer's office before the budget was delivered—and they have undermined the national safety net, which protects the most vulnerable. Labor, however, will support these appropriations and not block supply. That is our legacy. No Labor opposition in history has ever blocked supply. Given the budgets that those opposite have thrown at us, it is not something we do lightly. But we will defend the national safety net and we will stand up for the values that we hold dear in terms of education and opportunities for all, universal health care, and we will oppose, as we always have done, the heartless cuts which will impact upon Australia's most vulnerable people.

One of the most heartless cuts that this government has undertaken over such a long period of time is in the area of Aboriginal and Torres Islander affairs. Recently my colleague, the member for Barton, spoke out against the harsh cuts to services in the face of critical rates of family violence, particularly amongst Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Indigenous leaders, including the member for Barton and the assistant shadow minister, Senator Pat Dodson from Western Australia, have spoken out against this for decades, as I did in the last parliament when I was shadow minister for Indigenous affairs.

The response of the then Prime Minister and the present Prime Minister and the Minister for Indigenous Affairs was to shrug their shoulders, to cut half a billion dollars to Indigenous services and resile from a previous commitment of development of justice targets in closing the gap. These cuts slashed millions of dollars from the Family Violence Prevention Legal Service, community legal services, legal aid and frontline services in areas of housing, health, education and the like—essential services that tackle gross inequality, whether in urban areas or rural communities. I challenge the now Prime Minister to reverse these cuts to Australia's First People and to commit to tackling the scourge of domestic violence—as I said yesterday in my speech in relation to migration legislation—and the tragedy of Indigenous suicide rates as a matter of urgency.

During the election campaign I, as shadow minister for ageing, fronted up to each and every meeting in relation to aged-care providers, who were dealing with a $1.2 billion blow in the May 2016 budget, where there were cuts to complex health care and pain management for older Australians in residential aged care. Unsurprising, the government would not release the financial basis for these cuts, the background to it and why they were making these cuts. Of course, this is a government that had a $107 million hole in the omnibus bill figures and relied on us to provide additional savings of $6.3 billion to make sure that the omnibus legislation went through in accordance with our previous commitment during the election campaign and to make sure that they could get their maths correct and undertake the necessary budget reform which we need to undertake in this country.

During the election campaign, I said to aged-care providers that we should be investigating what should happen in relation to these budget cuts in aged care, and I am pleased to see that shadow minister for ageing, the member for Franklin, and her deputy, Senator Helen Polley—both from Tasmania—have introduced an amendment to the Aged Care Act to ensure an independent review of residential aged-care funding. The Minister for Aged Care's rationale for cutting $2 billion over the 2015 MYEFO and 2016 budget was that aged-care providers were gaming the system—an outrageous claim. We want to make sure that there is responsible management, and I call on the minister to release the financials and the background to it to show why these cuts are necessary.

In my own shadow portfolio area of immigration and border protection, the annual report tabled yesterday tells a worrying story about the immigration minister's management of the department. This comes on top of the Australian National Audit Office report on offshore processing on Manus and Nauru and the Rand Corporation report, commissioned by the Department of Immigration and Border Protection, which looked at the merger of the customs and immigration departments. The immigration minister has blown the budget, with the final budget outcome showing a $257 million blow-out. This blowout is driven by a $236 million overspend for departmental costs in relation to 'Outcome 1: protect Australia's sovereignty, security and safety by managing the stay and departure of non-citizens', which is essentially Operation Sovereign Borders.

At the same time, there is a significant cost blowout in the program area. The department's 'Function 5: Offshore maritime security' failed to meet targets for contracted aircraft and Royal Australian Air Force assets, square nautical miles; the commercial contracted satellite; Ashmore vessels, station and streaming days; marine unit patrol days; the number of apprehensions of illegal foreign fishing vessels; and the number of illegal foreign fishers apprehended and processed. But these are not the minister's only failures. It is quite clear that the minister has taken a tick-and-flick approach and a hands-off approach in these areas.

The Rand Corporation reports and the ANAO report clearly show that the government has engaged in some very bad maladministration and stuff-ups in the department, such as the failure to meet KPIs, including management of travellers and goods moving across borders occurring in accordance with the department's service standards—target not met; immigration status of the majority of non-citizens located in the Australian community for breach of immigration law resolved in a timely way—target not met; percentage of citizenship conferral applications decided within service delivery standards being at least 80 per cent—target not met; and visa applications finalised within an acceptable service standard—target not met. That is specifically for student visa, working holiday maker visas, general skilled migration, employer sponsored, business innovation and investment, partner, parent and other family programs. It is especially worrying that 52.4 per cent of permanent visa applications were not finalised within service standards. It is simply not good enough.

It is all very well to lecture the world—as the Prime Minister and the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection did recently in America—but you should be able to run your own department properly. There are three reports which clearly show that the Department of Immigration and Border Protection has serious systemic problems. This is a department that has been merged and there are reforms that continue to need to be undertaken. This is a government which, in terms of budget allocations, is blowing money, and we also have a minister who is clearly not focused on making sure the necessary reforms in the department are undertaken and we see that the necessary targets have been set are not being fulfilled. So it is all very well for the government to claim that they are doing things right in border protection—and we believe in strong border protection as well—but we need to treat the management of the department better and we need to make sure that money is spent more wisely, because this is taxpayers' money.

Another contentious issue is Medicare. In the 100 days since the election the government have not dropped one of the savage health cuts that you find in the budget—not one. Yesterday there was an opportunity for coalition members to go back to their electorates this Friday and say, 'We stood up for Medicare,' but they did not take that opportunity; they voted in the House to continue the savage cuts. The government refuse to protect bulk-billing. Members here have refused to protect bulk-billing. They refuse to reverse the harmful cuts to Medicare by unfreezing the indexation of the Medicare Benefits Schedule. They are in a situation where they will go back to their constituents who may have cancer and tell them that they will end up paying more for blood tests because their member of parliament voted against reversing the government's cuts to pathology. They are going to tell women with breast cancer that, as a result of the government's cuts to breast screening, MRIs, X-rays and other diagnostic imaging, they will pay more for vital scans. The government refuse to listen to the public on Medicare and refuse to listen to the public on the banking royal commission. We will support the appropriations legislation. We will support our long-held position, but the government must manage the economy better and do what they said they would do—that is, reduce debt and reduce deficit.

See this speech in context