Craig Kelly (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

They promised. That is how Labor were going to fund it. We know what happened to that promise about the surplus. They cooked the books by bringing expenditure out of that 2012-13 year, bringing some forward into the year before and pushing some out to the next year, so they could create this false claim of a false surplus—a faux surplus—in that year. But we know what happened. They were that hopelessly incompetent that they could not even cook the books right, and the so-called surplus of $1.1 billion that they promised turned into an $18 billion deficit, even though they cooked the books.

If we read further from that same budget speech we see it said that it 'finances bold new policies to help Australians with a disability'. There was no financing of it, because they could not even get the budget into balance. They ran an $18 billion deficit that year. The then Treasurer, the member for Lilley, went on:

Tonight I am proud to announce funding for the historic first stage of a national disability insurance scheme …

…   …   …

This budget commits $1 billion over four years to roll out the first stage of a national disability insurance scheme …

So it was $1 billion over four years. They put in $250 million for each year—remembering that we need $22,000 million to fund this.

Secondly, I will speak about Labor's so-called promises to fund this. We had the increase in the Medicare levy from 1½ per cent to two per cent. It was said at the time that that would raise $3.3 billion. But, going back to when that funding and changes to the Medicare levy were announced, the NDIS was estimated to cost $8 billion. We now know it is $22 billion. Whereas the Gillard government said increasing the Medicare levy by half a per cent would fund 40 per cent of the NDIS, it funds but a mere fraction of it. When we get to 2019-20 we will have $4.1 billion out of a $22 billion cost. It will not fund 40 per cent; it will fund less than 20 per cent.

At the moment we have existing funding from the budgets at $1.1 billion. We have a Medicare levy at $4.1 billion. We also have further funding, from redirecting state funding from the existing special disability services that we provide, of another $1.8 billion. Adding all those numbers up takes us to $7 billion out of the $22 billion, or $7 billion out of the Commonwealth's total of $11.1 billion. So we have a $4.1 billion shortfall to fund the NDIS.

In some type of game of magic pudding, Labor comes in and pretends that they have all these savings that they say they have announced, but they have previously stated that they have allocated those savings to reducing the deficit or to financing other things. Now they want to say that those savings are to be allocated for the NDIS. We know that Senate estimates asked whether those so-called other long-term savings measures that Labor said would fund this could be listed in detail. The Treasurer's response was: 'The short answer is "no".' In other words they do not have a single clue about where that $4.1 billion will come from. Even at the last election it was Labor's plan to increase the deficits further.

If we are going to fund this NDIS, it must be on a sustainable basis. We need to set out where every single dollar of the money will come from. That is what we in the coalition are trying to do. We are trying to ensure that the NDIS is fully and properly funded on a sustainable basis to pay that $11.1 billion. And here is the great tragedy: as a nation this year we will pay $12 billion in interest on the previous Labor government's debt. If it were not for their reckless—

Mr Neumann interjecting—

You are responsible as well; you were in that other government. If it were not for your reckless, wasteful and politically motivated spending, we would not have that $12 billion interest bill that we have to pay. The interest bill that we have now could fund the NDIS from the federal level in full and with spare change left over. But we have to pay that interest bill on the debt of the previous Labor government.

The member for Jagajaga and other members talked about this so-called $50 billion handout to large companies. This shows the economic ignorance of those who sit on that side. They think that it is like a fixed pie: if you take the money and you give it to big companies here, then you are taking it away from other people. What complete and utter incompetence! If you want to know how this Labor Party has diverted so far from what they traditionally believed about supporting workers, just go and have a look at the member for McMahon's own special book. On page 63 of his book he actually has a separate subheading called 'Promoting growth through cutting company tax'. I will quote directly from the member for McMahon's book. He says:

One of the more controversial reforms by Paul Keating as Treasurer was slashing the corporate tax rate from 49 per cent to 39 per cent …

Going from 49 per cent to 39 per cent—that is what the previous Labor Treasurer did. The member for McMahon writes:

I was a fresh-faced Labor Party branch member at the time, and I recall the party as a whole being incredulous that a Labor government would cut the tax rate for 'fat-cat companies'. I remember a motion Young Labor conference calling for the corporate tax rate to be lifted to 60 per cent to pay for a program of social reform.

But Keating knew that the corporate tax rate needed to be cut to make Australia competitive, that capital and investment would flow to tax-competitive nations and that this was an important job-creation move.

I ask the question to the members on the other side: when Paul Keating cut the corporate tax rate—

See this speech in context