Julie Collins (Franklin, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Regional Development and Local Government) Share this | Hansard source

This budget and these appropriation bills are, indeed, for big businesses and millionaires. Pretty much, it is not good news for every other Australian, particularly those working Australians who have to have an increase in their Medicare levy. There is an increase in the Medicare levy while there is still a $22 billion cut to schools, while we still have not seen a complete unfreezing of the GP rebate immediately and while we hear from the other side that they are still planning on a $64 billion tax cut for big business. We have a budget that says wage growth is at record lows and that says unemployment is going to go up, and we have those opposite trying to talk about fairness and say that this budget is a good budget. It certainly is not a good budget for most Australians.

Millionaires, with the removal of the deficit levy, will get a tax cut of over $16,000 while average Australian workers on $65,000 will have to pay an extra $325. Those earning $80,000 will have to pay an extra $400 a year because of an increase in their Medicare levy. That is, of course, without the government's plan to cut average working Australians' penalty rates. That will affect all of those Australians and those industries that have been affected today. I hear from people—particularly from nurses and other people in my aged care portfolio—who are concerned that this is going to be much broader than that and that their penalty rates, too, are at risk.

Also in this budget we have seen the farce about the Medicare guarantee. We hear from the other side that they are going to guarantee Medicare, but Australians of course know better. The government have done nothing but undermine Medicare every time they come to office, and then every time Labor get into office we have to fix it. Every single time they get into office they undermine Medicare and take money out of the health system, and then when Labor come into office we have to fix Medicare because those opposite have tried to undo the universality of Medicare. Let's be really frank about what the government call their unfreezing of the Medicare rebate for GPs. In the first 12 months only about seven per cent of those things that are billed under the Medicare GP rebate are actually going to get an increase in that rebate. Everybody is going to have to wait until at least 1 July 2017 for a normal, average GP consultation, and then of course they are already years behind in what that rebate should have been. For those opposite to come in here and suggest that it is all over and there is no freeze on the Medicare rebate for GPs is just not true.

There are so many things about the rhetoric in this budget that are not true. We have had the NDIS lie. Those opposite come in here and say that Labor did not fully fund the NDIS; that is absolutely not true. Our budget papers from when we were in office show that it is not true. Labor did fund the NDIS fully and properly, and our budget papers show that we were doing that. Those opposite want to talk about the NDIS and not politicise it, but they have done nothing but that. Every single day since the budget, they have been coming in here, trying to politicise the NDIS. I want to tell them about people in my electorate who are relying on the NDIS. They are more concerned about its current implementation than a political fight about the way it is funded. They are actually concerned about whether or not the person whom they are caring for, who is relying on the NDIS, is getting the support they need. There are implementation issues with the NDIS, as we would expect with any major reform, and the government should be focusing on fixing that implementation rather than coming in here and trying to play political games with the NDIS, because there are people in my electorate who are relying on it working properly, who are unsatisfied, who are worried about its implementation and who have had packages cut in recent months from their original packages. They are really concerned about the NDIS and how it is being rolled out at the moment. So what we do not want to hear from those on the other side is the politicisation of what is a very significant reform that did have bipartisan support and that I am sure many members on the other side are just as concerned as I am about its rollout, because it is so important that we get this right.

Then we have the government's rhetoric around Gonski and school funding. I asked a question today of the Prime Minister about the $68 million cut to public schools in Tasmania over the next two years. Of course, he did not really want to answer the question about the cut to public schools in Tasmania, because he knows that the schools in Tasmania are getting $68 million less than they would have got under a signed agreement that the government has with the Commonwealth. That is the reality—$68 million less over the next two years going to public schools in my home state, and it means that students in public schools in my electorate and every other electorate in Tasmania will be missing out and not getting the support that they need over the next couple of years.

Interestingly, we have the Tasmanian state budget this week, which I am sure those on the other side would not have paid any attention to.

Mr McCormack interjecting—

It is an interesting interjection by the minister that Will Hodgman is a good premier. Will Hodgman has not stood up for Tasmania at all against this government. He has not stood up for Tasmania when it comes to the cut in school funding. He has not stood up for Tasmania when we received a cut to our hospital funding. He has not stood up for Tasmania when we got zero dollars in the last infrastructure budget, as they wanted to call it, which we know is a farce, because there is no new money for projects in my home state of Tasmania. As I was just saying to the minister, not one federal minister came to the state of Tasmania in the week after the budget—not one. We had something like eight senior shadow ministers come down and talk to Tasmanians about the impact of the budget, but the government could not send one single minister to Tasmania to talk about the budget. Tasmanians are truly feeling left off this government's map. Time and time again, the government is making decisions—and it is only when Labor stands up for Tasmania that this government starts to take notice. So I expect that in the next few weeks we will have a few government ministers come down and do their thing around the state, but we will only see them come because Labor has called on them to do so and because Labor has demanded that they take notice of my home state.

I am sure that when they come they will not talk about their cuts to our schools. I am sure they will not talk about the cuts to universities. I am sure they will not talk about the change to the HECS threshold that many Tasmanians will be affected by. Tasmanians, sadly, have the lowest average incomes in the country. Lowering the threshold from $55,000 down to $41,000 before HECS is repaid will affect a lot of Tasmanians and will affect the marginal tax rate of many Tasmanians. And, of course, there is the TAFE cut. The cut to TAFE will also impact on my home state. I have had a couple of TAFE teachers come to see me concerned about the undermining of TAFE and concerned that Tasmania is getting school cuts, university cuts and TAFE cuts. When this government talks about jobs and growth, Tasmanians start to wonder exactly where the jobs and growth are going to come from. When you do not invest in young people, when you do not invest in the skills and the training that young people need, when you do not give people an option of tertiary education at university or TAFE, then how are the Tasmanian public going to get the skills they need to take up the jobs of the future? Clearly, they are not. Clearly, you cannot say that you support jobs and growth and then not properly fund schools, not properly fund TAFE and not properly fund the university system, and then go and make low-income Tasmanians pay more with the HECS threshold change and the increase to the Medicare levy.

Tasmanians simply can not afford it. As I said, they already have some of the lowest incomes in Australia. We had new data last week that talked about housing affordability. I know it might surprise some people in this chamber, but Hobart is right up there with Sydney for unaffordability of housing. We are one of the worst places in the country for housing affordability, because of the low incomes that Tasmanians rely on. It is well known that a disproportionate number of Tasmanians rely on government support payments, because the incomes are so low. It is no surprise to anybody who has come to Tasmania that we have areas of very significant disadvantage and pockets of high unemployment. But the cuts in this budget in no way address that—in no way at all.

The only infrastructure projects that are happening in Tasmania are ones that were announced and funded by Labor in 2013. There are only two small additional projects that are happening in Tasmania and one large infrastructure one for the university, and they are all things that Labor committed to and promised before the government did. They are all projects that Labor lobbied for. And I go back to my point that this government only pays attention when Labor stands up for Tasmania. During the previous election campaign, Labor came out early for funding the Hobart airport roundabout upgrade in my electorate. We came out early for the University of Tasmania relocation in Launceston and Burnie. The government was dragged kicking and screaming to make those same commitments. They are the only additional things in the budget that the government has funded, and Labor had previously committed to them. So Tasmania is feeling pretty disappointed and pretty left out from this budget.

I also want to talk about my portfolios. I am the shadow minister for ageing and mental health. People in the ageing sector and those older Australians who are relying on aged-care support, either in residential care or in their homes, will be pretty disappointed by this budget also. Whilst they have not had the cuts of previous years—I will grant the government that; it had previously been using aged care as an ATM and taking billions out—what we did not see were thoughtful responses to some of the serious issues around ageing in Australia. What we did not see was a commitment on level 3 and level 4 aged-care packages for home care. There is currently a 12-month waiting list for people to get level 3 and 4 packages in their homes. What happens in that 12 months while people are waiting for a package? Usually one of two things happens—people go into the emergency department or they go into residential aged care before they are ready, because there was no package available. It would be better to support these people in their home sooner rather than it costing everybody more paying for them to go to an emergency department or into residential care. The government is actually costing itself more by not funding the packages.

These aged care packages also come after somebody has had what is known as an ACAT or a RAS assessment. These assessments, too, are behind. I have had reports of the ACAT assessment that the states conduct taking up to six months. So you have your ACAT assessment and then you have the wait for your home care package. By the time you might finally get the package, it is 18 months down the track. Older Australians surely deserve better than that. Older Australians who want to stay in their homes rather than go into residential care or end up in a hospital emergency department I am sure would rather have those packages and stay at home, as I am sure their loved ones would prefer.

I also want to talk about mental health. I have offered the government bipartisan support when it comes to the mental health portfolio— particularly around suicide prevention, given the statistics and the data that we have seen, with suicides in Australia being at the highest level they have been in a decade. It is something that requires urgent action from government, and I have offered my bipartisan support to the government. So, I was pleased to see some additional funding—$115 million—for mental health in the budget, $80 million of that being for psychosocial services that will support those people who are outside of the NDIS and who have severe mental illness and need support who are currently in programs. Whilst I am pleased to see that, I do say it is not enough. I understand from the Minister for Health and the minister's office that the minister is working on some more support, and I would appreciate a briefing from the government on how that is rolling out and how that will occur. We also saw some significant funding for more suicide prevention, which I also support, but we really do need to do more when it comes to the mental health of Australians. Whilst I was pleased to see some $115 million in the budget, clearly we do have a long way to go and clearly we need to do more to deal with the terrible suicide toll in Australia. I again pledge bipartisan support to work with the government in this really important area. I will be doing everything I can to ensure that this area of public policy is properly funded and receives bipartisan support.

See this speech in context