Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Hansard source

Today I want to have a conversation with Australians. I understand that people are unimpressed with what they have seen in this place for the last two weeks. We are watching, sadly, the disintegration of a Prime Minister who—even though I wouldn't have voted for him—offered to this country the promise and the hope of a different politics. His hoarse, rambling and unconvincing performance a few moments ago failed to mention his Deputy Prime Minister more than once in 10 minutes. A resolution was put forward by Labor in the standard parliamentary convention: we said the Deputy Prime Minister, with a constitutional shadow over his eligibility, should stand aside from his responsibilities—just as his colleague Senator Canavan did when confronted with a very similar set of circumstances.

This was an opportunity for the Prime Minister to come forward and say, 'No, there's very strong merit to Minister Joyce; he's irreplaceable in the construct of the government,' and to explain the case for having double standards between Senator Canavan and the minister. But he didn't do that. There was only one reference to his beleaguered Deputy Prime Minister in 10 minutes. This is actually a symptom of the greater problem. He spent more of his speech vilifying Labor, attacking unions and attacking his opposition than he spent seriously mounting a case for his vision for Australia.

There are two things that I want Australians to know in the next few minutes: (1) as long as the Turnbull government is consumed by chaos and crisis, as long as the very legitimacy of its mandate and its majority are under a cloud, it cannot and will not do its day job; and (2) I want Australians to hear from us that Labor are focused on the people of Australia and our plans for a better future for this nation. Turning to my first point, this crisis caused by the government's negligence might seem like an obscure thing—the 'vibe of the Constitution', as Dennis Denuto would say; or, as the cynics in the ranks of the government ministry say: 'This is inside the Canberra bubble. It's political correctness.' That's what they might whisper on their alt-right sites. But Australians should know there are consequences. If the Deputy's Prime Minister's dual citizenship had been revealed earlier, if he'd stood aside and done the right thing, this parliament could have reversed the penalty rate cuts for 700,000 low-paid workers. If the Deputy Prime Minister had stood aside, we would have had the overdue banking royal commission that this country is demanding of the parliament.

Australians following these antics might well ask: what on earth is going on?

In the last week, we have seen this Prime Minister suggest that his opponent should be in jail. They have suggested a treasonous plot—a plot with a dangerous foreign power, affectionately known as New Zealand. But, unfortunately, this government becomes more desperate. I say to the government: we understand that the more you attack us, the less you have to say about yourselves and, more importantly, the less you have to say about the people of Australia. Where on earth is that new style of leadership that he promised? When we see neo-Nazis and white supremacists marching on the streets of suburban United States, our Prime Minister is reduced to criticising a local council in Australia. In a time of international uncertainty, with North Korean missile testing, with the threat of fundamentalist terrorism, Australians see their foreign minister embarking on a war of words with New Zealand. Given that it is his last week in the gallery, I think we should hear from Laurie Oakes. On that particular bit of strategic foreign policy genius, he wrote: 'I think it's laughable. It's a joke. It makes the foreign minister look stupid. It makes the Prime Minister look stupid.' Well said, Mr Oakes, and thank you for your service.

When our schools don't have the resources they need, when the TAFEs are closing, when apprenticeship numbers are falling, when women fleeing family violence cannot find a safe place to stay and when Aboriginal people are taken from us too soon because of preventable diseases, Australians are entitled to ask: why is this government spending $120 million on an unnecessary postal survey? Australians are entitled to ask of the parliament and the government: what does this government have to say about people struggling with wages growth at its lowest level since records were kept? It has nothing to say to the Holden workers in Elizabeth, nothing to say to the workers in Penrith Plaza, to the families swamped by power prices, to the young people priced out of university and priced out of the housing market. To all of those Australians worried about handing on a lesser set of conditions to their kids, what do they have to say to them? What do they have say to Australians on the wrong side of inequality, which is at its highest level in 75 years?

This is the plan the government offers Australians: a tax increase for working people and a tax cut for the top end of town. The foreign minister and the Prime Minister publicly humiliated themselves with their bizarre conspiracy theories. This is a matter in our political history. But we shouldn't forget that the Treasurer publicly humiliated himself on Monday when he was caught out trying to verbal the independent Parliamentary Budget Office. What I want to say to Australians is that it is not the incompetence, the trips and missteps of the government which most concern me; it is the unfairness of their policies; it's the ignorance they show towards the problem of inequality. It is the priorities of the Treasurer and the Prime Minister in the people they fight for that concerns us. They don't fight for the workers who need a wage rise. They don't fight for Australians who are underemployed, underrepresented and underpaid. They don't fight for young people being beaten at auction by investors subsidised by the taxpayer. This government does nothing to help these people. This government fights for its people—the millionaires, the multinationals and the tax minimisers. Let me be clear: in the Labor Party, we do not begrudge the top two per cent of income earners their success, but we think they are pretty good at looking after themselves. The Prime Minister and the Treasurer puff themselves up over their plan to increase the tax burden for seven million Australians, and when we say no to that they call it the 'politics of envy'. They think our plan to close loopholes for tax minimisers, to introduce one set of rules in our taxation system for all to stop the income splitting available to the few, not the many, is a war on aspiration.

This government thinks that aspiration is getting a good tax adviser and minimising their income. I think Australians have a different definition of aspiration than this elitist, out-of-touch government. Aspiration is handing on a better standard of living to your kids, a better quality of life, a better deal for your kids than you inherited from your parents. Aspiration is a strong Medicare. It's a good education for your children. It's a decent National Disability Insurance Scheme and proper aged care for your aging parents. Aspiration is working hard and getting ahead. Aspiration is being able to afford to buy your own home. Aspiration is being represented at work when you need assistance. Aspiration is about being able to marry the person that you love. Labor's aspiration is for a fair go all round.

We cannot afford to forget the Liberal rationale for their tax cut for millionaires. They criticise Labor for saying that we don't want to reduce the taxes of millionaires, and they call it the politics of envy. They say that, when we want to restore the budget deficit levy, it is a tax on success. They measure success by how much you earn. Let me be very clear: does that mean that when this government increases the income taxes of seven million people they're not successful people, so therefore it is not a tax on success? Let me say to Australians that the Labor Party does not judge Australian success by money alone. We don't say that a childcare worker on $60,000 is not a success—yes, you are. We don't say that a police officer on $70,000 is not a success—yes, you are. We don't say to the teachers in our classrooms, the firefighters in the fire stations and the people working in regional Australia that if you don't earn a lot of money you are not successful. Labor understands that success is whether or not you're a good parent, a good neighbour. Success is not measured by what is in your wallet; it's what is in your heart. Labor will stand up for all of those people facing income tax increases under this government.

In conclusion, I say to Australians that last night I had a conversation with about 150 students at the ANU. They're worried about the cost of their degrees going up. They don't know if they're ever going to be able to afford to buy a home. They're frustrated at the lack of action on climate change. They can't believe we're even debating marriage equality through a postal survey. They're worried about having their pay cut at their part-time jobs. They don't know why this government has such a lack of understanding of young people, but I assure them: we have the plans and we will deliver. (Time expired)

See this speech in context