Luke Gosling (Solomon, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I don't want to get personal about that particular contribution from the member for Tangney, so I won't. But those opposite just don't get it. They fundamentally don't get what this debate is about. We had the Prime Minister, the so-called leader of this country, talking about an aged-care worker aspiring to management. He was saying you'll get more value back the more you get paid. So the value proposition is in the wage. And you'd probably agree—the member might believe that—in your world view. Millions of other Australians, who those opposite have probably not connected with in any real way, see life a bit differently. Maybe they were brought up, as I was, by parents who gave us a sense of the value of community, the value of volunteering, and, of course, yes, a sense of the value of a dollar earned, but it was always put in the perspective of that responsibility that we all have to those in our community and to finding your unique gift in your life.

One of the things about the Labor Party that is core to us is lifting up the horizons of the Australian people—not just of the elite—and lifting up their opportunities, through doing things like investing in education, and supporting everyone, because we are all part of this team. We are all part of Australia; we are all Australians. So our focus should be to provide the services and the care that we owe our fellow Australians, because that's the contract. We went through this decades ago. The contract is that, when you work and pay taxes or contribute in your community in whatever way you can and you raise your family, you'll be looked after in your old age. But who's going to do that? Will it be those opposite, the investment bankers, the managers? Management has a place, of course, but is aspiring to management where the value is? How about the person who works with our elderly, who holds our elders' hands while they're dying? Those people who are providing that service will benefit from our system when they aspire enough to become managers.

I helped a constituent in my electorate recently who was having a very difficult time with a for-profit, on-the- stock-market, residential aged-care provider. His mum was having an incredibly difficult time and was not receiving the greatest level of care. I went along. The reason why some things had been missed is that, of course, they didn't have enough workers. The workers weren't being treated well, weren't being paid much at all and were stretched, so sometimes things were missed. When I went to talk to the management, they were quite dismissive, unfortunately. In the world view of those opposite, the people who are not respecting their workers by giving them good conditions of pay and good conditions of service, the managers who are getting paid more to screw things down, are the pinnacle. They're not. (Time expired)

See this speech in context