Stuart Robert (Fadden, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Hansard source

Australians are worried. They're worried about how they're going to afford their next mortgage payment. They're worried about their next electricity bill. Frankly, they're worried about putting food on the table. Small businesses owners are worried about the cost of doing business. This is a cost-of-living crisis that, frankly, this Labor government is putting in the too-hard basket. We had the Treasurer last week supposedly trying to paint us a picture. It seemed more like a blank canvas than a veritable Mona Lisa. We have seen more action from the Labor government on looking after union mates, their donors and campaign helpers in the very first months of this government than we have seen in them looking after the Australian people. In fact, the very first act from Treasury, the very first act under Prime Minister Albanese, was to water down transparency for super funds hiding, as has been reported in the media, over $85 million in donations and other payments for union picnics and the like before the election—$85 million hidden, not helping Australians with cost of living and looking after union mates. We have a cost-of-living crisis, but Labor's first priority is hiding transparency and lacking integrity. It would be extraordinary if it weren't so true.

Back on 9 June, just after the election, the Prime Minister told the Guardian that a cabinet meeting being held that week was to consider how best to respond to the cost-of-living crisis facing Australians. That would seem a reasonable reason for a cabinet meeting. This cabinet meeting was held with great fanfare, with the Prime Minister saying that his government would have a policy of doing what they could to assist with the cost-of-living pressures. I ask the House: what came out of this fabled cabinet meeting? Nothing. Not a sausage. I don't even remember seeing a press release. There were crickets out of a cabinet meeting that was apparently going to assist Australians with the cost of living. This is what happens when you talk the big platitudes during an election campaign and get into government without a plan.

This Labor government has no direction. It frankly has no clue, and everyday Australians are paying the price. This government can't even get right a commitment to save $275 for every Australian's power bill, a commitment that lasted barely weeks before the government broke that promise. Government is about tough decisions in tough circumstances. The risk for Australia is that Prime Minister Albanese and Labor's inaction will, frankly, make a bad situation a lot worse. Australians need a plan from this government. Did they get one after that fabled cabinet meeting in June? Goodness no—nothing at all. Did we get one after the Treasurer's much-hyped statement in parliament last week? No—nothing at all. The Prime Minister needs to start putting words into action. Frankly, he is he all talk and no delivery.

Before the last election, when Australia was coming out of the pandemic, we came out with the lowest unemployment in almost 50 years, very strong GDP growth, low interest rates and our AAA credit rating intact. An unemployment rate at 3.9 subsequently dropped to 3.5 per cent. The economy was 3.4 per cent bigger than before the pandemic. More of our citizens were employed post pandemic than pre, one of only a few nations in the OECD to claim that. We had a cash rate at 0.35 per cent. We had started the hard yards on budget repair without increasing taxes. Our last budget saw a record improvement of $100 billion to the budget bottom line. In the most recent financial statement, the budget deficit had more than halved from what was forecast in May. We delivered cost-of-living relief in our last budget. The Treasury confirmed at Senate estimates it was responsible, measured and did not add to inflationary pressures. Even before the pandemic and before global pressures on inflation, the coalition took action to reduce and relieve the cost-of-living pressures with tax cuts for families.

We didn't need a cost-of-living crisis to act. We reduced the small businesses tax rate. We didn't need what we are seeing now to move forward on that. We balanced the budget before the pandemic. We didn't need a cost-of-living crisis to do that. We did these things because they were good proactive policies—good for the economy and good for the Australian people. This is what a good government does and looks like. These are the proud achievements of the former coalition government, with, frankly, no thanks to those opposite.

Labor opposed bigger tax cuts for families and had to be dragged kicking and screaming to accept the stage 3 tax cut after years of saying they would abolish it. Labor opposed the small businesses tax cuts. Labor fought tooth and nail against every single bit of restrained government spending. And Labor wanted to spend even more.

Labor's yet to outline a detailed plan to address the immediate cost-of-living pressures. The Labor Party went to the last election promising to run bigger deficits, spending more of taxpayers' money. That will fuel inflation. This was confirmed by the independent Parliamentary Budget Office, which showed Labor's election platform will result in higher debt and higher deficit. By contrast, the PBO also confirmed that the coalition was the only party that went to the election with a pathway to improve the budget bottom line.

The coalition's 2022-23 budget was balancing the task of budget repair whilst also providing over $8 billion in assistance to Australians with the rising cost of living. Labor obstructed almost all efforts at budget repair over the last nine years. Remember, we inherited a quarter of a trillion dollars worth of debt. Remember that masterful 2012 budget, when the Treasurer, Mr Swan, stood here and said, 'The four surpluses I announce tonight'? Well, those four surpluses ended up being $200 billion by the time we balanced the budget. That's almost half a trillion dollars of Labor debt—be in no doubt, it was Labor debt—and the final expenditure of some $350 billion as we confronted a one-in-100-year pandemic. That is the truth of the sum $850 billion when it comes to gross debt. That is the truth, and, for those opposite, the truth will set you free.

Over the last two years, as a statement of fact, those opposite wanted to spend $81 billion more on additional expenditure during COVID—$81 billion more—and that is a fact. Those opposite wanted to spend $6 billion giving money to Australians who'd already had the jab to get the jab. That's how incomprehensible their degree of expenditure was. We know that the Labor Party platform, their wish list for government, as we saw in previous election campaigns, will require over $300 billion in more expenditure.

Those opposite, as the Labor government, have set themselves three tests. These are the tests set by the Labor Party, tests that the Australian people were told about—at least they were upfront—tests that were promised and tests that are expected to be delivered. Those opposite all agreed to these three tests, and we will hold those opposite accountable for them: lower power prices—well, that's going exceptionally well, isn't it? $275 was promised, and nowhere—broken; lower cost of living—well, that's going exceptionally well, isn't it, for those opposite; and higher wages. They are the three tests. They are the three accountable standards that we will hold those opposite to.

Unfortunately, Labor's priorities are elsewhere—priorities that will drive up the cost of construction, putting further pressure on inflation. Labor's policy in terms of abolishing the ABCC is not about helping individual Australians with the cost of living. In fact it will have the opposite effect. We know from economic analysis that this will be an over $40 billion hit to the economy and the cost of building homes, schools, hospitals and roads. This is Labor's priority. It is not the cost of living. It's not the stability of interest rates. These are not the actions of a government that is acting responsibly. They're making a bad situation worse.

See this speech in context