Julian Hill (Bruce, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

And none of your former ministers denied it, did they? Have you seen one of them come out and deny the fact that that was their plan?

Not content with their record, I'll just point to paragraph (e) of the second reading amendment, Madam Deputy Speaker. It's truly ridiculous. The shadow minister embarrassed himself with this. It says:

(1) notes:

…   …   …   

(e) the Government has committed over $217 million of taxpayers' funds to this expensive rebranding exercise;

According to the shadow minister, 'It's going to cost $217 million to change the name and the colour of the card.' I suggest the opposition check their facts. Of that budget allocation, $158.4 million—more than 70 per cent—is expenditure directly on existing and new services in these four trial sites. So let's be clear: what they've said not just in debate but in their second reading amendment is demonstrably, unambiguously, utterly false. Of the expenditure proposed with this bill, $158.4 million is to go directly into current and new services in those four trial sites.

The now opposition spent years forcing income management on these communities—little guinea pigs, they were, around the country. They spent years promising the world to these communities but did nothing.

See this speech in context