Patrick Gorman (Perth, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister) Share this | Hansard source

This government was elected to get things done, and we have continued to deliver and get things done despite the fact that we have faced huge opposition from those opposite. They said no when it came to energy price relief, no when it came to cheaper medicines, no when it came to the Housing Australia Future Fund—in fact, they oppose it so much that they're going to come up and say no on the Housing Australia Future Fund twice—no on the National Reconstruction Fund, no to fee-free TAFE, no to Startup Year loans and no to so much more.

I don't think it will surprise anyone in this place that I'm not going to take priorities advice from the shadow Treasurer and those opposite. While we were elected to get things done, we were also elected because the Australian people saw an absolute mess in the former government and we were elected to clean up that mess—a cabinet so bad that they gave us secret energy price rises and secret ministries. They left $1 trillion of debt as they were walking out the door. But we've been reminded this week once again of their very public support for robodebt. We've just had a 10-minute lecture from the shadow Treasurer about what the government's priorities should be. The lecture is one thing; I look at the actions that we've seen from the coalition this week in terms of what their priorities are.

They started the week with a big splash in the papers, telling us that their priority coming back to parliament was to oppose additional payments for 1.1 million Australians. They wanted to block payments for single parents. They wanted to block payments for the unemployed. They wanted to block additional rent assistance. Then, by the end of that Monday, we found out that their other big priority was actually to defend their legacy when it came to robodebt—again, attacking single parents and attacking people who are relying on benefits from Centrelink. That tells us so much about the priorities of the opposition and what comes to form the basis of their political offering to the Australian people.

When it comes to policy development, from what we're seeing from those opposite, there's one big missing pieces of the puzzle, which I think many in this place are waiting to see the answer on. I calculated it: it's been 424 days that the member for Hume has been the shadow Treasurer. I thought: 'That's a substantial piece of time. How many policies has he put the costings out for?' I thought: 'Maybe he would have costed one policy a week.' That would be 60 policies costed by the opposition—by the Parliamentary Budget Office, which is available to every member of the opposition. So I thought there would maybe be 60, which is maybe one a week. But, no, maybe that's too many. I thought: 'Maybe I'll be more generous. Maybe they might have costed one policy a month.' That would be 13 policies. But, no, it wasn't 13. I thought: 'Maybe they've costed one policy a year. That would give them one costed policy.' Nope, we haven't seen one costed policy.

There has been a big fat zero costed policies from those opposite after more than 400 days in opposition. I was actually amused, and I think even those opposite will be amused, that the Greens party have costed more policies than those on the opposition benches. So we are seeing a huge gap in policy development. There were big long lectures but no actual policy development by those opposite.

Then we get to the things that they still defend. We heard the member for Hume in his speech of defending the 10 years during which they sat in government arguing for lower wages as a deliberate design feature of their policy agenda. As the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations highlighted in question time, they presided over the slowest wage growth since the Second World War. It was both welfare recipients and wage-earners who were under attack from the previous coalition government.

I look at some of the things that have changed for the Australian people. We're asked why we come to this place. It's because we want to change people's lives for the better, to implement and deliver policy that improves the lives of all Australians. Here are some of the things that have happened to the people of Australia only because they chose to elect the Albanese Labor government. We've seen the minimum wage increase by nearly $3 an hour since the change of government. We've seen 250,000 aged-care workers get a 15 per cent pay rise, changing their lives. That means that nurses who are on the award can earn an extra $10,000 a year if they're working full time. That changes people's lives, and it happened only because the Australian people chose a different government last year. There are also half a million more Australians in work since Labor came to office.

Things have changed in local electorates. There's been a lot of discussion about the big changes—for example, the 1.2 million families who benefit from cheaper child care. For the electorate of Cunningham that means 5,700 families are better off. Our cheaper medicines policy means that people in Cunningham have saved $597,000 as a community. If you look at the great electorate of Lyons, in Tasmania, you'll learn that 1,700 families are better off because the Australian people chose to elect a government that is committed to cheaper child care. The community of Lyons have saved $249,000 in total in cheaper medicines, and there is more to come. If you look at Swan, my neighbouring electorate, represented by the member for Swan, cheaper child care means 6,900 families are better off.

See this speech in context