Stephen Jones (Whitlam, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Hansard source

In the time available to me, I'll respond to some of the questions that have been put to me. But I think it's worth outlining the budget strategy that is contained within these appropriation bills. Firstly, it's to ensure that Australians are equipped to deal with some of the cost-of-living pressures that they're encountering.

The shadow Assistant Treasurer, in his contribution, expressed his concern about inflation. You can imagine how concerned he must have been as they left office, when inflation was running at over six per cent!

We've managed to halve inflation. We still think it's running too high, and our efforts are directed towards ensuring we can bring it back within the Reserve Bank's inflation target zone—predicted, on Treasury analysis, to occur by the end of this calendar year. Of course that's important, because it enables the Reserve Bank, then, to review its interest rate setting as to taking the pressure off interest rates.

The budget is all about ensuring that we can deal with these cost-of-living issues and ensuring, in the area of energy bills, $300 of energy bill relief to every household in the country. I have to say that, if you're concerned about cost-of-living pressure, the entry price to that conversation is not what you say but what you actually do. Over the last two years, we've seen the coalition fail time and time again when they've had the opportunity to support cost-of-living relief and measures which will improve affordability for Australian households.

On wages, they've opposed every wage increase. When we said it was reasonable for Australians on the minimum wage to get an increase of a dollar an hour, this, according to the Leader of the Opposition, was something that was going to bring the economy to its knees. Wages are growing faster and more sustainably than at any time over the last decade. That's actually a deliberate design feature of our government, and the opposite was a deliberate design feature under the coalition.

On medicines, we introduced policies which will reduce the price of medicines. Those opposite campaigned against those policies. I'm pleased to say that not only have we reached agreement with the Pharmacy Guild on these measures but Australians now are paying sustainably lower prices for the medicines that they have been prescribed and that they need to keep them healthy.

The energy bill rebate was voted against by that mob over there. Energy price caps were voted against by that mob over there. So they whinge and carry on about energy prices and cost-of-living increases but, every time they have the opportunity to do something about them, they vote against it. So it's not what they say; it's what they actually do that matters. We're putting in place measures which will support Australian households. They're opposing and voting against every single one of those measures.

I think it was the member for Sturt who asked some questions about the growth in Public Service numbers, an important issue. It is important, as every member in this place would understand, that we have a well-staffed, professional, permanent Public Service which is able to provide frank and fearless advice to the government of the day. I see the member for Canberra in the chamber, and this is something that I know she feels very passionate about.

When we came into government, up to a third of the staff of critical agencies were contractors or labour-hire employers. Those opposite say they care about veterans and, whenever they get the opportunity, they have something nice to say about our veterans, and we agree with that. But it's not what you say; it's what you actually do. One-third of the staff of the Department of Veterans' Affairs were labour-hire or contract staff. I'm not talking about low-level staff; it went right up to the SES level. The direct impact of the deliberate staffing policy of the coalition was that millions and millions of dollars worth of claims made by veterans weren't being processed because the department didn't have the staff, particularly the professional staff.

So, when the member for Sturt asked us why we have increased APS numbers and converted outsourced staff and contract staff into permanent APS employees, there's your reason: because it was costing the Australian taxpayer dearly and it was costing people who rely on government services dearly. (Time expired)

See this speech in context