David Hawker (Wannon, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is also to the Prime Minister. I refer the Prime Minister to the loss of 130 jobs at the sawmill in Dartmoor, in my electorate of Wannon. Can the Prime Minister inform the House how many more jobs are due to be lost in my electorate in the next 12 months?

Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I indicated in my answer to the previous question and now indicate also to the member for Wannon, the government were upfront with the Australian people in the budget forecasts when we said that unemployment in the year ahead would rise to 4.75 per cent, because we do not believe in gilding the lily. There are problems out there which are the product of what has occurred in the global economy and there are problems which have occurred here in terms of the legacy that we have inherited from those opposite.

But, rather than simply bleating about it—as those opposite did for a long, long time—we have embarked upon a clear-cut economic strategy for the future. That is based on three principles: responsible economic management, a program of nation building and an agenda for an education revolution to deal with the challenges of education, skills and training. Also, we will not allow those who are finding it tough with cost-of-living pressures at present simply to fend for themselves but instead, through the budget, we will deliver a package of some $55 billion worth of support for working families and, on top of that, $7.5 billion for pensioners and carers.

I say this to the honourable member: there will be great challenges ahead, including for businesses and firms, right across the country. Australia as an economy is not immune from what is happening across the rest of the world. If you look, for example, at the economies of the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy, Japan and elsewhere, you will find either zero or negative growth in one of the quarters which have just preceded the present one and you will find a downwards revision in economic growth across the global economy. This seems to be the subject of considerable mirth on the part of those opposite. I would say to those affected by these global economic factors that this is, in fact, serious news.

The key thing, however—and I draw again the honourable member for Wannon’s attention to this—is having responsible economic management which creates the conditions necessary to enable the Reserve Bank greater flexibility to bring down interest rates; that is principle No. 1. Principle No. 2 is an industrial relations system which is fair and flexible so that those employees who find themselves in real difficulty know they have some basic and underlying protections through the industrial relations system of the country.

The member for Wannon voted for Work Choices—although he may have been Speaker at the time and perhaps he did not. Perhaps he is the single member of those sitting opposite who is exonerated from that responsibility; his party, however, cannot be. But the Work Choices legislation put in by those opposite was quite clear: 31 per cent of those on AWAs had their rest breaks taken away; 49 per cent had their overtime loadings taken away; and 63 per cent had incentive based payments and bonuses removed. But, as I said before, redundancy payments—which is the matter directly relevant to the debate which is being had—when people lost their jobs could be stripped away as an entitlement without any compensation under laws put in place by those opposite. They shake their heads in disbelief as though this were simply not the case.

Frankly, those opposite should hang their heads in shame for creating a set of industrial relations laws for this country which made it so difficult for working people in Australia under Work Choices to get fairness, including under difficult circumstances when the firms for which they worked could no longer continue.

Brett Raguse (Forde, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government. Minister, how is the government pursuing a nation-building agenda and are there any impediments to this strategy?

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Forde for his question and I note his ongoing interest in infrastructure issues, including during a visit I had to his electorate looking at the area of South-East Queensland that is experiencing such extraordinary growth. Infrastructure is important, particularly in our growth regions; but it is important also because of the current economic context which the government faces. We are suffering from some severe economic challenges ahead, not only in terms of the global credit squeeze but also in terms of global increases in petrol prices. That is why infrastructure investment is critical. That is why the government has joined the nation-building agenda along with the private sector—as the Prime Minister has outlined, the private sector that is investing so much in infrastructure, as the capex that was released last week demonstrated.

Twenty-first-century nation building requires responsible economic management and it also requires a plan to deliver world-class infrastructure and to boost productivity. That is why we have put $41 billion into long-term nation-building funds: $20 billion into the Building Australia Fund, $11 billion into education infrastructure and $10 billion into health infrastructure. The $20 billion that has been put aside into the Building Australia Fund will provide for our long-term prosperity in rail, in ports, in roads and in broadband. That is on top of the $26 billion that we have committed to road and rail infrastructure projects, many of which we have brought forward in the budget. We have brought forward projects such as the Townsville port access road in the electorate of Herbert—and I am surprised that there is not some support for that. Certainly, my colleague the member for Dawson, when I visited there recently, was very supportive of the infrastructure agenda there and of potential major infrastructure projects in regional areas, such as at Abbot Point.

What we are doing is sitting down and working with the three sectors of government as well as working with the private sector on infrastructure projects, because the budget strategy was about delivering two things: firstly, putting downward pressure on inflation and interest rates by producing a $22 billion surplus; but, secondly, making sure that we put aside funds into long-term investment opportunities in order to secure our prosperity for the future. We know that when we invest in infrastructure, unlike one-off payments, it is not money that just goes; it is money that comes back. It comes back in the form of increased revenue in the future. It is an investment for the long term—an investment in our productivity.

We know that over the last 40 years productivity growth has accounted for more than 80 per cent of the improvement in Australia’s living standards—more than 80 per cent. But what did we see from those opposite? What we saw from those opposite was an attitude towards infrastructure investment that was, ‘The market will look after it by itself.’ There was no national leadership, no coordination, no work on harmonisation of guidelines, no work on enhancing public-private partnerships and no work on removing the impediments to investment in infrastructure from those opposite.

But of course you cannot put aside the surplus into long-term investment funds if you destroy the surplus. That is what we are seeing in the Senate from those opposite. Those opposite are prepared to rip $6.2 billion out of the surplus—$6.2 billion that will not be available for issues such as easing urban congestion in our cities, $6.2 billion that will not be available to deliver high-speed broadband, $6.2 billion that will not be available to improve public transport in our cities. These are all critical issues.

What Infrastructure Australia will do is produce an infrastructure priority list for the COAG meeting in March next year. Infrastructure Australia will guide investment to where it is needed most—to help parents get out of traffic jams and home to their kids, to get our exports to market without delay, to drive the digital revolution and bring the Australian economy into the 21st century, to make public transport a viable alternative to the car, to help Australia transition to a low-carbon economy and to give families the best possible education and health care. That is the government’s strategy, and it is one being opposed by those opposite, though not with an alternative—just opposition for opposition’s sake. There is no plan from those opposite, no alternative from those opposite—just opposition for opposition’s sake. They are opposing removing a 24-year-old start-up concession and opposing removing a rort that was introduced by them to draw a distinction between alcohol as to whether it is in straight spirits or it is mixed. They are opposed to removing that rort. One has to ask why that rort was introduced.

Our infrastructure record in the past is a proud Labor one. We are proud of our tradition as the nation-building party. That is our past and that is our future. In the budget we laid out how we are preparing the economy for the future, how we are creating the conditions for a decrease in inflation and interest rates and how we are increasing the prospects of our securing prosperity well beyond the mining boom.

Ms Julie Bishop (Curtin, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations. What level of unemployment does the government believe will be required to bring down inflation?

Wilson Tuckey (O'Connor, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You’re pretty good on statistics!

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you very much to the member for O’Connor and thank you very much to the Deputy Leader of the Opposition for her question. It follows some earlier questions to me in past question times about unemployment. As the Prime Minister has explained during the course of this question time, and as I have explained in earlier question times, the budget papers show that the budget parameter, the forecast, is that unemployment will move slightly to 4¾ per cent during the course of this financial year. As the Prime Minister has also made clear—

Ms Julie Bishop (Curtin, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Ms Julie Bishop interjecting

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I do find it quite remarkable that the Deputy Leader of the Opposition—indeed any member of the opposition—who supported Work Choices in this parliament would feign concern when workers lose their jobs.

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Get into trouble, break glass! That’s what you do.

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You are responsible for Work Choices.

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Why don’t you just answer the question?

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am answering the question.

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Hockey interjecting

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I know you don’t like your record being exposed, Joe, and your responsibility for Work Choices.

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The Deputy Prime Minister and the Manager of Opposition Business!

Ms Julie Bishop (Curtin, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. It was a very specific question: what level of unemployment does the government believe will be required to bring down inflation? If the Deputy Prime Minister cannot answer the question, she should—

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The Deputy Leader of the Opposition will resume her seat. The deputy leader has put her point of order. The Deputy Prime Minister will respond to the question. I will listen carefully.

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. Can I just say to members opposite: it does strike me as remarkable that they would feign concern about workers losing their jobs, when they presided over the introduction—

Ms Julie Bishop (Curtin, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I raise a point of order on relevance. The minister obviously has no idea. I ask her—

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Deputy Leader of the Opposition will resume her seat. She has made her point of order.

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If I could finish my sentence: I know that the members opposite do not like to be reminded of their history of industrial relations extremism. The reason they do not like to be reminded of it is that they are still in the arms of industrial relations extremism and, if they ever had an opportunity to sit back over in the government benches in this parliament, we would not just see Work Choices back; we would see something worse back—

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Those on my left will cease interjecting!

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

because the Deputy Leader of the Opposition has made it abundantly clear that she believes in something—

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The Deputy Prime Minister will resume her seat. Has the Deputy Prime Minister concluded?

Wilson Tuckey (O'Connor, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, on a point of order: people at risk of losing their jobs are entitled to know how many the government is going to sack.

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for O’Connor will resume his seat. The invitation for a point of order is not an invitation to debate, and the member for O’Connor knows that full well. He should know it full well.

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Obviously, the members opposite do not like to be reminded of Work Choices and the fact that redundancy entitlements could be ripped off without the payment of a cent of compensation. I see that the member for Menzies, from the back, is still defending Work Choices, whilst the frontbench here actually believes in something worse now.

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Deputy Prime Minister will return to the question.

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On the question of current macroeconomic conditions—

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Those on my left will cease interjecting. The Deputy Prime Minister will resume her seat. Those on my left, cease interjecting. The Deputy Prime Minister will answer the question.

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I am looking forward to the opportunity to answer it.

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Those on my left are not assisting.

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On the question of where we are with the Australian economy and how that pertains to unemployment and inflation, it is clear and has been made clear by the Prime Minister and the Treasurer. Obviously, the Australian economy is not immune from global economic circumstances. They are feeding in domestically. They are certainly feeding in in terms of a slowdown in the economy. Secondly, of course, the economy is bearing the burden of 10 consecutive interest rate rises under the previous government.

Ms Julie Bishop (Curtin, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, on a point of order: you directed her to answer the question. If the minister cannot answer the question, she should sit—

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Deputy Leader of the Opposition will resume her seat! Again I repeat that the call for a point of order is not an invitation to enter into debate. The Deputy Prime Minister will conclude her answer.

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I was asked about unemployment and inflation, and I am answering that question. Of course, the economy is showing the consequences of the 10 interest rate increases in a row that happened under the previous government. What this government is doing is putting downwards pressure on inflation through its budget settings. What we are also doing and what I know offends each and every member opposite is that we are ensuring that people have the benefit of fair and balanced industrial relations. We know that the introduction of the transition act that stopped the making of AWAs hurt members opposite because they supported Work Choices. We will give them an opportunity to show what they stand for at the end of this year, and I predict it will—

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Deputy Prime Minister will resume her seat. Has the Deputy Prime Minister finished?

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, I have.