Mike Symon (Deakin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Continuing on from where I left off yesterday, the subject that I was up to in my speech was Springvale Road, a project very dear to my heart. My concern, as noted yesterday, was that there had actually been in an attempt in the House to put amendments up that would have taken funding away from this very important project. This road is something that has been a source of great concern and great congestion in my electorate for years.

As I mentioned yesterday, during the division on the Nation Building Program (National Land Transport) Amendment Bill 2009, we saw the National Party put up amendments that would have taken funding away from the Springvale Road underpass. And they were supported by the Liberal Party. Fortunately for my electorate, those amendments were defeated in the House. But it is laying it on a bit thick for them to have campaigned on this issue for so many years and gone to elections promising that they are going to do it and then in the House turn around and vote against the funding when it finally appears. That is amazing.

The Springvale Road grade separation is not the only road work that the Rudd government is contributing to in Deakin, however. The government is also contributing $1.9 million to Maroondah City Council and $2.09 million to Whitehorse council over the coming five years for local roads funding. That is an 11 per cent increase over what was there previously, a great improvement. These construction works will provide not just important improvements to local roads but will be ongoing sources of employment in our local area.

In particular, I note the $396,000 in Black Spot Program funding for the notorious Dublin Road and Railway Avenue intersection. There have been many accidents there over the years due to the lack of visibility when driving out from Railway Avenue onto Dublin Road. It is so close to the railway line that there is always the potential for something really bad to happen at that intersection. I have often met with constituents of mine who use this intersection. They always tell me about the need for traffic signals. It is a longstanding issue. This funding will provide for new traffic signals, pedestrian crossings and line markings, boosting safety not just for pedestrians and commuters but also for motorists—and even the ducks that sometimes cross the road to go the lake.

The provision of this funding is a tribute to the hardworking local community members like Vivienne Bolitho and Lyn Donald, who have worked for years to see the intersection made safe for all. Their hard work and efforts in gathering some 1,400 signatures have paid off, with a $396,000 investment being made in local traffic safety. I congratulate Vivienne and Lyn and everyone else involved in campaigning for this funding over such a long period of time.

The Rudd Labor government is also investing in our vital community facilities, providing local jobs that help boost our economy and leave valuable and much needed infrastructure for the next generation at the same time. I am especially proud of this government’s $2.9 million commitment to Ringwood’s Jubilee Park. Added to contributions from the Victorian government and Maroondah City Council, the soccer arena will be completely refurbished in a $3.55 million redevelopment. What we have there now is a building that is on its last legs. It was built in 1962 and it certainly looks like it has never been touched. If left much longer, it would certainly hit the ground by itself. This funding will pay for the demolition of the old building and then the building of a state-of-the-art facility that will boast new change rooms with disabled access, a boxing gymnasium, terraced sporting areas, pole lighting for the field and administrative areas for regional sporting organisations, as well as modern environmental measures such as solar power, water tanks and recycled water systems. The ground will be done up with a synthetic pitch. In summer it is brown and dead. In winter it is patchy and lumpy. It is not always an attractive playing surface, by any means.

When this project is completed we will have a state-of-the-art facility in Ringwood. The popularity of soccer continues to grow, especially junior soccer and women’s and girls’ soccer, and that is a great thing to see. This is a case of government doing it once and doing it right, working closely with the local council to ensure that the facility meets a range of needs, not just those of the soccer club. It provides a visionary facility for the coming generation and not a patch-up job of something old that may only last the next five years. I know that this facility will be a boon for the local Ringwood City Soccer Club and I am sure that it will increase the usability and use of their facility. The redevelopment of this facility will also become a home for the MVC Boxing Association, a group I know the state member for Eastern Metropolitan, Shaun Leane, has worked very closely with. This is fantastic news for their club.

Then there is the $2.3 million Wembley Park redevelopment in Box Hill South, which is the adjoining electorate to my electorate of Deakin. It is a ground that is used by constituents of both electorates and is also in a similar state. It has not been maintained as well as it should have been over the years and the fact is it is just old. So local soccer in my area is growing in popularity and will grow even more with this investment in community infrastructure.

Moving on, I would like to note especially this government’s commitment to social housing. For too long policy action by federal governments in this important area was left in the too-hard basket. This government has recognised what needs to be done to assist those that need a hand and that the social housing stock of this nation needs a boost. Members of the House, I am sure, would be aware of the Rudd government’s $6.4 billion investment in creating 20,000 social housing homes across the nation. This is a magnificent commitment and one that I want to make clear my support for.

Recently I was pleased to host the Minister for Housing and Women’s Affairs in my electorate to see first-hand the work being carried out to improve social housing dwellings in my area. Some 66 homes will receive upgrades and maintenance, totalling $410,000. Some of these homes were built 19, 20 or more years ago and really had received no maintenance whatsoever in that entire time. They have actually been made into very nice, livable places that have not got rotting gutters or paint peeling off the walls. They are attractive, and so they should be so that people can live decent lives in them.

Sixty-six properties may seem quite insignificant in the national scheme of things, but of course locally they all add up. Even better, that is just the first round of funding and the first round of houses put up under this program. It is not just refurbs and refits of these houses; there are also new social housing dwellings getting built in electorates right across Australia. I commend the government’s efforts in this area and I look forward to more good news on the social housing front after years of neglect.

As someone with a background and personal interest in information technology, I want to take this opportunity to remark upon the government’s National Broadband Network. This $43 million superfast network featuring fibre-to-the-home coverage is one of the greatest national infrastructure projects ever undertaken. Apart from bringing Australia’s information networks into the 21st century after years of neglect and a complete lack of foresight by the previous government, the network will be a boon for businesses of all shapes and sizes.

It will also be a great thing for homeowners. Having access to real broadband fibre to the home will open up possibilities that simply are not there now even if you do have a fast ADSL connection. It certainly means that more people will be able to work or do business from home. That can also be a very good thing for people who may not have to go into the office, but at the moment do because their communications are simply not up to scratch.

I recently received an email from the proprietor of an accounting business that is close to my electorate office. He wrote:

I would like to applaud the announcement of yesterday regarding the National Broadband Network—

and he went on to say—

This must be the first time in years and years that a government has done something worthwhile.

I would like to think that this government has done a lot of worthwhile things—the removal of Work Choices and Building the Education Revolution just for starters, and I could go on with a list all day. My local accountant supports the government’s action on broadband because he sees the benefits that will come to his business. Maybe it means he will get to spend more time at home rather than commuting to work when he really only has to do a desk job most of the time. The National Broadband Network is a visionary step forward in communications technology. I certainly commend the Rudd government for taking this bold step.

A number of local small business owners that I have met with in past months have also indicated their support for another government initiative—the now 50 per cent tax break for small business. In fact, they are very happy with it. The questions they ask are: how soon can we get it? Why is it finishing so quickly? Of course, the explanation is that it is about bringing forward demand, and it is certainly working. This measure supports local businesses, improving cash flows and then in turn, hopefully, allowing some small businesses to keep staff on during the global recession.

This measure, along with the reduction in pay-as-you-go tax that will benefit 1.5 million small businesses in Australia, and the doubling of incentives to invest in research and development through the research and development tax credit are acts of a government that is actively assisting the small business sector of the economy that supports jobs. This government, unlike the last, has steadily turned an eye to the future and is investing heavily in innovation, research and development.

The government will dedicate $3.1 billion over the next four years, focusing on university level research, the sciences, business innovation and infrastructure. This investment will raise the government’s investment in science and innovation to $8.6 billion in 2009-10. I was particularly pleased to see that this budget provides a $51 million increase to the Australian Postgraduate Award stipend. That is a rise of 10 per cent a year in 2010.

Along with $51.6 million from 2012 to replace the inadequate indexation arrangements that currently exist for research block grants to an index that recognises better the cost pressures on Australian universities, there are many other measures in this budget that will support jobs in high-tech industries. That is a total of $3.1 billion invested in public and private sector research over the next four years. The Super Science programs will enhance our nation’s research and technological development in the areas of astronomy, climate studies and future tech and, importantly, in bringing through our next generation of scientists, with $27.2 million for 100 new Super Science Fellowships.

I have mentioned briefly the simplified research and development tax credit, which will replace the R&D tax concession and open up access to an estimated $1.4 billion a year for businesses looking for ways to innovate and improve. I am proud to be part of the government that has showed a renewed appetite for both science and innovation.

All members of this House will be keenly aware of the Rudd government’s $14.7 billion commitment to Building the Education Revolution. As a government, we have backed up our words on education with a once-in-a-generation—some have told me a once-in-a-lifetime—investment in our school system. The building works have already begun at some schools, supporting jobs in the local area.

Over the past four months I have worked closely with school principals across my electorate on their applications for funding under the Primary Schools for the 21st Century, the National School Pride Program and the science and language learning centres program. I commend the efforts of the principals in conjunction with the school councils and parent associations for advocating for what it is that their school needs and for their great interest in the programs. My local schools are brimming with community-minded people who, by and large, are dedicated to providing better outcomes for the students in their care.

Recently, round 2 of the National School Pride Program was announced, bringing our total commitment to Deakin schools under this program to $8.925 million across the 39 schools in my electorate. I know that this funding will go a long way in ensuring that local schools can address their maintenance needs and enhance their facilities. What is the flow-on effect of all this construction work? It is jobs. It is not just jobs in the construction industry; it is jobs for all of the industries that operate alongside the construction industry. Suppliers, engineers, architects and even local lunch shops will benefit from this. It is a great thing for our local area.

As part of round 1 of the Primary Schools for the 21st Century program in Deakin, Blackburn Primary School received $3 million; Burwood Heights Primary School received $2.5 million from the federal government, along with another $2.5 million from the Victorian government; Burwood East Primary School received $2 million; and St Luke the Evangelist Primary School received $2 million for new constructions.

I am proud to be part of a government that has set the wheels in motion for the introduction of paid parental leave. From 1 January 2011, the primary carer of a newborn or adopted child will be able to access 18 weeks paid parental leave. This leave will be paid at the level of the federal minimum wage, and parents can combine paid parental leave with existing employer provided paid leave. Approximately 148,000 new parents will be eligible for the paid leave each year. Remember that, aside from the US, Australia was the only OECD country that did not have a paid parental leave system.

Over the past year many pensioners have told me that they felt like they were left behind after the good economic times over the previous decade. Especially, their pension has not kept pace with the rises in living costs. This is especially the case for those pensioners who rent and who have laid down their roots over many years in an area, only to move because of rising rents. This government has listened and will introduce a weekly $32.49 increase in the single pension and a $10.14 per week increase in the couple pension. This will benefit approximately 19,200 pensioners in my electorate of Deakin.

This government has got it right after years of mean penny pinching during the years of plenty under the coalition. I commend the bills to the House.

Paul Neville (Hinkler, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In speaking about the Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2009-2010 and Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 2009-2010 I am reminded of the Labor Party branding itself ‘economically conservative’. It is akin to that famous line, ‘You can put lipstick on a pig but it is still a pig.’ If we want to stay in that idiom, if ever the public has been sold a pig in a poke—lipsticked or not—we were sold one on the night of 12 May, when the government handed down its budget.

Labor’s short-sightedness and irresponsible approach to spending has saddled future generations with crippling debt. Every Australian family is going to pay dearly for many years to come. Somehow in the space of 18 months the Rudd government has frittered away what was the strongest economy in the Western world. The surplus of more than $20 billion has now turned out to be a deficit of $58 billion—all that within a year—and unemployment is on the rise, predicted to go to 8½ per cent. In the not-too-distant future we will have one million Australians out of work—an absolute indictment of the party that prides itself as apparently standing up for the workers.

Under the former coalition government there were more workers than ever before, so much so that we had to import workers. Those people who were workers got to enjoy the benefits of their labours, with affordable private health insurance, superannuation co-contribution payments—partly axed in this recent budget—high wages and a government which put away billions of dollars for the future for education, communications and the superannuation of Australian public servants. Now they face the prospect of unemployment, a weakening small business sector, fewer services, massive debt and debt’s inevitable consequence—and we should never forget this one—higher taxes.

Of course, the Labor government says every single economic decision has been framed by the global financial crisis. Labor is busy telling Australians, ‘Don’t worry about what we are doing in the domestic economy, because we are far and away better off than any other nation.’ That line starts to wear a bit thin when a debt-ridden Labor government starts accusing the opposition of talking down the economy. Nothing could be further from the truth. Holding a government to account for its decisions and the decade-long ramifications of those decisions is what a robust opposition is all about. This business at door stops and saying in the parliament, ‘What would you do?’—it has never been the responsibility of oppositions: governments are elected to govern. They have control of the portfolios, the public service and they have the levers of the Treasury. It is for them to frame a budget, line by line. It is the role of the opposition to criticise it—not to write an alternative budget.

I also suspect that the financial crisis will end up being the biggest get-out-of-jail-free card that Labor could ever possibly have. That is exactly what this new government is counting on. The shadow Treasurer has pointed out that, while the global recession is the most severe economic downturn since the 1930s, it does not logically follow that it is the worst economic downturn for Australia since the 1930s. We should not be subsumed into that sort of dizzy thinking. The government is simply trying to paint a bleaker picture to try and camouflage its own incompetence.

In the year 2012-13, we can look forward to net public debt of $188 billion, which is double that at the previous Paul Keating peak, and a sum which will rack up about $8 billion of interest a year, even at the current low interest rates. Worse still, Australians are looking down the barrel of an ultimate peak of about $300 billion. Labor’s love affair with debt is a love that dare not speak its name, given that the Prime Minister’s reluctance to utter the phrase ‘$300 billion worth of debt’ carried on for nearly two weeks. With $9,000 of debt for every man, woman and child in Australia, and including those in my electorate of Hinkler, my constituents are now carrying a burden of about $1 billion. That cuts right across the electorate: for example, that breaks down to $436 million for Bundaberg, $496 million for Hervey Bay and $60 million for the Isis shire. The debt cannot be paid off in the short term. It is a burden that will be carried by children and even grandchildren. Having to repay debt along with interest means there will be less revenue to spend on hospitals, schools, roads and the environment. Australians are right to question the government’s competency when it comes to handling our economy.

The government got us into the current mess, but even more concerning is its ability—or lack of ability—to get us out of it. Just last week, the Prime Minister told Australians that he had a plan to pay off the net debt—a sum of $203 billion—by 2022, but this plan hinges on economic modelling which shows above trend growth for six consecutive years followed by trend growth for another six years. This is absolute fantasy. It relies on an unprecedented 12 years of uninterrupted growth or growth well above historical trends. To meet this aspirational target, the government will have to deliver budget surpluses of more than $25 billion a year for at least eight consecutive years. Given that the surpluses have met or exceeded two per cent of GDP on only three occasions in the last 40 years—that is, 1970, 1971 and 2000—what is the likelihood of that dream ever happening? Pretty much none.

The government’s decision to means test the private health insurance rebate is another example of short-sightedness when it comes to looking after the health needs of Australians. In fact, I have six different quotes, some as recently as February this year and February the previous year, from the Minister for Health and Ageing that say, ‘We will not be altering the private health insurance rebate.’ But the government has done that. The Prime Minister said, ‘The buck stops with me,’ yet within 18 months the pledge is broken. More than 9½ million Australians hold private health insurance, contributing more than $10.6 billion to our healthcare system last year and freeing up much needed space in the public hospital system. Now the government wants to slash rebates, forcing people to either leave the system or pay even more for their health coverage. It is estimated that by the end of next year more than one million Australians will have dropped out of private health insurance or reduced the level of coverage while premiums themselves will probably go up by about 10 per cent each year.

That is going to take extra dollars from the pockets of local families who have striven to pay their own health fees. I am sure that Australians will languish on public hospital waiting lists because the flood of people leaving the private health system will exacerbate the public health system. In my own electorate of Hinkler, 51,000 people are covered by health insurance and each and every one of them will be affected by the government’s decision. The health minister’s recent statement that there has been significant development and positive signs of improvements in public hospitals concerns me. I do not know what fantasy land she lives in. If we were to follow her line of thinking, we would be right in assuming that all is well with our public hospitals and that people who are forced out of private health insurance because of Labor’s means testing will easily be accommodated in the public system. For a start, just have a look at the public hospitals of New South Wales. Week after week in the Sydney newspapers we read about one regional health council after another not being able to pay its bills, not even being able to pay its food bills much less its medical expenses, and doctors bringing their own swabs and bandages from their surgeries to the hospitals. This is just Third World stuff.

Mr Deputy Speaker, let me take you to Queensland where I live. As recently as March, the AMA reported that the Queensland health system was still plagued by ongoing problems such as severe shortages of acute emergency and overnight hospital beds, staff shortages, high bed occupancy and declines in the standard of basic workplace facilities. The performance report of Queensland public hospitals for the December quarter of 2008 showed that more than 7,000 people were languishing on surgery waiting lists and that 259 category 1 patients were waiting longer than 30 days for their surgery. This is the system that the Rudd government promised to fix at the last election—that all the interstate rivalries and troubles would be torn down and all of a sudden these hospitals would all come good. How on earth will the public system cope when one million people alone will flood onto it from the private health insurance field?

Another abominable budget announcement, one which will scupper the higher education hopes of thousands of young Australians, is lifting the work requirements to acquire the independent rate of the youth allowance. This is a dramatic and an unfair change which will affect an estimated 30,000 students around Australia. Most members will have been contacted by parents or students who are very concerned about this policy. In fact, it is not even going to be grandfathered for its first year of introduction. Many young people strive to get to a university of their own choice and these new requirements will force them either to put work before study or to put a massive financial burden on their families to subside these studies. Let us face it: kids from the regions do not often have the option of staying on the cheap with the family while they pursue their studies from home. This policy change is going to make their lives—and I am speaking mainly of kids in regional and country areas—and the lives of their parents very difficult indeed.

Currently, students are able to qualify for the independent rate by earning $19,532 per year or more during a gap year. For the next year onwards, students are going to have to work for 30 hours a week for at least 18 months in the preceding two years to qualify for the independent youth allowance. What a nonsense that is, Mr Deputy Speaker. Have you ever heard anything quite so nonsensical? A student is going to have to take 80 per cent of a full-time workload. Do you really seriously think that someone doing that is going to be able to study? To get that 30 hours on an ongoing basis over 18 months is just not going to happen. You would be flat out doing this in the capital cities, but you would have no chance in the regional areas, and you would have even have less chance in a country town. Even assuming you could do that, why would you pick 18 months? Eighteen months stuffs up another year of study because most universities—not all—do not encourage start-ups in the middle of an academic year.

In many universities that will effectively mean a two-year gap. And we all know what happens after a two-year gap: it is harder to get back to study after two years than it is after one. It is hard to get back to study if you are working. It is hard to get back to study if you have bought a car and you are paying it off. So it goes on. I think we will have massive dropouts at a time when this country, and the government itself, are crying out for better academic futures for students. The great education revolution! I ask the members opposite from the government: how does this mesh up with the education revolution? Pray tell, because I cannot see it. From a practical outlook, anyone working at least 30 hours a week and studying is clearly not putting their studies first, and I have said that quite clearly.

The other thing I want to talk about is roads. Roads are very important in my electorate. I have put a lot of time into roads and I was very successful with the last government, but I really find great problems with the new government. The Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government yesterday tabled something in the House that absolutely staggered me. Out of what used to be the R2R strategic fund the government has now got this Orwellian concept of the Nation Building Program off-network fund. It is the same fund—for this year anyhow. So out of that $655 million, $540 million is going straight to Labor electorates. You might say that that is just the luck of the draw, but wait a minute. These are not going to be put up to Infrastructure Australia for pre assessment; there is none of that. When asked at estimates what the basis of assessment was for handing out these grants, the government could not say. This is the same government who, in this same House this week, criticised the previous government for having a few dodgy projects under the ACCs Regional Partnerships program. There were only a handful of them when it really came down to it but in this case it is hundreds of millions of dollars that is just being handed out willy-nilly without any pre assessment, without any justification in estimates and without any reference to Infrastructure Australia.

There is another thing that troubles me. I have pushed the idea of extending the Black Spot Program because it is the one that goes into regional, rural and country roads, not the arterial roads. It finds dangerous areas such as badly banked roads, culverts and places where people slip off the road—all those sorts of things that you cannot get round to fixing in one go. It is about going in and taking the hot spots—called the black spots—out. It is a great program. When I heard the government was going to extend it, I was prepared to really congratulate them. But there was a catch. What they are going to do is allow it to be spent on the national highways. That is crazy because the national highways have their own program. It is already a Commonwealth responsibility and it already has its own maintenance program. So the government creates this idea that it is going to provide a great Black Spot Program and then it says it is going to take that much of it and put it on to national highway roads. That is just a spin. That is just a cost-shift on the books that does nothing extra for black spots.

I have a lot of roads in my electorate that I want to see done. I want to see one called The Old Toogoom Road completed. Hervey Bay, which is very similar to the Gold Coast—a long thin city—needs another artery right through the middle; one from Urraween Road through to Boundary Road. I want that done and I want River Heads Road done. They are the sort of projects that the R2R strategic program was meant to cover. What we have actually had under this is money that was dedicated to those sort of regional situations—$540 million of it—picked up and thrown in to election promises in Labor electorates. It is just absolutely outrageous.

Pensioners are always a big worry to me, and pensioners did receive an increase in single pensions—and I applaud that. That was long awaited and it is something that I fought for in my own party for years. But to give pensioner couples $5 per week each is an absolute insult. I recognise the need for having the gap between the single pensioner and the pensioner couple closed up a bit. It was well recognised that that gap had to be filled. But surely to heaven you could have given them 15 bucks each—30 bucks for the couple. That still would have very heavily favoured the single pensioner. But no, that has not happened.

Pensioners do have a tough time of it, and to say that the opposition never did anything for pensioners when we were in office is quite wrong. We brought in a range of things including a utilities allowance. We also brought pensions onto the MTAWE, which the previous government had not done. By the time we went out of power that meant about $45 a fortnight more to pensioners than would have been the case if we had stayed on the Keating formula. It is pretty obvious that I did not particularly like this budget, nor do I think that my electorate will like it. I commend the government on those things that they did do, like looking after the single pensioners, but there were precious few of those moves.

Jill Hall (Shortland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Unlike the previous speaker, I thought this was a very good budget. This will be my 11th budget speech since I have been in this parliament and I would have to say that this year’s budget was one of the most pleasing budgets to me. I stood up in this House for the first nine years I made budget speeches and was unable to find any single line item that actually related to my electorate. Some of the bigger line items applied to people throughout Australia but for people in Shortland electorate—items that were Shortland electorate specific—there was nothing.

One thing that I think is so good about this budget—no matter whether you are a member of this parliament representing a government electorate or someone representing an opposition electorate—is that you will be able to look at the budget and find line items that actually relate to your electorate. The benefits in this budget do flow across electorates. It is not a matter of pork-barrelling and putting everything into Labor electorates. In fact over 50 per cent of the infrastructure funding has gone to coalition seats, which is very different from what happened in the past.

This budget was not an easy budget to formulate. It was a difficult budget because these are difficult times. I do not think that since the Great Depression has a government been confronted by such economic circumstances as the Rudd government faced in the lead-up to this budget with the global financial crisis and the virtual collapse of money markets throughout the world. If you look at the UK, the USA and Europe, you can see the turmoil.

Then you look at Australia and you see that the actions taken here have put Australia in a very good position. We are handling this global financial crisis better than any other country in the world. You could be forgiven for listening to speakers in the opposition and thinking that the stimulus packages and all the initiatives that the Rudd government has taken were taken totally in isolation, that Australia was not only an island, as we are, but an island that has no connection to any other country in the world and that everything that happens in Australia happens in isolation.

That is not the case. What happens in Australia is related to what happens everywhere in the world. The economy of Australia is part of a global economy and it is integrated into the economies of other countries. Because of that, and because of the challenges of the global economic conditions, formulating this budget had to be approached very carefully. On one hand, you had declining income. The resource boom was tapering off and the economy was slowing down. As the mining boom unwound, revenue has been hit and unemployment has risen. That did not happen because there was a Rudd government here in Australia; that happened because we are connected to the rest of the world. It happened to a lesser extent in Australia and I would argue very strongly that that is because of the steps that were taken at the end of last year with the first stimulus package and with the second stimulus package in February.

Within my electorate, the people understand that there is a difference and that we are in difficult times. They appreciate the fact that they have a government that is prepared to make some really hard decisions and that at the same time is investing in the future. The previous government failed to do that. It had great economic times. Everything was booming. But we had a chronic skills shortage in this country. Time and time again I stood up in the parliament calling on the government to do something about the skills shortage. But nothing happened. Now we are in difficult times. Our infrastructure and employment programs are designed not only to meet the economic circumstances of the current time but also to prepare Australia for the future.

As a nation, we will come out of this global financial crisis and out of this downturn in a very strong position. That will be because of the initiatives and the hard and smart decisions that have been taken not only in this budget but through the previous stimulus packages. It is interesting to note that Standard and Poor’s have reaffirmed Australia’s AAA rating. Once again, that says that our economy is strong. Australia has the confidence of Standard and Poor’s and is thought of as being a very strong economy.

I would now like to talk a about the benefits of this budget to my electorate. In 1997, the then Liberal government made a decision to close the Medicare office in Belmont. This Medicare office was one of the busiest Medicare offices in the Hunter and the Central Coast. But it was in a Labor held electorate, so the decision was made to close that office. There was no thought given to the fact that people living in the electorate tended to have lower incomes and were very elderly. The electorate of Shortland has the 10th oldest constituency in the country. To actually obtain their refunds from Medicare and access all the other services from Medicare, pensioners had to travel some distance. Quite a few of those pensioners did not even have their drivers licences and others had restricted licences which prevented them travelling to Charlestown, which would be the Medicare office that they would visit, or to Lake Haven, which is some half-an-hour down the Central Coast. So there was this bloody-minded decision to close that Medicare office because it was in a Labor held electorate.

The staff of the adjacent Medicare office identified that the single biggest issue facing Medicare in the region was the need to reopen that Belmont Medicare office. Year after year, I came to Canberra begging the previous government to have some compassion and to reopen the Medicare office. There were 20,000 signatures submitted to the then Howard government begging—yes, begging—it to reopen that Medicare office, but my words and the words of 20,000 people in Shortland electorate fell on deaf ears. I have been to every election since I have been standing as a member in this parliament saying that a Labor government would reopen the Belmont Medicare office. And guess what—it is happening. In this year’s budget, the money has been allocated to reopen the Belmont Medicare office, and it is probably the most popular announcement that has ever been made in my electorate.

We also gave a commitment to finish off the Fernleigh Track. That was included in last year’s budget. This year’s budget has allocated $35 million to the Hunter Medical Research Institute. It is a fine research institution doing cutting-edge research. It is thought of very highly within the Hunter region. This will allow for a state-of-the-art facility to be built to house the HMRI. The first time I visited HMRI was quite some time ago and it was operating out of a little back room at the back of the university. The institute now operates out of the John Hunter Hospital. The research that it has undertaken has received worldwide recognition. That was really great news in this budget.

This budget also allocated $1.5 billion for the extension of the F3 freeway, which is quite a significant amount of money. The residents of the Hunter have been agitating for a very long time to have that extension. The previous government always talked about it and always talked about undertaking plans. The member for Paterson was a great advocate for this extension, but unfortunately he was unable to secure the money. In this year’s budget, the money was allocated, and that is going to be of great economic advantage to the Hunter region.

I would have to say that in the Shortland electorate, given even those two big allocations of money, the single most popular announcement in this budget was the reopening of the Belmont Medicare office. I thank the Treasurer and the Prime Minister for delivering on that commitment that we made in the lead-up to the last election. It is a commitment that the people of Shortland will never forget. They will never forget the fact that their Medicare office was taken away from them and it was the Rudd government that gave it back to them.

That makes this budget so important to me, apart from all the other very important allocations of money that are included in it, such as investment in nation building with the infrastructure fund: the $4.6 billion for road networks and the $3.4 billion for upgrading highways. In question time today the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government was talking about the Pacific Highway at Cowper. I grew up in Cowper. My mother and my sister live in Cowper. I know how important the upgrade of the Pacific Highway around Kempsey and those areas is to people living in that region.

There is $3.2 billion for public hospital infrastructure. There is $1.5 billion for new solar technology. That is a very significant budget item, particularly given that we will be debating the CPRS in parliament this week. The National Broadband Network will put Australia in a very competitive position. It will enable us to access the high-speed broadband that we need to be an important player on the global scene. There is $389 million to expand infrastructure, and the port is very important in the Hunter region. There is also the school infrastructure package.

As I mentioned earlier, in the past I always found it difficult to find any budget items that referred to the Shortland electorate. With the funding in this budget for the stimulus package we have received $28,745,000. That is a lot of money. There are 720 projects. In 49 schools there are 64 projects. In the first round of funding there were 38 schools and 48 projects and in the second round there were 11 schools and 11 projects.

Seventeen social housing units in Shortland have been approved, to the value of $4.3 million. Construction will start this year. Six hundred and thirty-one social housing units will undergo repair and maintenance. That is very important. Basically 100 per cent of housing in Windale, a suburb in the Shortland electorate, is by the Department of Housing. The people living in that area will now be able to have much-needed repairs done to their houses. That will be greatly appreciated.

There is $1½ million for the Black Spot Program and nearly $4 million for the Community Infrastructure Program. These programs are all so important to the people I represent in this parliament. They can see that they are considered as being important enough to have projects funded in their area. They no longer feel that, because they are in a Labor area and there is a coalition government, they are being ignored. I am really hopeful that people in coalition electorates also note that we are not ignoring them either. It is not pork-barrelling and just spending money in Labor electorates; it is about spending money where it is needed across the whole of Australia. A person should be able to expect that, regardless of whether they are in a Labor electorate or a coalition electorate, their needs will be taken care of.

I will quickly mention the increase for pensioners. As I have mentioned, there are many older people in the Shortland electorate. The benefit for single pensioners is much greater, with the budget taking it up to two-thirds of the couple rate, level-pegging it with countries throughout the world. The budget also provides a smaller increase to couple pensioners. It also streamlines the way bonuses and allowances are paid. They will be paid fortnightly, which I think is a better way for people to be able to plan and to access their money.

Finally, I would like to touch on what this budget delivers to small business, because small business is so important to the Australian economy. The small business tax break has been very, very widely accepted and appreciated within my electorate. It was only last week that I had a small business person come in to my electorate office and say it was one of the best decisions they have seen any government make. They are also very pleased with the research and development tax credit. I could talk at some length about the benefits to small business that are in this budget, but I will just say that this government recognises the vital role that small business plays in our economy and that is why we have directed so many budget initiatives towards them. I commend this budget to the House.

Chris Pearce (Aston, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Financial Services, Superannuation and Corporate Law) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise tonight to make some comments in relation to Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2009-2010 and cognate bills that are before the parliament which of course encompass the budget for this year. The first area that I would like to go to is the area of deficit. It is interesting to look at this budget and understand how this Labor government has actually plunged our country into such horrific deficit and debt. It is incredible that we are even talking about a deficit, because just 18 months ago, when Kevin Rudd became Prime Minister of Australia, this nation was in a very healthy surplus position. Now, of course, we find ourselves in a difficult deficit situation, with a huge debt added.

When you look at the budget, you see the deficits projected. We have a $42 billion deficit projected for this year. That alone is a $50 billion turnaround in one year. We have a $58 billion deficit projected for 2009-10; a $57 billion deficit, for 2010-11; a $45 billion deficit, for 2011-12; and a $28 billion deficit, for 2012-13. All of those add up to a massive $220 billion deficit from this budget. On top of that—as if that is not already enough—what it represents is the fact that this government will end up being the biggest spending government since World War II. This government will actually end up being the biggest spending government that Australians have seen since World War II.

According to the budget, the government will reach a spending level of 29 per cent of GDP. That is alarming in itself. Even more alarming, it is my onerous duty to inform the parliament tonight, is the fact that at 29 per cent of GDP that will make this government’s spending worse that that of the Keating government, if you can believe that. But, more worryingly, it will make their spending even worse than that of the Whitlam government.

Andrew Laming (Bowman, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Incredible.

Chris Pearce (Aston, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Financial Services, Superannuation and Corporate Law) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Worse than the Whitlam government. By anybody’s objective measure, Australians would say that the Whitlam government would have to have been the worst government this country has ever had. But fancy being able to say to people, ‘We’re going to be a bigger spending government than the Whitlam government.’ It goes without saying that a government wearing such a badge is deeply troubling to all Australians.

Of course the essential issue behind deficits is that deficits equal public debt. We are heading for what will end up being a record in public debt. This government, since it has been elected—and bear in mind that it was elected in November 2007, so 18 months ago—has increased its own spending through its own programs by $124 billion. That is a big number in itself, but I think it is always instructive to break it down. When you do, you see that that is an average of around $225 million of new spending per day. I think that is a staggering amount of money. I am confident in saying I am sure that the member for Dobell, who has just come into the Main Committee, would not be able to spend $225 million a day.

A division having been called in the House of Representatives—

If you break that down even further, that represents around $10 million an hour in new spending for every hour since the Rudd government was elected—an extraordinary level of spending.

As I said in the parliament just a few weeks ago, I think it is instructive to look back and see what people have said about spending in the past. I think it is always instructive, particularly, to have a look at what the Treasurer has said about government spending in the past. You see, in this year’s budget this government is spending record amounts of money. In and around last year’s budget, Treasurer Swan had quite a bit to say about government spending. As a matter of fact, in the AM program on 5 May he said:

… we are going to wind back the excessive increase in government spending that’s occurred in recent years …

This is from what is now the largest spending Treasurer in Australia’s history. He also said:

But the previous government went on a spending spree …

This is from the largest spending Treasurer in Commonwealth history. Last year he was saying that we, the previous government, went on a spending spree. It falls to this government, the Rudd government, to rein in spending. This is from Wayne Swan, Australia’s biggest spending Treasurer, the Treasurer that has put Australia in more debt than we have ever known before in our absolute history. What an amazing thing for him to say. I think the best quote of all was at a doorstop interview on 10 May 2008. This is what the Treasurer said:

What you will see on budget night is a new era of fiscal discipline …

A new era all right! We have an era of absolute spend, spend, spend which will drive not just us into debt but our children and their children’s children into debt. This will be a millstone around the neck of this country for decades and decades to come. Deficits are one thing and debt is another. The total debt that is projected from a net perspective will accumulate to $188 billion by 2012. As you would know, Mr Deputy Speaker, with debt comes a thing called interest. Interest payments alone are going to cost the taxpayers of Australia at least $8 billion a year. When you look at that interest payment, it is interesting to understand what that represents. The shadow Treasurer, the member for North Sydney, articulated this very well in a recent speech:

To put that ongoing interest bill into perspective: it is about twice the amount of money spent on housing this year. Two and half times the amount spent on sport, recreation and culture. The interest for one year will be twice the amount spent on agriculture, forestry and fishing. It’s twice the amount spent on public order and justice. And the interest bill is $1 billion more a year than we spend on transport and communications.

This government has again wrapped around all Australians a burden of massive debt that will last for decades and decades, and on top of that this enormous burden of interest. This means that the government will have $8 billion less to spend on much needed service delivery, such as hospitals, schools, health and education. It is interesting to break this deficit down to see what this means for every man, woman and child in Australia. It means $9,000 of debt for every man, woman and child in this country. What a staggering and poor reflection on Labor to give every man, woman and child in our nation a debt of $9,000 each. The interest bill alone will cost each person around $500 per year. Each day that Australians go off to work, they can know that not only are they working to look after themselves and their families but also they are needing to work to pay off their $9,000 worth of Labor debt and $500 worth of interest.

There are many other aspects of the budget that are worthy of comment. One of the areas is the change in the budget to superannuation. In introducing this subject, it is interesting to remember that it was only 12 days before the last election that the Prime Minister said on radio in Brisbane:

There’ll be no change to superannuation laws one jot, one tittle.

That was a quote from a radio program on 4BC 12 days before the last election. We all know that the Prime Minister is prone to the use of interesting words such as ‘jots’ and ‘tittles’, but we have seen in this budget significant changes to the laws of superannuation just 18 months after he promised not to change them one jot or one tittle. The government superannuation contributions for low- and middle-income earners have been slashed by one-third while tax relief on other people’s superannuation concessional contributions have been cut in half. Again, you see Kevin Rudd, the Prime Minister, during the election campaign saying one thing and then breaking that and doing an entirely different thing once he gets into office. We hear all the time that this is all the result of the global financial crisis, but while we were in government we weathered the storm of the Asian financial crisis, we had the worst drought in 100 years, we had the tech wreck, we had the war on terrorism, we had SARS and we had the world oil shock.

Throughout all of that, we created a record 2.2 million new jobs in Australia; the rate of unemployment hit its lowest level in over 33 years; the economy sustained consistent growth, year on year; real wages increased by more than 21½ per cent; and $96 billion worth of Labor debt was repaid, which saved over $8.4 billion a year in interest. Taxes were reduced for all Australians. We reduced personal income tax and marginal income tax. We introduced the lower income tax offset. Superannuation payments received tax reductions—and capital gains tax, of course. We also presided over the fewest strikes in Australia’s history, and our credit rating was upgraded twice to AAA. That is what the coalition government achieved during its term in office, whilst we weathered all those significant global events, as I said.

What has happened since Labor came to office? Since Labor came to office, a few things have happened. The first thing is that the economy has gone backwards since Labor came to office. Second, unemployment has risen. There are more people out of work now, since Labor came to office. Consumer confidence has totally collapsed since Labor came to office. Business confidence is at all-time low since Labor came to office. Industrial disputes have increased since Labor came to office. Taxes have increased since Labor came to office. The budget has gone from a healthy surplus to a massive deficit since Labor came to office. The Prime Minister has spent almost as many days out of the country as he has in the country since Labor came to office. The level of wealth in Australia’s households has experienced a significant decline since Labor came to office.

In summary, since Labor came to office, Australia has had inflicted on it what is really an inexcusable trifecta: higher debt, higher employment and more strikes—all since Labor came to office. This budget is another poor reflection on the way that Labor manages this economy, and that is why Australia is now suffering higher debt and higher employment than at any other time since World War II. It is a very poor reflection on Labor.

Craig Thomson (Dobell, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I also rise to speak on the Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2009-2010 and related bills. I fear the contribution for the member for Aston was very like the contributions from everyone from the other side, in that they dare not mention two things: the global recession and alternative policies that would actually make any difference to the country.

James Bidgood (Dawson, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They’ve got a blind spot on that.

Craig Thomson (Dobell, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Because both of those issues are things that they have an absolute blind spot about. What we get instead from the opposition are a variety of proposals, but we usually find they speak a different language here in Canberra to what they speak when they go back to their electorates. It is very difficult to understand where the opposition are coming from.

This debt-and-deficit scare campaign they are running simply does not stand up to scrutiny. If we take the shadow Treasurer’s position then they would be looking at a debt about $25 billion less than Labor’s, but of course they oppose all the savings, the $22 billion worth of savings, so they would be in about the same situation as we are. If you take the member for Warringah’s position, then it is about a $21 billion difference from us, so again you are talking about a very substantial debt situation.

The reason the opposition are conducting this scare campaign is that they know that what the Rudd Labor government have done through the budget and through the stimulus packages is make sure that we can protect Australian jobs as best we can in the face of a global financial crisis, a global recession, that is impacting upon the whole world. Of course, in Australia we have done better than most countries, and again that is something that those on the other side simply fail to concede; they do not want to talk about it to any extent. We also find that, in their own electorates, those on the other side are happy to cherry-pick the positive contributions in terms of local infrastructure issues, but here in Canberra they speak a very different language.

I had the pleasure recently of visiting a public school in my electorate of Dobell on the New South Wales Central Coast to congratulate the principal, the P&C and the students on their approval of a new school hall under the government’s Building the Education Revolution program. On arrival, I could not help but notice a huge sign at the front of the schoolyard which said, in big, bold letters, ‘Great news: new hall for Tacoma Public School.’ Those words summed up not just how the school felt about the new hall but also the reaction of the wider community in Tacoma. The school is getting a new hall, but the hall will be used by the whole community in Tacoma, which currently has no such facility.

Under the normal criteria, this small school with only 154 students would not have a chance to have a new hall funded. It would have remained a pipedream. The faces of the year 6 students who stood in front of the sign for a photograph were faces of genuine delight and happiness, even though those kids will have all moved on to high school before the new hall is built. They know that their younger brothers and sisters in the school community, and the general community of Tacoma, will be able to enjoy this structure for many years to come.

It is infrastructure projects such as these that this government is delivering to communities across Australia, helping to stimulate local economies and helping to protect local jobs. Across the Central Coast region, $16 million is being spent by the Rudd government under the National School Pride Program, which features small- to medium-sized projects to give schools a much-needed facelift. Over the two rounds this project will deliver more than $7.37 million, made up of 54 projects in total, to 46 primary and secondary schools in my electorate of Dobell alone, to help stimulate jobs in our local community. Under the program which is delivering Tacoma Public School’s hall—Primary Schools for the 21st Century—a further $7.1 million is being injected into the Central Coast region under round 1, with more on the way in round 2.

I have spoken often in this place about the high unemployment rate in Dobell. It is substantially higher than the Australian average, and every local job that we can retain is vital. In addition to the high unemployment rate that we have on the Central Coast, and in Dobell in particular, 30 per cent of people who are employed commute to Sydney every day—a four-hour round trip. So local jobs are vital for the community and they help to build a stronger community. Each one of these schools will become mini job centres, and there has been a strong focus on employing local people, local tradesmen, on these projects. I held a two-hour forum with the Central Coast division of the New South Wales Chamber of Commerce, where we went through the types of projects that are available for local tradesmen and builders. We had close to 200 people turn up—people who were interested in making sure their local companies get part of this action. This is why I am speaking in favour of Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2009-2010 and Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 2009-2010 and Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2009-2010.

Under the Rudd government’s economic stimulus plan, my electorate of Dobell will receive more than 600 projects, worth more than $22 million, to help boost the economy and protect local jobs. I have mentioned the school projects, the total of which in Dobell alone is $11.6 million under the Building the Education Revolution. But there are many others, including $4.3 million under the government’s social housing program on 16 housing units. These have been approved and the construction is due to start this year, with dwellings to be completed by 30 June 2010. A further $2.5 million will be spent in Dobell on repairs and maintenance of no less than 545 social housing units. All this translates to local tradesmen conducting work locally.

The other issue that I have spoken considerably about in the House is the number of tradesmen that we have on the Central Coast. We have a much higher proportion of tradesmen working on the Central Coast than most electorates. We also have a higher proportion of people working in retail, which is the biggest employer in my electorate. Both of these areas are front and centre of the budget and the stimulus package, and that is why they are so important for the seat of Dobell.

The type of work across these projects is wide ranging. Typical school refurbishment projects, for example, will include painting, floor coverings, repairs to walls, fittings, roofs, stormwater components and paved areas. One of the large high schools I visited, The Entrance Campus of Tuggerah Lakes Secondary College, is having a new covered way built which will extend along a fair distance of the total school compound. This is replacing something that was built in the early 1950s, some 50-odd years ago. It has not been able to be replaced ever since. You can see both the jobs and the social infrastructure that are being built.

There will be new school halls and covered outdoor learning areas built. Student amenities will be fixed and classrooms will be spruced up. New pathways will be constructed in the school communities. New basketball courts and sporting fields are also part of this program. Some schools will have their security systems upgraded while others will have their car parks renovated.

Wyong Grove Public School is another school in much need. It is one of the most disadvantaged schools in New South Wales and it is in my electorate. Every day many children depend on charity and the local community to make sure they get breakfast when they come to school. They come from backgrounds where breakfast does not come from their own home. Wyong Grove is also gaining a brand-new hall and a covered outside learning area, which will be put to good use for many years to come. This is important infrastructure for the whole community.

There are other important infrastructure programs which these appropriation bills will fund, including four black spot road projects in my electorate. Just over $1 million will be spent on a black spot project in Tuggerah at the intersection of Wyong Road and Reliance Drive, on new traffic lights at the intersection of the F3 freeway and Sparks Road at Warnervale, on a new raised concrete safety area at Long Jetty and on wire rope safety barriers for both the southbound and northbound onramps of the F3 at Ourimbah.

New infrastructure is also being built under the auspices of the two councils in my electorate to the tune of more than $2.8 million. These projects are part of the single largest investment in local infrastructure in Australia’s history. They include more than $1½ million worth of priority projects in Wyong shire alone. There is $520,000 being spent to upgrade the Canton Beach playground, a popular spot on the north side of Tuggerah Lake, where families love to picnic and take in water activities such as sailing. There is $400,000 being handed to the Wyong Shire Council towards the major upgrade of the Baker Park netball courts in Wyong, which will bring the courts up to a standard which will allow them to host state events and other major tournaments. This in turn will provide further economic boosts for this area. The Saltwater Creek playground at Long Jetty on Tuggerah Lake, another popular park, will have over $100,000 to build toilets for the disabled. They recently raised money and built a special-purpose disability park there. This $100,000 means that they will have the amenities required to go with that park.

All of these projects are providing important infrastructure that the communities in these areas need and they are resulting in economic boosts for the area as well. I was delighted to be passing on the news of these projects to the local community. I was genuine in doing so, unlike those opposite, who say one thing in their electorates, put false grins on their faces for the local newspaper and then vote against these nation-building projects when they are back in Canberra.

The Rudd government understands that our community in Wyong is feeling the effects of the global financial crisis. I have made many representations in Canberra about the importance of local projects that generate construction activity and deliver much-needed infrastructure to improve the quality of life in local communities. The jobless rate in Dobell is, as I have said, well above the average. That is why it is so important that the local people are given work on as many projects under the government’s economic stimulus package as possible.

In Australia the forecast unemployment rate of 8½ per cent is well below the previous peaks of 10.3 per cent in the September quarter of 1983 and 10.8 per cent in the December quarter of 1992. The number of unemployed is expected to peak at just under one million people. One can only reflect on how bad these figures may have been if it were not for the Rudd government introducing the stimulus packages that it has.

The alternatives being proposed by those opposite are so open and transparent—and they are: leave it to the market; let the market rip and don’t worry about the government playing a role that will help cushion our economy from the worst of the global recession. That is why we have acted decisively. That is why we have acted to make sure that jobs are such a priority.

The government has committed $1.5 billion over five years to its job and training compacts with retrenched workers, young Australians and local communities, with $300 million allocated to give retrenched workers immediate access to intensive employment support. The government has increased the number of places across a range of training programs to help people upskill and reskill. We have put in place measures to keep young people at school or engaged in further education and training to prevent many from experiencing long-term unemployment. Regions and communities hardest hit by the economic downturn will receive priority assistance through a $650 million job fund to build community capacity and to support local jobs.

Talking about helping support local jobs, the Rudd government is also getting on with the major projects in my electorate of Dobell, projects that were promised before the 2007 election and that are being delivered. Work has already started on the jewel in the crown in my area, the Tuggerah Lakes system. With the help of $20 million of federal funding, we will clean up the lakes. This is creating green jobs but also cleaning up the environment, something that is long overdue and something that the Rudd Labor government committed to and is getting on with and making sure happens. What was once an eyesore, with household junk scattered across the edge of the lake and noxious weed growing wild, is now being turned into a picture-postcard and picturesque area. This not only makes it better to look at but encourages the tourism industry that is so vital for many jobs in my area.

The program has had spectacular success in its first part at the north entrance, where noxious weeds have been removed and native vegetation planted, allowing the restoration of sensitive habitat for animals, including many sea birds. The project reflects a real working partnership between the government, the local council and local Coastcare groups.

In the very near future—probably within weeks—tenders will be put out for one of the largest civil works ever undertaken on the New South Wales Central Coast, and that is the piece of infrastructure known as the missing link water pipeline. The Rudd government is providing more than $80 million in funding for this pipeline, which will allow the region’s biggest dam to be stocked up with vital water supplies for the long term. This project is expected to support hundreds of jobs during construction and further permanent employment both directly and indirectly. Most important, it will secure the Central Coast’s water supply, helping to drought-proof the region. This is an area that has experienced the worst of the drought, falling to 13 per cent water capacity. Even with the heavy rain that the Central Coast has experienced in the last six to seven months, our dams are still only at 32 per cent. Until this pipeline is built, our water supply is at risk.

The wonderful Central Coast of New South Wales, where my electorate is located, is an attractive place for first home buyers, because homes are still cheaper than those in Sydney and they are considered to be of good value, given the lifestyle that comes with the investment. The median wage earned by Dobell residents is among the country’s lowest, so any government help that young families can get in buying the largest investment of their lives is appreciated. This will still be available for some time to come. The first home buyer’s grant has been very successful, particular in my electorate. It has allowed people who would probably struggle to ever get into the market to do so—and on a sustainable basis—and has made sure that they can realise the Australian dream.

At the same time, it has stimulated the local economy and provided local jobs through the building of new houses in the rapidly expanding suburbs on the Central Coast. Most of the businesses in my electorate are small businesses. They will benefit from this extended measure in the toughest global economic circumstances that we have seen in three-quarters of a century. The measure will help the cash flow of businesses, cash that is needed even more when the financial climate is tight.

My electorate contains a high proportion of residents who are pensioners. The pension reforms in this budget will have positive effects in terms of targeting pension payments to those most in need, encouraging labour force participation—which will increase the living standards and retirement savings of senior Australians—and contribute to growth in the Australian economy. Maximum rate pensioners will receive $32.49 per week for singles and $10.14 per week for couples combined. This is reform that has long been called for, but it has been a Labor government, a Rudd government, that has delivered.

The opposition are engaging in a simple yet deeply cynical political exercise in the face of the challenges that we are facing with the global recession. They take their title of ‘opposition’ far too literally. Reasonable and responsible oppositions realise that on occasions the greater good of the nation is served by not engaging in an automatic default position of opposing anything that the government says or does. Strong democracies require an effective opposition that keeps government accountable. I hear in my electorate all the time that this opposition is going beyond this ideal. I have heard many times from voters of all persuasions that the opposition and the opposition leader simply oppose everything, no matter what the merits of the government agenda are. The born-to-rule mentality is alive and well in the conservative parties in this parliament. Instead of coming on board and supporting the government in protecting jobs and minimising the harm of the global recession that is taking place, the opposition is instead engaged in the cynical Crosby Textor politics of negativity and division.

The contributions that we have heard from opposition people in this place have all been about talking down the economy and putting a negative perspective on everything. They are happiest when the economy is going bad, because they see that as in some way helping their short-term political agenda. The Australian people want more; they deserve more. They deserve an opposition that will support the government’s initiatives in relation to making sure that jobs are supported as best they can be and that will support a budget that has measures that puts the Australian economy in a better position than most other economies around the world.

However, it seems that the sad truth is that the opposition do not care what damage they do to this economy by talking it down so long as they think that they can get some political opportunity out of this that supports their political position. Rather than calling them the opposition, we should call them the opportunists. They are not about what is in the best interests of this country; they are only about the short-term political advantage that they think that they can get. This is a global financial crisis, one that you will not hear the opposition talk about. You also will not hear them talking about constructive alternatives. They are about negativity. I commend these bills to the House.

John Cobb (Calare, National Party, Shadow Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Make no mistake, this has been a horror budget for the nation, with record debt and deficit. It is every inch a traditional Labor budget. A forecast debt of $315 billion—with no guarantee that this will not grow, and it almost certainly will—is something to contemplate. It is interesting that on the same day the Treasurer and the Prime Minister were quibbling over a mere $15 billion. Not very long ago, $15 billion was a lot of money—until the Rudd government started plunging us into debt of the order that we are now facing. Now $15 billion does not seem very much, does it?

Every man, woman and child in my electorate, the electorate of Calare, will owe probably around $14,500—not including interest. I should add at this point in time that interest is not something that one should forget. Over the last 20 years, including the 10 years that it took us to pay it off, the interest on this last Labor debt of $96 billion was something like $108 billion. That was the interest, not the principle. The coalition left the current Rudd government with a record surplus and a Future Fund. In 18 months, that has not only been blown away but a $16 billion debt has been racked up. There has been $23 billion handed out in cash. When the cash is gone, we are still going to have a huge debt: as I said, $315 billion if we are lucky.

The Labor government is addicted to debt. It has no regard for taxpayers’ funds. Once they make the decision to cross the line from surplus into deficit, restraint seems to go out the window. And what happens now when all the bolts have been shot and the surplus has long gone? What happens when infrastructure priorities are shown to be wrong in terms of returning money to the Commonwealth to pay the debt off? The Rudd government is using the financial crisis, it seems to me, as an excuse to spend billions. For the first time they have taken the attitude that they can borrow what they need for their own particular social agenda and nobody will be able to go crook because they are simply saying that they are providing an economic stimulus package.

The $23 billion cash splash would have built infrastructure needed, certainly in regional Australia, as I am sure that the member for Grey would agree, for new highways—in our case—over the Blue Mountains to open up western New South Wales; the Melbourne to Brisbane inland rail; fixed spur lines; and black-topping many hundreds of kilometres. The good thing about all those is that they would have returned productivity, GST tax that would pay this debt off and not leave the huge legacy which we are going to be left with.

Rudd’s debt of $315 billion will also lead to the big issue of higher interest rates. You cannot have the government borrowing—what was it?—$2 billion a week, an awful lot of money, without creating a problem. Who are we competing against? We are not just competing against farmers. We are not just competing against small business. We are not even just competing against big business. We are competing for the same money that mums and dads want to build a house with or want to buy a car with. So everybody is going to end up paying high interest rates. There is one thing that you cannot do: supply and demand says that the more people who want something, the more expensive it gets, and with $315 billion—at least—of debt the government is chasing money and that means they are competing with all those people I mentioned.

Make no mistake, this is a horror budget for the agricultural sector and the thousands of people who are involved in it. We may not be riding on the sheep’s back but agriculture is still almost 20 per cent of our exports, and agriculture, fisheries and forestry industries, whether it is tuna at Port Lincoln, or wool from western New South Wales, or vineyards in McLaren Vale—and I can assure you, member for Grey, we also have some very good wine in my electorate of Calare; it is not all in Grey, though a lot of it is—are very important for all these people and the work and the jobs involved.

This is a budget that totally ignored original occupation in Australia. Agriculture is still one of the most important sectors, particularly from an exporting point of view, and it is compromising farmers’ ability to feed and clothe the nation and one heck of a lot of the world. One farmer said to me the other day, ‘Who would want to be a wheat farmer. Thanks to Labor at the state level and now at the federal level running down our rail lines, there is no way that a big crop can be moved to market.’ Despite the much-heralded spending of $3 million on a committee to review rail lines in our region, now there is nothing in the budget to address that issue. There is certainly nothing in it to address transport issues in Western New South Wales in particular.

In the electorate of Calare—and I looked at the huge infrastructure spending budget that the Minister for Transport, and whatever else he is, skites about, and all I could find in the Calare electorate were two or maybe three truck stops. Given our roads, I guess we should be thankful for that but when one thinks that every man, woman and child in my electorate is going to share in that $14,500 per person debt, one would have thought that we would get something.

Let us look at the agricultural sector again for a minute. There was $2.8 billion in the agriculture budget last year and $900 million less this time. On top of that, 312 jobs are to be chopped. What minister would allow drought, for example, to become the creature of Treasury rather than of Agriculture? We are talking about a Treasury that even hates giving people back tax refunds, and they certainly do not like funding drought. So instead of leaving drought funding with the people who are obviously supposed to deal with it—the agriculture department—you hand all that funding back to Treasury. Has that got anything to do, I wonder, with the fact that on page 60 of the agriculture budget papers it says that past 2009-10 there are no provisions for drought—not because drought is going to end but because drought programs are?

In what can only be described as a national disgrace, there is a massive $35.8 million cut in government funding to Australia’s quarantine and biosecurity programs. This will lead to the loss of another 125 jobs. Cutting the agriculture research budget is unforgivable. Cutting the quarantine budget is criminal. The Rudd government’s legacy could include—and I hope it does not, but it could with this sort of budget—disease, deficits and debt.

At the same time as the government is cutting its contribution to our quarantine and biosecurity programs it is raising taxes and user charges on exporters who have no choice but to use AQIS services, and they are raising those charges by up to over 1,300 per cent, destroying jobs and export income. Whether it is drought—or ‘dryness’ as seems to be the new modern left-wing term—or climate change, farmers will have to do more with less. They certainly do that at the moment, until the drought ends. This is why the cuts to research and development do not only make no sense, they make a joke of everything that the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry or the Minister for Climate Change and Water say. And, having slashed R&D funding in this budget, it is the height of hypocrisy for the agriculture minister to be swanning around Europe as an observer to the G8 agriculture ministers’ meeting in April and saying, quite blatantly, in a press release:

Australia has a major role to play in meeting the global food shortage and boosting global food security ... We believe investment in agricultural research will be essential.

He puts his hand on his heart and says that in front of all his mates, the agriculture ministers in the major countries of the world. Then he comes home and what happens? Vital research and development programs are slashed, with a $12 million cut from the Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation and the axing of Land & Water Australia. There is a resultant $45.9 million cut to research. Other cuts to the department include a $12 million cut through ‘identifying lower priority activities that can cease’ within the department. I shudder to think what that might mean.

Agriculture was the only bright light in our economy in the last quarter and it has now been gutted. Another legacy of the $315 billion debt will be a higher Australian dollar; that is inevitable. Today, the dollar is trading at over 80c. Anything over 75c makes it very hard for our agricultural industries to compete in export markets, particularly in Asia and our near regions. But the budget does nothing to explain the effect of the Rudd government’s emissions trading scheme. This is a major omission and will have a dramatic impact on the budget’s bottom line. Another issue which is causing much angst is the government’s decision to tighten the non-commercial loan rules. This measure extends the non-commercial loan rules to include payments by way of a licence or right to use real property and chattels. This reduces the scope for private companies to allow their shareholders or associates to use company assets such as real estate, cars and boats for free, or at less than their arm’s-length value.

On the face of it, maybe that is okay. But what it means in plain English is that some farming families will be hit with a new tax—some farming families who are using accepted practice for family companies. I hope the government realises the unintended—I hope it is unintended—consequence of this new tax measure and exempts our farming families from such a tax. Obviously they will pay tax on the result of that.

I can quite honestly say that Calare is one of those electorates which helps to a large extent create the wealth of this nation. We are a major exporting electorate. You do not have to be a rocket scientist to see that this budget does nothing for regional communities—certainly in western New South Wales and I would think it will not do much for northern South Australia either. There is no vision for inland Australia but there are plenty of nasty surprises.

For example, the changes to the eligibility criteria for the independent youth allowance in last month’s budget are guaranteed to make life much harder for those in remote and regional places. We actually do not have in Condobolin, for example, a university to which you can travel every day on the local bus and live at home. That is the cheap option. I am afraid that is not an option for us. Current gap year students who have, in good faith, worked for at least 15 months over an 18-month period or earned more than $19,500 in that time have had the system suddenly change on them. The number of calls in my electorate offices in Cobar and in Orange on this issue is as great as anything I have ever seen. From 1 January they need to work at least 30 hours a week for 18 months in a two-year period. For gap students this obviously doubles the time before they can go to university. As was pointed out in the only daily paper in my electorate, the Orange Central Western Daily, the changes have devastated residents such as Laura Wannon, who took a 12-month job at East Orange post office for the sole purpose of qualifying for the youth allowance. With her parents currently supported by only one income Laura needed the youth allowance to fund her studies away from home at the ANU in Canberra next year. ‘Qualifying for youth allowance was the one reason I took the year off,’ Ms Wannon said. ‘Now there is really no point in having done that.’ She said losing youth allowance would affect her study option for next year and whether she could afford the move to Canberra.

We will do everything we can to try to put some sense into what is in effect retrospective legislation for people who have done like Laura. They have planned their lives over the last 12 months based on what they wanted to do and now suddenly that is swept away from under them. I do not think an 18- or 19-year old person should have to put up with a government changing the rules on them and totally altering their life and what they planned to do with it.

In addition, Labor has decided to abolish Commonwealth accommodation scholarships worth over $4,000 a year and replace them with a relocation allowance of $4,000 in the first year and $1,000 thereafter. I have more rural and remote students than most; they are fantastic people who are up against it from the start. If you live at Wilcannia, university seems an impossible dream when somebody takes away the props that have been put there over many years. They already have about one-third of the opportunity that others have; Labor’s plans will make this disadvantage far, far worse.

Another issue that has come out of the budget is cataracts and the way the budget measures affect people in an electorate such as mine. Somewhere in the region of 10 per cent of people in my electorate are of Aboriginal descent and live out in remote communities in New South Wales—perhaps not as remote as the north of South Australia, Queensland or the Northern Territory but very remote for us. Some of the communities are 1,000 kilometres from the nearest place, such as Orange, where you can seriously get cataracts treated.

Already 70 per cent of cataract operations are done outside of the Medicare system; they are done in private practice—30 per cent are done under Medicare. There are only five eye specialists operating west of the Blue Mountains in New South Wales. They cannot work for nothing. What will happen with the halving of the Medicare rebate for cataract surgery is that they will not be able to do the 30 per cent, which they are able to do now because people are able to afford it with the rebate. They will not be able to do those operations out there in western New South Wales. It is going to have an enormous effect out in Bourke, Brewarrina, Cobar and places like that, particularly in Aboriginal communities. I cannot see that continuing.

We have been talking to the surgeons who do these operations. They wonder whether this is an attack on them or an attack on the people of western New South Wales. The man who invented this procedure is buried at Bourke. The man who is known around the world for inventing the procedure for people in Africa—he has been all around the world—is buried at Bourke, in my electorate. There is nobody more aware than the people in western New South Wales that they had an opportunity to have their eyesight fixed. I think the result of this cut to the Medicare rebate will devastate everybody. We have a lot of people who have cataract problems, not just in my electorate but in the whole of western New South Wales—the whole of regional Australia, if it comes to that.

I would like to finish by saying that we have a responsibility in this place not just to today but to future generations. We stand in parliament now and hear the figure of $315 billion being tossed around as though it were not a big deal. It is an enormous deal. We and our constituents are going to pay for that to a level of $14½ thousand per man, woman and child—without interest.

James Bidgood (Dawson, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in favour of the bills before us: the Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2009-2010 and the Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 2009-2010. The member for Calare asked: ‘What do you get for the money?’ He needs to remember that we are $210 billion short in revenue income. Even the member for North Sydney has said that, if they were in charge, their budget would be just $25 billion less. This is the worst global financial crisis in 75 years. Those on the other side were in government with massive surpluses from the minerals boom. And what did they do for infrastructure? They did nothing—absolutely nothing. We, the Rudd Labor government, are putting people to work in jobs, building the infrastructure for tomorrow. We are nation building, because that is what they did not do. We are having to fix up 11 years of appalling neglect for the core, basic long-term infrastructure of this nation. That will create greater productivity in all of our exports through, rail, road and ports. That is what these bills seek to address.

The member for Calare asks: ‘What did it the budget do for regional communities?’ I will tell you what it did for regional communities. There has been massive investment through Building the Education Revolution. Every single school across the nation, whether they are in the cities, in the regions or in remote rural areas—wherever there is a school there is a benefit to that community. That is what you get for your money. That is what you get when you get clear, decisive leadership with a vision to build this nation; to build the infrastructure for tomorrow which will last up to 50 years into the future, looking after the nation and its productivity, looking after the educational needs of our students; to build the intellect of this nation; and to build up in our young people, our students, the sciences, the languages, the physical activities that they need. We are building a smarter and more intellectual nation because we truly do believe in educating our students. We do not give it lip-service. We make real promises backed with real dollars, real investment. That is why I am speaking in favour of these appropriation bills tonight.

With a total of $75.7 million delivered to my seat of Dawson, I can truly say that the Rudd Labor government is delivering for the people of Dawson. The Rudd Labor government is delivering where the opposition over there, when they were in government for 11 years, delivered nothing. They delivered nothing like this. This is a real commitment to the roads: $150 million on the Bruce Highway committed; $95 million to the Townsville Port Access Road in southern Townsville in my electorate; the Flinders Highway connection to the Bruce Highway, $110 million; $345 million invested, promised, in the first year. That is delivering for Dawson.

I would like to table and have included a graph I happened to obtain showing the figures of 2006-07 and 2007-08, the last Howard government years. I would like this incorporated, if possible, in my speech. It shows the Howard government investment in infrastructure as just being, on average, $3 billion. This is the Labor projection. May I incorporate that in my speech?

Leave granted.

The graph read as follows—

Thank you very much. It shows clearly that the Rudd Labor government is committed to double what the previous government put into the infrastructure of this nation. I am proud to stand here tonight and to back these appropriation bills, to invest in the people of Dawson in Mackay, Proserpine, the Whitsundays, Bowen, Burdekin, Ayr, Stuart in southern Townsville and Oonoonba. All these communities deserve government that supports them and a government that is prepared to invest in them. The Rudd Labor government has also delivered $1.3 million for the Harrup Park Country Club in the 2009-10 financial year to contribute towards improved facilities for both spectators and players, including a new building with international standard changing rooms, media facilities, administration offices and improved amenities. This is fantastic for sports tourism in the region and it really is the icing on the cake, because it is not just sports but sporting tourism, which is a very big earner in the city of Mackay.

This goes hand in hand with the $8.8 million funding to construct the Mackay rugby league stadium in the last budget. So now we have a sporting hub which is being invested in by this government. They promised for two previous elections to build the rugby league stadium, but what did they deliver? Nothing. We, the Rudd Labor government, have delivered. People in our communities are beginning to see firsthand that under a Rudd Labor government important community infrastructure is being funded and delivered in their communities.

Included in the budget is a total of six nation-building program projects worth $62.7 million just for the seat of Dawson. These are including two new projects: $30 million for maintenance work on the Bruce Highway between Sarina and Cairns in 2009-10 and also $10 million for safety enhancement works in known accident zones, also between Sarina and Cairns in the 2009-10 year. These two projects alone will total $40 million in 2009-10 and a total, by 2014, of $255 million. This is truly delivering for the people of Dawson when it comes to the Bruce Highway.

The budget also includes the continuation of the strategic corridor program in Townsville. As I mentioned, the port access road worth $95 million, the Burdekin bridge maintenance and rehabilitation worth $50 million and the Bruce Highway total, all up, $150 million, which also includes the southern approach to Mackay making up all the remainder. They are valuable projects all funded and all delivered by the Rudd Labor government.

In the seat of Dawson, we also received funding for five Roads to Recovery projects worth over $2.63 million, including $1,438, 473 for Mackay Regional Council, $738,955 for Whitsunday Regional Council and $457,561 for the Burdekin Shire Council. We have funding for three projects under the Black Spot Program worth $152,000, one at Alligator Creek on the Bruce Highway which is worth $100,000, one in the town of Ayr, at Ivory Road, worth $40,000, and one in the town of Seaforth, where the Cape Hillsborough Road gets $12,000. But let us not forget the funding in this budget for boom gates at rail crossings, including at Maraju-Yakapari Road in Mackay, Gorman Street in Mackay and Drysdale Street in Ayr.

What is also exciting, and great news, is the increased health funding in the budget for my electorate, with Farleigh, Mackay, Nindaroo and Walkerston now eligible for rural incentive grant payments for the very first time. There is additional federal funding for the Mackay Division of General Practice to deliver primary health care to the Mackay community. The Mackay Division of General Practice’s case for funding was heard loud and clear at the Community Cabinet meeting in Mackay, which took place in June 2008—grassroots democracy getting grassroots outcomes delivered by the Rudd Labor government, which actually listens to people on the ground. The Mackay Division of General Practice media release informs us that they received a total of $552,666 in this 2009-10 budget, an increase of 18 per cent. The CEO, Mr Christian Grieves, says:

For the first time, GPs relocating to Mackay from one of Australia’s capital cities will be rewarded by a grant of up to $15,000. This should make it much more attractive for family doctors to move to Mackay. The budget initiatives, which include the new general practice rural incentives program, will mean that GPs relocating to Sarina, Proserpine, Moranbah, Airlie Beach and Mirani will be eligible for a relocation grant of $30,000.

He then goes on to say:

This is really great news for the people of Mackay. Local medical centres will find it easier to attract GPs to work in Mackay. Until now, only doctors working outside of Mackay were eligible for retention payments. So, when it comes to recruiting locum GPs for the Mackay division in the medical centres, we have been finding it difficult to meet the financial expectations of doctors looking to move to region. The cost of moving to Mackay from another country to work as a GP has increased substantially over the last two years. The division now believes these financial incentives will make Mackay a more attractive place for overseas doctors to work.

The Rudd Labor government is delivering when it comes to rural health needs. This is good news for the people of Dawson.

Also, very importantly, there are 16,277 pensioners in the electorate that will benefit from the government’s pension reform program, providing an additional $32 for single pensioners on the full rate of pension and $10.14 a week for pensioner couples combined on the full rate of pension. This budget is good news for the people of Dawson. The Rudd Labor government is delivering for Dawson, and I commend this bill to the House.

Louise Markus (Greenway, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Veterans' Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to respond to the budget bills and to talk about their outcomes for Australia’s veteran communities, as well as for the communities in my own electorate of Greenway. I will start by focusing on veterans and how they have fared in the budget. Veterans have every right to feel let down by the budget: they have made little gain by it. The budget reflects the reckless spending of the Rudd Labor government and the disastrous state of the nation’s finances, which have resulted in few new announcements for veterans.

This budget also reflects the government’s disregard for the indirect impact on veterans from the proposed changes to private health insurance, the Medicare safety net, pathology and diagnostic services and from some cuts to Medicare fees to doctors. These are matters that affect the whole community. When the total impact of changes to health, the disincentives in aged care, the erosion of entitlements such as the Partner Service Pension and the bonus payments that exclude some veterans are added to the few new announcements for veterans, the overall result is that the Rudd Labor government is not giving those in the veteran community the priority they deserve and are entitled to.

Prior to the 2007 election, the Rudd Labor government raised expectations within the veteran community. Since that time, the Rudd Labor government embarked on a reckless spending spree. The expectation that outstanding issues will be addressed is highly unlikely and will remain so for a very long time. That is disappointing. Since the election, the Rudd Labor government not only spent the surplus left by the coalition but also increased Commonwealth spending by $124 billion. That is an average of $225 million of new spending every day. The budget reveals the high price all Australians will pay for Labor’s reckless spending spree over the past 18 months: one million unemployed by 2010-11; a record $58 billion deficit; and a record net debt of at least $188 billion by 2012-13. It will cost every man, woman and child $9,000 each to pay back the debt. From November 2007, two-thirds of the debt that will be owed by taxpayers in 2012-13 will be due to new spending decisions taken by the Rudd government over the past 18 months.

During the election campaign, the Rudd Labor government made a lot of promises to the veteran community, but let us look at what the budget has delivered or has not delivered for veterans, war widows, the ex-service community and their families. Key issues of concern such as military superannuation were ignored in the budget, but two reviews were announced: the review into the cost to veterans of pharmaceuticals due to war caused conditions, and the review into the operation of the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004. Both have a time frame of two years, so it will be at least 2011 before any benefits can flow from those reviews.

There are two other reviews that veterans and others in the ex-service community are aware of and are awaiting decisions on: the review into military superannuation and the review into the outstanding recommendations of the Clarke review. Both have been undertaken and submissions have closed but no decisions have been forthcoming. When can the veteran community expect a response?

The coalition is holding the government to account for their reckless spending, but the Rudd Labor government statement that spending will be held to two per cent from 2011 is unbelievable. How will the Labor government be able to deliver that? Australia’s veterans have been let down very badly by the reckless spending decisions and poor economic management of the Rudd Labor government.

There have been only two major spending announcements: $9.5 million in response to the report into suicide in the veteran community; and $10 million to establish the Anzac Trail on the Western Front in Europe. I am particularly concerned about the $9.5 million in response to Professor Dunt’s study into suicide in the ex-service community. This is a very important issue and it needs an appropriate response. It is becoming very critical at this time.

As many people know, before entering parliament I was a social worker in Western Sydney for 25 years. I worked with many veterans and their families and other families in the community who were experiencing mental health issues. From my experience, I have to question how far a bit over $2 million every year will go to addressing the serious mental health issues facing the veteran community. Even the $83 million over four years allocated to the recommendations from the Dunt report into mental health issues in the Defence Force has little to offer veterans. Australia’s veterans have been let down again.

The one other big budget item is the allocation of $10 million over four years to establish the Anzac Trail on the Western Front in Europe. I note that closer to home, $7.7 million is being stripped from the Australian War Memorial. Apart from the response to the Dunt report into suicide in the veteran community and the Anzac Trail in Western Europe, there are only four other new initiatives. Three are basically housekeeping: improving payment arrangements for veterans residing overseas, expanding eligibility for the Defence service home insurance scheme and centralising access to the current assessment process for home front rehabilitation appliances and veterans’ home care programs. The fourth is the closure of a dependent disability pension, which seeks to round off very old payments where no new grants have been issued since 1985.

While the above savings amount to around $6 million, the real question is: why have these been put forward as key initiatives when issues of concern to veterans remain outstanding? These issues include military superannuation, the Defence Force Retirement and Death Benefit Fund and the level of litigation, with the department fighting veterans over entitlements or compensation. There is carry over funding from last year’s budget, but nothing new to address the need for more resources and training in entitlements and services for ex-service organisations so that they can be more effective in helping the wider veteran community. There were significant staff cuts to the Department of Veterans’ Affairs last year and another 91 this year, which will impact on services. This was raised with me a number of times by individual veterans and ex-service organisations.

Perhaps the reason that these issues were not addressed is because the Prime Minister and his spin addicted government are probably too busy working out how to explain to the Australian people the size of the debt and deficit—the largest since World War II. Or perhaps he is trying to work out what his response will be when working families are told that it would cost them $9,000 each—every man, woman and child—to pay back a debt that they did not create, but a debt that this government wilfully and recklessly racked up.

The challenge, with Australia’s budget now in serious deficit, is how veterans’ issues will be resolved. To understand the impact on veterans, we have to look beyond the immediate announcements and line items for veterans and look at the bigger picture. The proposed changes to private health insurance will reduce the rebate for higher income earners, which will indirectly result in higher premiums for all Australians. The government is breaking its election promise that it would not make changes to the private health insurance rebate.

Throughout the budget papers, the Rudd Labor government continually talk about early and decisive action. They continually link Australia’s debt to the rest of the world. This is strategic spin, designed to downplay the seriousness of the debt and deficit. Australian may experience a milder downturn compared to the problems in Europe, the US and other parts of the world—and I hope that that is the case. But Labor gloss over the fact that Australia’s debt is the biggest ever faced in the history of this nation. The only swift and decisive action that the Rudd government has taken is to spend the surplus within a year and to plunge this country into world record debt and deficit. This was certainly swift. As for decisive action, Mr Rudd and his Labor government decided to spend recklessly and to take this country into the worst debt and deficit in this nation’s history. The Prime Minister cannot deny that two-thirds of the debt that will have to be paid back by taxpayers will be due to spending decisions taken by his government over the past 18 months. The Australian people and the coalition have a very different view of what is swift and decisive.

In my electorate of Greenway, there will be many people and organisations affected by this budget: small businesses, wage and salary earners, schools, pensioners and self-funded retirees. This budget will have an impact on them all. In 2007, there were 5,081 in the electorate of Greenway, the majority being small business employing 20 people or less. Business, especially small business, will bear the biggest burden due to Labor’s debt and deficits, such as through the increase in fees and charges by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission. The small business tax break will not help businesses struggling with falling sales and tighter cash flows. The $10 million small business online initiative is only funded for two years. Small businesses are Australia’s biggest employers and we should be doing everything to ensure their viability. Only the coalition has a plan for recovery that recognises that private enterprise and small business must be supported as the drivers of economic growth.

In Greenway in 2008 there were 47 primary schools, 14 secondary schools and one special school. There are also a number of TAFE facilities and the University of Western Sydney has a couple of campuses. What has the budget given to those schools and to education in Greenway? The education revolution has been a failure. Forget the spin and look at what Labor does and not what it says. Look at the massive cost blowout for computers in schools and the debacle of computers but no electronic infrastructure. Look at the mismanagement of the school hall program and the instances where schools are told what to build even though those schools want to build something else. Their priorities are different. The disconnect between what is being forced upon the school communities and what the school communities see as their priority is becoming very apparent. In the budget there is nothing for Australian schools.

In higher education the rules have changed from a threshold of 15 working hours per week to 30 working hours per week plus a combined parental income of less than $43,000 before students are eligible. Not content with changing the goalposts for the more than 1,700 students aged 17 to 22 years in higher education, the Rudd Labor government has turned on universities. One of the greatest initiatives introduced by the coalition was the establishment of the Higher Education Endowment Fund to provide an ongoing revenue source to pay for university infrastructure into the 21st century. In the 2007-08 budget the Rudd Labor government renamed it the Education Investment Fund and expanded it to include vocational education and training institutions. He then boosted it by $2.5 billion taken from the Howard surplus to create a fund of $6.2 billion. This year, one year later, the Rudd Labor government has raided the Education Investment Fund for a range of unrelated projects including $400 million towards solar energy and carbon capture energy projects. The question is: is anything safe?

In addition there is no 10 per cent increase in funding to make up for the shortfall created last year when the government abolished all full-fee places for Australian students, a private revenue stream for universities that had been providing universities with economic security into the future. Rather than improving Australia’s education and training institutions, Labor is only interested in using them to disguise unemployment figures, because they do not have any idea how to create new jobs. In fact Labor has abolished the Australian technical colleges which set up real partnerships between schools and businesses.

If the Rudd Labor government is not raiding the piggybank, it is hurting people who are working hard, are saving, and are prepared to sacrifice to build a superannuation nest egg for their retirement. Cutting money out of superannuation is the height of intergenerational irresponsibility. Given our ageing population and the burden of paying the Rudd Labor government’s debt and deficit by the next generation, it is irresponsible to cut money out of super. Salary sacrificing is one of the most effective ways of saving for the future, but the prospect of the huge debt burden of paying back for the Rudd Labor government’s reckless spending will diminish the ability of people to adequately save for their retirement. No Australian has been spared the regressive attack on super. Low- and medium-income earners have been particularly affected through the slashing by a third of the co-contribution scheme.

There are other people affected by the Rudd Labor government’s reckless spending, but they are affected in other ways. People waiting for aged-care accommodation; people who have private health insurance, as I have already mentioned; and people who play sport are all affected. In Greenway there are approximately 8,384 age pensioners not counting over a thousand veterans receiving treatment of some kind. I can only hope that none of these 8,384 age pensioners or the close to 1,000 veterans need to enter aged care, though I am afraid to say that most of them will.

There is an accommodation crisis in aged care. The Rudd Labor government has cut the indexation of the conditional adjustment payment subsidy which now makes it harder for aged care providers, and will contribute to their finding it more difficult, to close the wages gap for their staff. If aged care is unviable, no new providers will enter the industry and no new facilities will be built. It is as simple as that. I have three aged care facilities in Greenway but as the population ages there is a need for more. With our ageing population, the Rudd Labor government has no answers and no plans to address the crisis in aged care accommodation.

Finally, I would like to talk about roads. Feeder roads, arterial roads, links to major freeways, suburban backstreets in neighbourhood suburbs and local roads like Richmond Road and Boundary Road and half-a-dozen other roads in and around Greenway need urgent upgrading as a whole—not piecemeal—so that tragic accidents can be minimised. This is urgent work and is now unlikely to take place. Labor has chosen to move billions of dollars of funding away from local roads. The Rudd Labor government’s decision to re-brand area consultative committees as Regional Development Australia means the local voice on local road infrastructure will be absorbed or amalgamated into state responsibilities, meaning the federal government will no longer have a direct responsibility for regional development. With no specific local roads funding and with the New South Wales state Labor government’s disastrous economic management, there appears little joy for local roads or users in the foreseeable future.

There are major issues facing this nation. The challenge is how to address those issues under the huge debt and deficit burden caused by the reckless spending and poor economic management of the Rudd Labor government. The Australian people have every right to feel betrayed by a big spending, reckless government which was left an outstanding economic legacy courtesy of the coalition. It is distressing indeed to see that in such a short time the surplus has been spent, the future funds have been raided and Labor have racked up a debt and deficit that will take generations to repay.

Kerry Rea (Bonner, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise this evening to speak in support of Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2009-2010 and Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 2009-2010 and indeed to commend the Prime Minister, the Treasurer and all of those involved in preparing this very significant budget for 2009-10. It is interesting that many opposition members in their speeches have claimed that this is a big spending government and that the government is being reckless. Yet all we hear in every single speech is a long list of those things on which they would want the government to spend more and very little by way of telling us where they would get the saving and the cuts to achieve that.

I know this is mentioned every single day in the House and outside but we do have to understand the context in which this budget was drafted and delivered. It is something that the Australian community understands but, unfortunately, the opposition clearly do not understand, and that is the significant context in which this budget was drafted. They simply do not understand that we are in the middle of a global recession. We are in the middle of the worst global financial crisis in 75 years. It may sound like a mantra but we are hearing that statement over and over because it is a fact. It is a statement of truth. You only need to look at the economic indicators across the world, you only need to listen to economic experts and you only need to look at the facts and figures. Everything will tell you that we are in a serious global recession. We are in the worst financial crisis in 75 years.

In that context a budget must be drafted that not only provides the necessary goods and services that the Australian community expects from the Commonwealth government, that not only delivers stimulus and support for the economy, particularly in the area of employment to protect and support jobs, but also provides a path out of economic downturn and sets this nation, builds this nation, to be prepared for the recovery to come.

In that context, on the one hand the government must support the economy and provide nation building projects which will keep people in employment and provide the infrastructure that our community needs; on the other hand the government has had to deal with a drop of $210 billion in revenues for this year—the health budget for four years. That is a significant drop in revenue; indeed the most significant single contribution to the deficit presented by the Treasurer in this budget.

In that context I do not think anyone across the Australian community would diminish the challenge that was faced by the Treasurer and the government in drafting this budget. It is important therefore to acknowledge that in that context it was necessary to go into a reasonable level of debt in order to support our economy, employment and significant nation building projects. I believe the Australian community understands that rather than see us fall prey to the significant impact of the global financial crisis, rather than see the Australian economy dwindle even further into recession, the government must play an active role in providing the stimulus to the economy that will buffer us against the bad times and set us in a good position to deal with the good times. For that reason, I accept that there does need to be a responsible level of debt, which there is in this particular budget. We are talking about the lowest level of debt of any of the major Western economies. We are talking about a level of debt in this financial year of 4.9 per cent of GDP. When you compare that to the United States where we see a level of debt of 61.1 per cent of GDP, I think everybody would acknowledge that this is a responsible level of debt that we can manage, but an important part of providing the very much needed funding for our services and projects.

The budget also acknowledges that it does mean we are in a temporary deficit. When you see the level of economic difficulty being confronted by major economies across the world—Japan, the United Kingdom, the United States or others—it is appreciated that it was inevitable that we would go into deficit in these very difficult times. What is significant about this budget is that the government has provided a path to recovery and one which I endorse.

I cannot present these points enough; I cannot get this message across enough; you will hear from many government speakers this same message. The reason is that it is still falling on deaf ears. The opposition can speak in the parliament for an hour on a matter of public importance to do with the economy and not once mention the global recession. Indeed, only this morning I was asked by a journalist to comment on a quote by a member of the opposition, a Liberal MP, a backbencher, who said, ‘This is the recession we didn’t have to have.’ When you are dealing with that level of denial, when you are dealing with that level of blinkered vision in such significant economic times it is no wonder that they cannot actually come up with an alternative plan and that they cannot support what the government is trying to do. They simply do not understand.

What they do not understand is that it is actually in times like this that governments must step to the fore, must take an active role in both the economy and the community and must lead if we are to recover from these very difficult times. It is a time when the government must make some tough decisions and there are tough decisions in this budget. When you take something away from someone then it is a tough decision. We all know that.

At the same time, I believe that the tough decisions that have been made in this budget have been made in a fair manner, in a way that still supports those who are most vulnerable and indeed most in need. But it acknowledges that there are people who can afford to pay their way a bit more and who should and would appreciate that in these tough times we all have to take a little bit of the pain.

Nevertheless, what I am so proud of is that in this budget there are some significant reforms. The government has delivered on some very vital commitments to people in our community who, unfortunately, have been ignored in the past. We go no further than the pension reforms contained in this budget—an increase in the base rate of the pension, one that we have not seen for many decades in this country. The 16,204 pensioners in Bonner will, I know, be most appreciative not just of the increase in their income but that it comes as a permanent increase to the base rate so that they are not continually waiting, from budget to budget, from year to year, to find out whether they get the crumbs of a bonus out of a budget. They can be much more secure in their income.

As a woman and a mother, to me one of the most significant elements of this budget is the Treasurer’s commitment to introduce paid parental leave in 2011. We all know that many women work because they need to. We also know that it is the right of every woman to have the choice to have a career or not. It should not be to the detriment of her life or the life of her family. She should not have to make a choice between a mortgage and child care or children and a career. It should be a fundamental right, and it is one that many women aspire to. The fact that this government has finally acknowledged that it has a role to play in supporting women in the workforce and also supporting families when a newborn child comes along is a significant advancement. As a woman who has argued strongly all my life for better rights for women, for equality for women, I am so proud to be part of the government that has finally introduced this into the parliament.

I am also very proud that, although these are difficult economic times and the government acknowledges that it must introduce and support projects in the community that will provide employment and support various communities, it does not just do that willy-nilly. It does that in a way that will be sustainable in the future, and as a result we have initiatives around clean energy and support for insulation, for example. It is not just, once again, an acknowledgement that these are emerging industries and sectors of our economy; it is government support so that these sectors will flourish and develop into whole new areas of employment and enterprise. They are the industries of the future that will protect our environment, and our planet and community will be much healthier and secure because we put the support, when it was needed, into promoting alternative energy sources and supporting a reduction in our emissions and our dependence on coal-fired power.

The significance of the reforms of this budget, as I said earlier, is that we are a government that take on the responsibility and the challenges of difficult times and say, ‘What can we do that will not only get us through these difficult times but also see us become a much more prosperous and much more sustainable, and therefore a much more progressive, community in the future?’ By investing in social housing, by supporting paid parental leave, by supporting pensioners, by investing in clean energy initiatives—these are the things that we have said government can be active on; we can play a role. And guess what? As a result of that, we can actually create a better community for not just ourselves but for the future. The further significance of this budget is that these projects, these initiatives, are being rolled out across the country.

Certainly in the electorate of Bonner there are a number of very important and vital educational, community and environmental projects that are being supported. Indeed, as a result of the government’s investment in stimulating the economy and supporting nation-building projects, there are 478 projects totalling $31,571,013 in commitments to infrastructure in Bonner. Those figures defy belief. They demonstrate that in just one electorate alone the government saw the need to support so many different projects. There is $25,825,013 to support 45 schools across the electorate of Bonner, both public and private. I am particularly pleased to point out a couple of these projects.

The Hemmant State School is a very small school. It has around 60 students. It is set in a semirural area right smack bang in the industrial part of the Australian trade coast port of Brisbane—a beautiful school. It has major significance in Queensland because it is the oldest continuously operating state school in the state. So it is one that has a long and proud heritage. The $75,000 in the budget that will extend the tuckshop does not seem much, but when you are looking at such a small school community with a P&C that are struggling to raise funds you appreciate just how significant that is. Two hundred thousand dollars is going to Holland Park State School to extend the instrumental music area and the art area. Manly State School is getting a multipurpose hall worth $3 million. They are just a few of the many projects that are going into our school community. The Gumdale school hall is receiving $1½ million to provide not just a state-of-the-art, very modern facility for the Gumdale State School students but a community facility, one that does not exist in what is a very new and developing suburb, and a facility that is much needed.

The importance of supporting our educational facilities goes without saying. These projects will make such a difference and are so important to the people of Bonner and, indeed, to all of us here on the government side. ‘The biggest school modernisation program in history’: it is not just a phrase but a reality because the numbers are quite clearly here in the budget.

But of course it does not stop there. There is $750,000 in black spot funding to the Wynnum North roundabout on Wynnum North Road and Wynnum Road, a roundabout that is close to a busy high school, a roundabout that sees a lot of traffic going through it every day. We all know that where you have schoolchildren and a lot of traffic road safety has to be your highest priority. I am very pleased that the government has put $750,000, three-quarters of a million dollars, into making this roundabout safer for the Wynnum North State High School children and indeed the residents of that area.

Of course, we do not just stop at roads and schools. We also acknowledge how important community infrastructure is. We are putting into the Manly Pool, a pool that has been down on the bay side, on the foreshore, for many years—a long time ago I even swam there as a child—$500,000 for a much-needed upgrade, very much overdue. That will combine with council funding to see that pool receiving $1.3 million for an upgrade for the residents of that area. The foreshore of Manly and Wynnum is a part of Brisbane that is enjoyed by many residents. I know that that upgrade will be greatly appreciated.

It therefore stuns me when I hear the contributions made by the opposition in this budget debate. When you look at these sorts of projects, the myriad safety measures and community infrastructure, that are being funded by this budget, it just astounds me that we have an opposition that is not prepared to support these very important projects but at the same time is putting on the table a whole range of other initiatives that it believes money should be spent on but then is running a public campaign to attack the government about debt and deficit. It just is not the luxury of opposition in times like this to throw it all out there and pretend that you are not taking responsibility. We need support. We need action. We actually need some leadership from the parliament to get us through these tough times and to acknowledge that our community needs this infrastructure.

I mentioned social housing earlier. Once again, the government is responding to a decline in the construction industry by not just creating jobs for jobs sake but creating jobs that will build homes for families and others in our community who are the most vulnerable. In fact, in Mount Gravatt East in the electorate of Bonner, the Queensland government is kicking off investment in social housing. It is funding that in partnership with the federal government. I was very pleased to be on the construction site to see one fairly well-used house sitting on a very large block being replaced by six brand-new units that will house six families. One of the units is fitted for disability. This is not just about investing in construction; this is about building and reinvigorating our community and supporting those people who are the most vulnerable.

The government has acknowledged the need to borrow but also created a plan to pay that back and bring the economy back. After all of the initiatives in this budget, we have simply heard one measure from the opposition, and that is to take more money out of the budget by not supporting the proposed means testing for the private health insurance rebate. Of all the initiatives, the opposition feels that it is important to support the wealthiest in our community to continue to be subsidised by the taxpayer to take out private health insurance. But they are not supporting the tuck shop extensions for 45 schools. (Time expired)

Tony Windsor (New England, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have been listening to some of the contributions on the budget and I think that we are seeing the next election campaign written before our eyes. There does not seem to be a lot of agreement in terms of some of the initiatives that the government has put in place. One thing that I am pleased to see that there is agreement on—and many members would be aware of this—is a program called Youth Insearch, which has been supported by the government, the Leader of the Opposition and many of the opposition members. I would like to take this opportunity to encourage the government in this. There was a meeting held only last week with senior people in the Prime Minister’s office to look at assisting Youth Insearch. With the crisis in relation to the charity dollar, most people are well aware that a lot of the charities that were operating on corporate funds and donations are finding it a bit tough. There is a real need for government to provide during this gap that has been created.

I have been a great fan of Youth Insearch. It is probably the most successful intervention program for young people who are finding it very difficult—young people who have been abused physically and sexually and who have come from all sorts of very sad circumstances. As a magistrate who is a great supporter of Youth Insearch—he is a deputy coroner in New South Wales at the moment—said to me one day, ‘Tony, these are the people that I lock up next time.’ Youth Insearch has an 80 per cent success rate in relation to those young people and in the main has operated without any government assistance. But there is some need now for all of us to make sure that a program like that, which is essentially run on a volunteer basis, is maintained.

There are a number of issues that I would like to raise, but I will go to a positive side of the nation building debate, at least to start with. I congratulate the government for its funding of what is known as the Murrurundi Tunnel—a rail reconstruction through the Liverpool Range. Anybody who knows the Newcastle-Moree railway line would be well aware of the mountain range between Murrurundi and Willow Tree and the problems that have been incurred for nearly a century in getting trains over those mountains. With the development of the coal industry and wheat industry on the northern side of those mountains, there has been an extra freight component because of the additional cost of getting those trains over that mountain range. For many years, there has been a call for a major reconstruction of that section of the railway. In the budget, $290 million will go towards its reconstruction and another $290 million will go to associated work, particularly between Gunnedah and Newcastle. In conjunction with some of the work that is being done at the Newcastle port, those things will be very significant for nation building.

Just to put that in perspective, a few years ago Ernst & Young did a feasibility study for the previous government of an inland rail link between Melbourne and Brisbane. The two-volume report identified all the freight in Victoria, New South Wales and southern Queensland that was going anywhere so as to ascertain the potential market for developing an inland rail concept and its economic feasibility. A good friend of mine, Everald Compton, has been involved in that for many years. He is a great Australian. The number arrived at for all the freight in Victoria, New South Wales and southern Queensland that could come into that link was 220 million tonnes, and 110 million tonnes of it—half of it; 50 per cent—was actually moving between Moree and Newcastle. There are two transport bottlenecks in Newcastle; however, a third coal loader is being built there now. The Hunter Valley has some problems in relation to rail, and $290 million in the budget is going towards that and another $290 million is going towards fixing the problem at the Liverpool Range.

Essentially, the eastern part of Australia, other than north of Gladstone, is in that corridor. To put it into perspective, as much as I would love to see an inland rail link, the current freight component on that link is 4½ million tonnes. By 2029 it will have doubled; it will go out to nine million tonnes. If you are looking at priorities, the government has picked the right one by addressing the Newcastle to Moree railway line. A massive freight component is in that sector at the moment. That is not to argue against an inland rail concept; but, if we are talking about investment in critical infrastructure, which we should be, it is important to invest in those areas where there is a return to the nation. There is no doubt that that corridor is very important to the nation, and with the development of coal mines and agriculture north of Murrurundi Range it will become more and more significant.

The other significant budgetary item in terms of the north-west and New England is the promise of the extension to the F3 freeway, which will join the goat track between the New England Highway and the main expressway between Newcastle and Sydney. I am told that that will cut out up to half an hour in travel for people going from Tamworth to Sydney. That will have a significant road freight impact as well.

That is a $1½ billion project. It is not in my electorate but it is important to my electorate. It has been promised a number of times before. Hopefully this time it will be built, because it is very significant not only in terms of freight and passenger movement but also in terms of safety. The shortcut through Branxton down to the expressway was quite a dangerous road and this will help a lot.

The government has invested a lot in school infrastructure. We are hearing about that daily in the parliament. I will not bore everybody with that now, but it is very significant in the country. I think there is real equity in the distribution of those funds. Country schools are getting the same as city schools; in fact, if anything, there is probably a slight leaning towards country schools in some of the funding arrangements.

There are a couple of things I would take issue with. The alcopops tax has been before the parliament. It is in the budget papers, it will be debated and it will pass or fail. I will be voting against it. I thought it was a stunt at the time and I still think it is a stunt. I see no particular reason to have changed my mind. I am not a supporter of alcopops; I never have been. I highlight what the previous government did about the sniffing of petrol in Central Australia. It was an identified problem, a health problem. We are being told that alcopops present a health problem and that we should do something about it and there is pressure being put on the opposition to do something about it. In addressing the sniffing problem we did not put the tax up. We did not put the tax up on fuel to try to drive the users out. We did not try to use a market mechanism to drive them out and in doing so accumulate more budgetary funds. We banned it. If we are serious about alcopops we should ban them, not use this mechanism. If you remember back to when this stunt was first pulled, there were a number of issues that were quite embarrassing for the government and they needed to create a trail-off to the left. Alcopops have become that particular issue. With no apologies, I will be voting against that measure.

I think the investment allowance—the Prime Minister mentioned it today—has been a great initiative in this budget. In the agricultural sector, particularly in those areas where the drought has eased or broken, there is incredible interest in using the investment allowance to re-equip some of the machinery. Presuming the 50 per cent investment allowance gets through, it will be a significant boost or stimulus—whatever you want to call it—to agriculture and other small business sectors. I am a bit surprised: if this had been done by a conservative government there would have been bells and whistles and flags hanging from the trees suggesting what a great thing it was. I think it is a positive in stimulating business activity and investment and in assisting investment in critical pieces of infrastructure in the business sector.

There is one criticism I do have in relation to the investment allowance. We heard recently that Sir Rod Eddington, who is heading up Infrastructure Australia, has suggested, as I understand it—I do not mean to verbal him—that there was going to be a significant shortfall in major infrastructure that could be funded through the government sector and that we needed partnerships with the private sector to drive some of these major projects. I could not agree more. One of the failings of the investment allowance arrangement is that unless the project can be installed by 30 June 2010 the investment allowance will not apply. What that is immediately cutting out are some very large projects that would obviously take longer than from now until 30 June 2010 to complete.

I have had private discussions with people in the Prime Minister’s office and the Treasury about this particular initiative and the government and others have been talking about employment being saved and investment stimulus and jobs, jobs, jobs. We have an example in the electorate of New England where a private sector operator is prepared to invest $120 million. No government money—$120 million—and it would employ when completed 500 people. If the investment allowance—and that was at the 30 per cent rate when these inquiries went on—was applied to that particular investment, that would have a massive short-term, medium-term and long-term economic value adding to agriculture in a very well-established business in several states in Australia.

I think that it is a great shame that the government has reduced the investment allowance essentially to equipment or relatively small-cost items that would have to be completed, if there was a construction phase, at least by June or July, whatever it is, 2010. Obviously Infrastructure Australia, Sir Rod Eddington and others were suggesting that government cannot do it all and, in fact, the Prime Minister and Treasurer were saying that part of their logic—and I agree with it actually—for stepping in was because there was a drop-off in demand occurring and a drop-off in investment from the private sector so government had to move in and fill the gap. Here is a classic example where there is private sector participation. It does not need government other than the extension of what the government has put in place by way of the investment allowance, and all of these benefits that I talked about could flow.

The youth allowance is in the budget—and it is something that I have spoken about in the other place—and I think that the government has got to reconsider some of the issues in there. There is some good stuff, but the gap year issue that most people would be aware of is one that should be addressed.

If they are looking for ways to pay that, I would ban the baby bonus and I would remove the first home owners scheme. I think that both of them send quite inappropriate messages in a number of directions, particularly the baby bonus. I think that it is probably one of the worst pieces of policy that I have ever seen. I think that we have spent something like $7 billion on the baby bonus so far, and as for the first home owners scheme, God knows what has been spent there. Particularly of late, it is only escalating the price of homes that young people are going to go into debt to purchase, so in that sense it is keeping the price of housing up. One of the issues that we have faced in this country is that we have had an artificial boom in real estate that was unsustainable long term. I think that there has to be a movement backwards in relation to some of those issues.

I was very pleased to see the pensioner issue addressed. The government needs a tick in relation to the $30 increase. As for broadband, it will be a wonderful thing if it occurs—and I hope it does—because it would put Australia right at the forefront. Broadband is the roads and railway lines of this century, and I do not think that we are going to even conceive the extent of its benefits, not only the personal benefits of high-speed broadband but the health and educational ones as well. Some of that real-time broadband could lead to enormous initiatives in terms of the medical profession and the health business in country Australia. I know that there has been some criticism of the government that 90 per cent of the population will get 100 megabytes, or whatever they call them, and some country towns will only get 12. But I take you back to the previous government’s arrangement where the maximum was going to be 12 megabytes and that was going to come from satellite. I am comfortable with that, because that technology will improve fairly rapidly anyway.

I know there has been some criticism of the government about the National Broadband Network, that 90 per cent of people will get 100 megabytes, or whatever they call them, and some country towns will only get 12. But I take you back to the previous government’s arrangement, where the maximum was only going to 12. I am comfortable with that, because the 12 will come from satellite and that technology will improve fairly rapidly anyway. So I think we should encourage the government to roll out that particular piece of infrastructure and encourage the private sector to be involved as well. Who knows—now that the Mexican has gone, it might be within the realm of imagination that Telstra will come back as a major player in a national broadband network!

There is money in there for the Murray-Darling system. I think, now that the board of the Murray-Darling Basin Authority have been appointed, we really do have to have a close look at some of the activities that are occurring within the basin. I have significant issues with BHP and a Chinese company called Shenwa, who are currently exploring for coal on probably some of the most productive and magnificent alluvial floodplains in the world, those being the Liverpool Plains, which are at the base of the Liverpool Range that I talked about earlier. The Murray-Darling Basin Authority have a mandate, under their mandatory content rules, to look at some of these issues, and I would encourage them to do that. The Commonwealth is involved in the mining business whether it likes it or not now, because of the Commonwealth agreement with the four states on the Murray-Darling Basin, and so it should be. But if it is serious about this, it has got to be a player and not just say, as Peter Garrett does from time to time, ‘It’s a state issue.’ It has moved beyond that now, and I think we have to have some serious science done in terms of the connectivity issues between groundwater and surface water, and particularly the impact that coal and other activities may well have not only on the land that is disturbed but also further downstream. There are a few other things I would have spoken about, but I will leave it at that and thank the Committee for their attention.

Maria Vamvakinou (Calwell, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am pleased to speak this evening in support of Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2009-2010 and related bills which support the 2009 Rudd Labor budget. This is a budget that is framed in difficult times, but it is a budget that is honest, constructive and aspirational in its intentions. It is big on investment but targeted and well crafted, and its intentions are very clear and specific.

I want this House to know that people in my electorate are very concerned about the current international economic outlook and the impact that it is having on the Australian economy. In conversations with them, they tell me that they fully understand the ramifications of inaction and failure to invest and stimulate the economy. My constituents, just like other Australians, understand that there are times—and the most severe global economic crisis in decades is certainly such a time—when we are going to have to borrow in order to protect our current economic capacity so that we can secure our nation’s future. That is what the Rudd Labor government has done and, indeed, that is what this budget seeks to continue to do. The people in my electorate understand that this budget is about supporting jobs now and delivering the investments needed to strengthen the economy for the future.

We all know that the global recession has wiped $210 billion from the budget, and this has been the biggest revenue drop since 1931. My constituents understand that the government has had to change some of its priorities because of this recession. They understand that our No. 1 priority is stimulating the economy to support jobs and businesses, otherwise the full burden of the recession will fall on the shoulders of ordinary Australians far more than it already has, and the people in my electorate are amongst the most vulnerable.

It is well-accepted fact by mostly everyone—unfortunately, except the opposition—that, if we do not take measures to stimulate the economy and support jobs, hundreds of thousands more jobs will be lost. For the people of Calwell, that means more job losses in an electorate that is already carrying a greater burden of job losses than anywhere else. This budget supports jobs and small businesses today by investing in the infrastructure we need for tomorrow. It is a nation-building budget focusing on major roads, rail and ports, on a national broadband network, on education, health and clean energy.

This budget is about building towards growth. While we all have rigorous debates up here about how much we should or should not spend or how we should proceed, there are certain facts that cannot be ignored. Fact 1: we must secure the job market. The livelihoods of Australian people depend on it. Fact 2: we have to rapidly develop our infrastructure and technology as a greater priority than before, not to allow them to stagnate, if we are serious about the future prosperity of this nation. We have to invest in our children’s education and give our kids the best opportunities and resources to develop into the future builders of economic, social and cultural prosperity.

While it might be opportunistic for those opposite to condemn the level of the government’s investment, it is imperative to remember that this debate is not just about us. It is not just about this year or the next. It is about the future of this country. It is about the economic prosperity of the people I represent. It is about their jobs and it is about their family’s future. That is why this government has focused on education, building infrastructure and innovation as our key priorities.

Last year the committee that I chair, the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Innovation—and I note the member for Grey, who is a very active member of that committee—conducted an inquiry into research training and research workforce issues in Australian universities. We received over 100 submissions and the report, titled Building Australia’s research capacity, which was tabled in the parliament in December 2008, made some 38 recommendations. The inquiry found that the challenges we face in boosting Australia’s research capacity are not simply confined to academia. The report also found that there was a broadly held view that many of the challenges we currently face in boosting our research capacity are in large part the result of years of neglect of research training in Australia, making the task of addressing the challenges all the more urgent.

The value of research and innovation in today’s knowledge economy cannot be overestimated. Our research reputation was once admired and respected around the world, but the previous government failed to invest in our research training, instead resting on its laurels while the international research landscape changed and developed, leaving Australia’s to fall behind. We were allowed to lag behind, and this government has had to move quickly to address this crisis. Our research and innovation capacity is key to our future economic prosperity. The 2009 budget is all about securing our future economic prosperity, and the government therefore—and indeed the Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research, Senator Kim Carr, and the Minister for Education, Ms Julia Gillard—have quite correctly moved to inject massive funding into the education sector across the board, from pre-prep to primary to secondary and on to tertiary education and research.

The budget builds on the education revolution, which commenced immediately upon this government taking office. It will see a further $5.7 billion invested over four years, with one particular aim being to increase university places. Some 50,000 students will be able to enrol in a degree course by 2013, with an emphasis on making many more places available for students from disadvantaged backgrounds. This investment is about and for the young people in my electorate, and I welcome it with great hope and excitement. For too long, opportunities for young people in my electorate have been inadequate. They have become resigned to a culture and perception that, if you live and go to school in Broadie, you have little hope of getting to higher education.

Investment in achieving world-class higher education will see some $2.1 billion pumped into the higher education system. The government’s investment in education is based on well-documented evidence presented to it by the Cutler and Bradley reviews and further reaffirmed by the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Innovation’s findings that we must invest in our education, research and innovation capacity. I am pleased, therefore, that the budget has responded to the thrust of the industry committee’s recommendations by allocating some $703.1 million to Australian universities to improve teaching and learning facilities, to enhance research capacity, to provide better student income support and to increase the stipends for postgraduate students. Although the budget was not able to deliver on everything we wanted, it met the most significant and immediate needs. The universities and the postgraduate associations have welcomed this budget measure.

The government should be commended for heeding the calls of the education sector. We have done so in a very difficult period for our economy. But we have done so because we know that to shirk that responsibility now is to condemn generations of Australian children to lost opportunities. The opposition talks about condemning future generations to paying off debt. I reject that. This government is about securing the future of this country so that when greater stability and activity returns to the international economy Australia will be best prepared to move forward quickly.

The budget’s investment in our children’s future does not stop here. It continues with $155.3 million to help out-of-trade apprentices and apprentices who have lost their jobs complete their qualifications. It provides 3,650 additional places for 19- to 24-year-old job seekers in the Australian apprenticeship access program to assist them to enter as apprentices or undertake training. This budget aims to help Australians across the board in regard to education and training. We want to protect jobs, but we also want to skill and reskill Australians so that they can participate actively and confidently in the workplace and so that they can play a significant and integral part in our economic recovery.

To this end, I welcome the 10,000 training places for retrenched workers to be delivered through the Productivity Places Program. My electorate has had more than its fair share of job losses in the last 18 months, with the most recent being the Pacific Brands closure of its Coolaroo factory. My constituents’ livelihoods and futures depend on a budget that invests in its people. We should welcome this, not oppose or condemn it. We should show faith in our people by investing in their abilities, their potential and their welfare. I believe that we can be confident that such a vital investment will pay dividends in the shape of a healthy economy and a more just and creative society.

My electorate has many low-skilled and vulnerable people who are most likely to suffer during this period of economic difficulty. I am grateful that this government considers the welfare of these people a national priority. I am grateful that the budget allocated $28.2 million for 5,888 additional language, literacy and numeracy places for adults in order to improve their job prospects.

For years, elderly pensioners have literally begged for relief. For years, I and other members in this House, including opposition members, have received delegation after delegation of individual pensioners and action groups still fighting the good fight on behalf of others telling us that they were in desperate need of relief and assistance. The previous government was aware of their calls, but I am afraid that they ignored them repeatedly throughout their term, responding instead with one-off handouts. They did this even though pensioners were telling us that this was enough and that what they really needed was an increase in their pension, as this was the only way that they could begin to get on top of the burden of the cost of living. I have lost count of the many times that I was told by elderly Australians that they wanted to be given an increase in their pension so that they could manage and control their own budgets and plan ahead.

I admire this generation of Australians. They come from a different era. Most of them have worked hard. They have done their time, as they have repeatedly told me, paid their taxes and made their contribution. Their expectation of a respectable pension that allows them to meet their financial commitments and aspire to some sort of dignified comfort in their retirement is understandable. I agree with them. It is their right. While most of this generation was in the workforce, there was no opportunity for superannuation. The expectation was that the age pension would be their safety net in their retirement. This government has understood this. This has been a long time coming. It is the largest and most significant increase in the age pension seen. It is an increase of $32 per week for singles and $10 for couples. This is an increase that I believe has provided the surety of income that pensioners in my electorate wanted.

I want to pay tribute at this point to someone in my electorate who has been at the forefront of pensioners lobbying for the increase to the pension, Mr Peter Yiallouris, who was until recently the president of the Federation of Greek Elderly. At 80-something, Peter lobbied and fought for this increase. He is retired and of ill health now. I want to pay tribute to his sense of obligation to his community and to the cause of the elderly and aged pensioners. He represents that generation of postwar migrants who came here to work, and work they did, building their families’ futures and simultaneously this country’s future. People like Peter understand the need to invest in nation building, because they were once part of a previous nation-building exercise all those years ago.

Carers are another special group of people in our community. In my electorate I have some 2,373 carers in receipt of carers payment and 5,616 carers in receipt of carers allowance. This is another group that has needed a more permanent form of increased assistance. The government has quite rightly replaced previous budget one-off bonuses with a permanent carer supplement of $600 per annum for carer payment recipients and an additional $600 per annum for carer allowance recipients for each eligible person in their care. Welcome also is the addition to the existing child disability assistance payment of $1,000 a year for carers who receive carer allowance.

I have a fair bit to do with carers in my electorate and I want to take this opportunity to pay tribute to them all and in particular to note the amazing work that Brite Industries does in my electorate by providing meaningful employment to people with disabilities. I know many of them and I want to note here for the benefit of this House their commitment. In many cases their carers are elderly parents who themselves are facing the prospect of needing care and they worry about the ongoing care of their children when they are no longer able to care for them. They welcome the extra support the budget provides for them but continue to be concerned about their loved one’s welfare. This is heart wrenching and just makes their commitment and sacrifice all the more admirable. We must support these wonderful people. To the extent that it can, this budget lends that much-needed relief and support.

The budget is a nation-building budget and infrastructure is central to this agenda. I just want to mention that my electorate, a very safe Labor seat—and safe seats are often concerned that their relative safety diddles them out of getting things—received a total of $11 million under the government’s Community Infrastructure Program. Of that, $9.5 million has gone towards the building of the Hume City Council’s $14.7 million new library and learning centre in the suburb of Craigieburn. I was fortunate to have the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government come to my electorate on 6 May to make the announcement. I make mention of this project because it is important infrastructure not only for my community but also for the government’s big picture agenda, which as I have mentioned focuses on education and skilling young Australians for the future by providing the best possible resources.

In this project the people of Craigieburn and in particular the young people will have the benefit of a state-of-the-art, modern and expansive learning facility—a library and a learning centre that will become an information hub. Its key features are learning spaces, conference and meeting areas, kitchen space for children and for adult learning programs, a story-telling amphitheatre, and print and technology literacy services. In general it is a space that will benefit young and old in my electorate.

The Craigieburn Library and Learning Centre project will promote social inclusion, lifelong learning and of course will provide a significant number of new jobs over the 33-month period of construction of the building. This is a direct stimulus to the local economy. It is a win-win for everyone. My community, particularly the Craigieburn community, is literally over the moon about this piece of infrastructure. Modernisation and state-of-the-art infrastructure is coming to areas of my electorate that have long felt ignored, making the people in our community significant stakeholders and integral parts of this country’s future prosperity and development.

As an addendum can I mention that Craigieburn was recently listed as having amongst the highest uptake of the government’s first home owners scheme, making Craigieburn a high-growth suburb with lots of young families and new housing estates. The government’s scheme makes housing more affordable and of course keeps the local building industry going. This is where Victorians are choosing to settle their families, so infrastructure is a major issue. I know that many people will welcome the budget’s extension of the first home owners boost.

There have been some difficult decisions that the government needed to make. On the one hand we have acted to stimulate the economy in areas we believe have short- and long-term impact. On the other hand we have had to make some tough decisions that are not necessarily popular but essential to long-term economic management. One of these is reducing the 30 per cent private health insurance rebate for singles earning more than $75,000 a year and for couples earning more than $150,000 a year.

Another is that the eligibility for the age pension rises from 65 years to 67 years. I appreciate the anxiety that this has caused, especially amongst workers who rely on their physical fitness and strength to earn a living. However, we need to bear in mind that this decision is consistent with what is happening across the globe. As life expectancy rises, health care, nutrition and general fitness improve and, in our case, as the population ages and pressure grows on the ability of taxpayers to provide adequately for retired citizens, this is a responsible and sensible policy decision. It is tough but ultimately fair, as I believe is the case with the budget overall. In an ideal world, we could all retire at a time of our choice and live luxuriously within our means. In an ideal world, we would have full employment and the prospect of an economic downturn would be an interesting phenomenon of ancient history. But this is the real world and, under the circumstances we find ourselves in, I commend the Treasurer, the Prime Minister and the government on their vision, their compassion and their commitment to a strong, vibrant and, above all, just Australia.

Nola Marino (Forrest, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2009-2010 and cognate bills. There is no doubt that this budget and the forward estimates contain very serious implications for the nation and the Australian people, particularly for enterprising, hardworking families and businesses in regional Australia, including those in my electorate of Forrest. What we have in real terms is a return to the same old historic Labor budgets of debt and deficit, but in proportions this country has never seen before. My constituents, like many other Australians, cannot understand why the government has driven such a reversal in our economy, given that the Labor government inherited the best economic conditions of any government in the history of federal politics. We have gone from a $22 billion surplus to $120 billion in new Labor government spending, $26 billion in increased taxes and a $32 billion deficit this year, equating to an incredible $50 billion turnaround. The deficit for 2009-10 is estimated to be $58 billion, with net debt to grow to $188 billion by 2012 and with interest payments of at least $8 billion a year.

This budget, in effect, contains $315,000 million of peak debt and deficit by 2015-16, all on the nation’s credit card. This supposedly temporary debt and deficit is all borrowed. I am very concerned that this peak debt figure will just keep growing. People in my electorate of Forrest know that this is $315 billion and it has to be paid back by hardworking families and businesses just like them. My constituents understand that the interest payments alone on these borrowings will ultimately mean that there will be less funding for core government services. They also understand that the eventual repayment of principal on interest will be made by our children and possibly grandchildren. We are all aware, however, that the $315 billion of debt and deficit excludes the $43 billion for the National Broadband Network, excludes the $28 billion for Ruddbank and excludes proposed additional defence spending. I have no doubt that the parliament and the Australian people are yet to be told the full extent of the Labor government’s debt and deficit.

The projected debt and deficit is also contingent upon the Labor government’s commitment to no new spending initiatives between now and 2017. This is difficult to accept, given the unparalleled new Labor government spending of $124 billion over the past 18 months. In spite of all this spending, the budget forecasts that over one million people will be unemployed in Australia by 2010-11. Unemployment stood at four per cent at the 2007 election. It will rise to 8.5 per cent in spite of the $10 billion December stimulus package that would, it was said, ‘create 75,000 jobs’ and the second $42 billion stimulus package that was supposed to support 200,000 jobs.

The budget delivered many hits to regional Australia, including to my electorate. My office has been inundated with calls regarding changes to the youth allowance, changes that discriminate against regional students, who have no alternative but to move to a capital city like Perth for their tertiary education. Legislative changes due to take effect in January seriously discriminate against regional students who are currently in their gap year. These are the motivated young people who are working part time to help fund their own education, students who have taken a gap year away from starting their university studies to qualify for the independent youth allowance and who are in the process of earning the required $19,000 under the existing rules. In some instances, both their own plans for study and the plans of their families are seriously compromised.

For these students to have to work virtually full-time for two years before they qualify for Youth Allowance in some instances will deny some of my south-west students a university education. They have certainly told me so in these emails. For many of my students, it is the youth allowance that is the difference between being able to study at university in Perth and not being able to study at university at all to achieve their career goals.

The Commonwealth accommodation scholarships of $4,500 each year assisted students to meet just some of the significant additional costs of living away from home. The substituted relocation allowance of $4,000 for the first year and $1,000 for the subsequent three years ignores ongoing additional costs of living away from home. Students in my electorate have no choice but to live away from home—the majority of courses are only available in universities in Perth. And Perth is anything from a 2½-hour to a four-hour drive away from parts of my electorate. South-west students do not have the option of a daily bus fare from a metropolitan suburb to their university.

I was really appalled that the Minister for Education, Julia Gillard, when questioned in the House of Representatives on this issue, either did not understand what this means to regional current gap year students or, worse, simply does not care what her Labor government has done to these same rural and regional students, which was clearly evident in the minister’s dismissive response.

From January 2010, to qualify for youth allowance students have to work for 18 months for 30 hours a week. How many regional students will be able to access university when one year is the university deferral period and very few courses offer a mid-year intake? And how many 30-hour a week jobs are there in small regional towns and rural areas for school leavers? This is an unreasonable expectation for rural students. It is unfair and retrospective. What we will see is fewer regional students attending university and, for those who are able to do so, a far greater sacrifice by themselves and their families compared to metropolitan students and families.

Natasha Carbone from Bunbury wrote to me and said:

I took this year off studying so that I would be able to earn the $19,532 that would allow me to qualify for Youth Allowance benefits. Now that the requirements for Youth Allowance have changed, it seems that I no longer qualify for these payments. For rural students such as myself, this change means re-evaluating not only our financial situations but also our decision as to whether to attend university at all.

One of the parents who contacted me, Jan Rigden from Bunbury, wrote:

This change is extremely prejudicial to students who graduated from school last year and deferred their studies, based on the current rules. At the moment students are only able to defer their place at university for one year, so many students will not be able to afford to go and will also lose their place, making it unlikely they will go the following year.

She asked me:

Please can you advocate for country students who have far greater need for living away from home income support and who are far more likely to return to rural areas to practice their chosen careers. This change discriminates significantly against rural students in particular and is likely to lead to a decrease in rural students studying at a tertiary level, which is already lower than our city counterparts.

And, yes, Jan, I will continue to advocate for students from the south-west. One parent actually asked me whether the government is further discriminating against those who will go on to become future doctors, lawyers and vets by lowering the age group for Youth Allowance eligibility from 25 to 22.

Where is the equity of opportunity in tertiary education for students from Forrest? For desperate students and their parents seeking clarification or information on this from the minister’s office, they were directed to the department of education’s phone number. After several hours of waiting, the call went through to the Centrelink call centre and the advice was that the government had only released very limited numbers of questions and answers and that specific answers and comments could not be provided. So what do these parents and students do between now and January 2010? This is a clear example of how the young people in my electorate are already paying for Labor’s reckless spending and cash handouts—funding sources that could have been used to retain support for regional students.

The coalition will propose a Senate inquiry into the Youth Allowance changes. Already there are twice as many metropolitan students attending university as country students. This number will rise with the impacts on current gap year students.

Great young regional people from my area, with very bright futures, have no choice but to reconsider their futures and some will now not be able to afford to go to university. I have spoken before in parliament about the additional costs and social challenges facing regional students who have to move to cities to attend university. I will continue to pressure the government on this issue for the families and students in Forrest.

My electorate will also suffer from the broken promises of the Prime Minister and Minister for Health and Ageing to retain the 30 per cent private health insurance rebate and Medicare safety net. There will be 1.7 million Australians immediately affected by these changes, facing either higher premium payments or higher tax payments through the Medicare levy.

It is also clear from repeated attacks on private health insurance that the Labor government is working towards one single major public health system. The government clearly does not understand the need for a strong robust private health system to maintain an equally strong public health system, quality service provision and choice for Australians. Western Australia has the highest rate of health cover in Australia and I have over 79,000 people with private health insurance in my electorate. Those who exit private health insurance will become a further burden on the public system and waiting lists will inevitably increase. Obstetric services, ultrasounds and reproductive technology and cataract surgery are all affected. Women charged an average fee for private obstetric care will pay $500 more for their treatment, with the proposed changes to the Medicare rebate.

Cutting the Medicare rebate for cataract surgery really proves that the Labor government values complex precision cataract surgery at half the cost of a pair of glasses. This ignores the inclusion of postoperative management. The longer term impacts of this decision may be that regional and remote communities will no longer receive ophthalmology visits or surgery. Visits will no longer be financially viable, and the most needy and disadvantaged communities will be the worst affected. Gap fees may increase to patients, and those who cannot afford the gap will be placed onto increasing public waiting lists. Not only is this an attack on the private health system it is also an attack on the viability of small- to medium-size health services businesses and enterprises in my regional electorate.

Senior Australians are very concerned about the changes to private health as well as reductions in the superannuation co-contribution scheme that encouraged many to continue working to fund their retirement. Their goal of financial self-sufficiency has simply been made much more difficult. A responsible government should be actively encouraging financial self-sufficiency, given our ageing population and the need for increased financial self-reliance. Effectively, these same hardworking self-reliant people are being punished for their enterprise to pay for Labor’s $124 billion dollar spending spree and cash handouts. Australians will work longer, retire later and have to live on less as a result of this budget. Pensioners have also been contacting my office regarding the utilities allowance being paid as part of the pension increase.

The attack on regional and rural Australia and electorates such as Forrest continued with the $908 million cut from the budget of the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry for next year. In spite of the strong agricultural export performance that kept Australia out of technical recession, this government clearly does not value our farming sector. Three hundred and twelve departmental jobs are to be cut from the highly respected Land and Water Australia, which will be abolished—removing funding from rural conservation and environmental research.

Given Australia’s drought and water issues, this is an exceptionally inconsistent, contradictory and incomprehensible decision; a further example of how regional Australia and small farming businesses are also paying for Labor’s reckless $124 billion spending spree over the past 18 months. Twelve million dollars will be cut from the Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation at a time when critical research is equally critical to sustainable farming. Our farmers, particularly our dairy farmers, are constantly expected to drive environmental and economic efficiencies without the subsidies introduced by the United States and the European Union. These decisions compromise improved efficiencies and sustainability.

A further indication that regional Australia and our farmers are paying for Labor’s reckless spending are the cuts to the quarantine and biosecurity budget: $35.8 million. The increased risk may come at a very high price to our highly competitive agricultural sector and quality clean food production systems. The Labor government has ignored the recommendations of the Beale review for increased spending on quarantine, again placing higher importance on cash handouts than on our food and biosecurity. There will be a 50 per cent cut in administering the Horticulture Code of Conduct, costing 300 jobs; the abolition of the 40 per cent rebate for exporters; and new taxes and charges on AQIS export inspection services, with full cost recovery applying from 1 July 2009. Farmers in regional Australia keep paying for the Labor government’s reckless spending and cash handouts.

In dollar terms the meat industry is the largest user of AQIS services. These additional costs will add up to $5 per head on cattle and up to 50c per head on sheep. Preliminary calculations by the Australian meat industry are that this represents increases of between $150,000 and $300,000 per registered export processor. What I do know is that these costs will be passed on to growers. The meat industry is a major regional employer in Australia.

Conversely, the government’s new $460 million overseas food and agriculture program increases foreign aid at the expense of our Australian agriculture sector. My electorate in Western Australia is a food bowl. Dairy, beef, fruit, vegetables, wine—you name it; we produce it. Add to this the $58 million cut from Customs and Border Protection. Seventy major ports with 1,300 local workers can check only five per cent of containers. The inspection of air and sea cargo for illicit drugs, illegal weapons and biosecurity threats will be compromised through 220 job losses and the funding cuts.

The assault on the regions continues with another broken election promise of a dedicated regional development program. Labor promised to expand the role of the area consultative committees; however area consultative committees have closed. The role has been passed to the states. The federal government will have no direct or specific responsibility for regional development and the funding has been cut by $15.1 million. The government’s Better Regions Program promise purported to support community, economic and environmental projects but was never opened to receive applications. The funding was used to deliver election promises made by Labor candidates in targeted 2007 electorates. These decisions for regional Australia, however, coincide with the creation of a better cities unit in Sydney—something that is not lost on regional Australians.

The Regional Strategic Roads program will be closed down and millions of dollars of regional road and rail funding will shift to urban areas. In parliament the Prime Minister said 35,000 projects will be funded; I call on the government to table the list. The government promised $22 billion in infrastructure spending, yet less than 22 per cent of alleged funds are provided for in the next two budgets. The member for Goldstein and infrastructure experts have identified a $60 billion black hole in the infrastructure funding needed to complete the projects announced by the government. Private sector investment will be needed. How many of this year’s 35,000 projects will actually be funded and delivered? Given that the government has committed not to increase government spending by more than two per cent for six years, I wonder what programs the government will cut.

Labor promised $4.7 billion for a national broadband network that would provide fibre services to 98 per cent of Australians and be rolled out by the end of 2008. Following a flawed $20 million taxpayer funded tender process, we now have a $43 billion proposal; however only $4.7 billion of that is contained in the budget. The now $54.2 billion NBN proposal will not deliver to towns with under 1,000 people. This effectively excludes many families and small businesses in my regional electorate. I have nearly 14,000 small businesses in Forrest. Small businesses drive competition, employ nearly half of Australia’s workforce and support regional economies, and they need access to high-speed internet and telecommunications services.

What the Australian people now have as a result of this budget is confirmation that Australia has the same old Labor government of debt and deficit. We now also know that Labor has no plan to pay off this debt and no plan for a return to surplus—just a superficial hope that in 13 years of ‘temporary’ debt and deficit the budget will somehow move back to surplus in 2022. Other analysts predict a debt of $300 billion will take at least 15 to 20 years to pay off, and $300 billion will not be the full extent of this government’s debt and deficit. The coalition knows just how hard it is to pay off Labor debt. It took 10 years to pay off the last $96 billion of Labor debt. This government has lost control of the nation’s finances, and Australians, particularly regional Australians like those in my electorate, are paying the price for the Rudd government’s reckless spending.

Julie Collins (Franklin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise in support of Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2009-2010 and Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 2009-2010, commonly known as the budget bills. This second Rudd government budget was framed within a global context, and I am a bit surprised that those in the Liberal Party seem to forget that there is a global recession going on. In fact, Australia, along with the rest of the world, is currently weathering the worst global recession in 75 years. Economies around the world are experiencing their deepest global recession since the Great Depression, and those opposite seem to continually ignore this.

The 2009-10 budget is a plan for the future. It has clearly been engineered to support jobs for today, and it is building the essential infrastructure that Australia needs for a stronger and more prosperous future. This budget is about nation building for recovery. In light of the continued deterioration of the global financial market, the Rudd government has made some tough decisions in this budget to ensure that Australia’s net debt remains the lowest of any major advanced economy in the world.

During a global economic downturn, like the one we are now experiencing, a responsible government needs to step in and actively stimulate the economy and support jobs and small businesses. To do nothing would leave Australian families and businesses to shoulder the burden of this global recession, and we could not do that. Governments around the world have learnt from the mistakes made during the Great Depression. We are all in this together, and we need to work together to ensure that we build our economic recovery.

In our second economic stimulus package, 70 per cent is for nation-building infrastructure. This includes the biggest school modernisation program in Australia’s history. We are investing in road, rail, port, broadband and major solar energy projects. We are investing in research, education and innovation. We are supporting small businesses. The Rudd government is investing in the implementation of the paid parental leave scheme—the first in Australia’s history. There is pension reform, the continuation of the very successful first home owners grant and the long-awaited assistance for carers. And we continue to build on our education revolution. Over the next four years, $22 billion will be invested in infrastructure across the nation—a budget measure that will support jobs and lay strong foundations for a prosperous future. The largest component of this investment is in transport.

Across my home state of Tasmania, $797 million will be invested over six years in road and rail projects. I will go through some of the substantial investments that have been allocated across southern Tasmania—bearing in mind that southern Tasmania was ignored by the Liberal Party when they were in government. In fact, 90 per cent of their AusLink funding went to northern Tasmania. So I am very pleased to say that, in conjunction with the state government, $15 million will be invested in the construction of the Kingston bypass in my electorate of Franklin. The good people of Franklin have waited a very long time for this; they waited 12 long years under the Liberal Party government. I am very pleased to report to the House that construction on the bypass will begin towards the end of this year. It will greatly improve safety and also reduce congestion in the town of Kingston as well as in the Blackmans Bay and channel areas.

To the north of my electorate, in southern Tasmania in the electorate of Lyons, $164 million will be invested, again in conjunction with the state government, in the Brighton bypass. This is the largest infrastructure project that has ever been undertaken in Tasmania, and it is being undertaken by a Labor government. Also, $14 million has been allocated to refurbish the Bridgewater Bridge and the lower highway junction; $6.2 million will be invested in planning for the replacement of the Bridgewater Bridge and for building the Bagdad bypass. These are future projects that we are planning for now. Also, $4.5 million will be invested in upgrading the Midland Highway-Constitution Hill project. All of these projects are about major road infrastructure that Tasmania has been waiting for many years to receive, and the Rudd government will be delivering them as part of its nation-building program.

As chair of the Tasmanian Black Spot Consultative Panel, I am particularly proud of the investment we have made in making Tasmania’s roads safer. I have spoken quite a few times in this place about the black spot funding in southern Tasmania. I am really pleased that both stimulus packages have included investment in roads. Unfortunately, there have been more deaths on Tasmania roads recently, and that is a tragedy. Overall, there is $5.6 million for Tasmania’s black spots. I think 37 or 47 projects will be delivered in Tasmania. The Rudd government is also funding other road safety initiatives in this budget, including boom gates and level crossings in Tasmania. Further, there is $800,000 to address the lack of safe modern roadside facilities for truck drivers in Tasmania.

This budget will also build on the work already achieved by the Rudd government to deliver the education revolution, with the $5.7 billion we are investing over four years to deliver reforms to the higher education and innovation sectors and the 9,540 public and private schools across Australia that will benefit from our school modernisation program as part of Building the Education Revolution. This investment is all due to the fact that the Rudd government believes that a critical component of moving this country forward is education. But we all know that, as well as investing in education, it is about investing now in local jobs in our local communities and businesses.

I was really pleased to be with the Deputy Prime Minister when she visited Tasmania recently to make the announcement about the Primary Schools for the 21st Century program. She joined me and the Premier of Tasmania at Blackmans Bay Primary School, where the funding of $2.4 million we are providing was very well received by the local school community. We also had the National School Pride program announcements, which were very well received in the local community. Rounds 1 and 2 will deliver $6.2 million to more than 40 primary and secondary schools in my electorate of Franklin. I did want to read into the Hansard today the whole list of schools in my electorate getting funding, but unfortunately there is not time for that.

One of the other big projects that Tasmania will benefit from that I really want to get on the record is broadband. I was really pleased, and Tasmanians in particular were very pleased, to have the Prime Minister and the minister for communications in Tasmania to announce that Tasmania will lead the nation in the rollout of the National Broadband Network. This project will change the way Tasmanians live and work. At present, Tasmanians have great difficulty accessing broadband, so this is a very welcome investment in Tasmania’s future communications infrastructure. In this time of global financial crisis, the National Broadband Network will also create jobs in Tasmania. So that was a very pleasing announcement indeed.

Another part of the budget is the clean energy and solar energy revolution, which is a $4.5 billion investment in clean energy initiatives to assist Australia’s transition to a low-pollution economy and to help Australia build green jobs for our future.

As part of many innovation and research announcements, the government has committed funding to southern Tasmania that I want to go through which will provide long-term investment in research and innovation. We have got $11.7 million to continue the operations of the Australia-Antarctic air link, which is very important for the local community in Tasmania but also very important for Australia in terms of our international research, including climate research, that is being done in the Antarctic. There is $25.2 million over two years to meet the increased cost of maintaining Australia’s presence in Antarctica. That is new funding, and I was pleased to be with the minister for the environment, Minister Garrett, in Tasmania recently to make that announcement and to look at what that money will be doing.

There is $44.7 million to build stage 2 of the Menzies Research Institute, an important medical research facility near our local hospital in Hobart which does lots of really important research and was in fact the facility that did the vital research into SIDS which discovered how babies should be laid down. So that is a very important investment for the local community. Finally, there is $45 million for the Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies at the University of Tasmania, $52 million to extend the Integrated Marine Observing System network and $120 million to replace the Southern Surveyor, the research vessel which leaves from Tasmania and goes into the Great Southern Ocean to do research below the ocean.

I received a telephone call from the University of Tasmania’s thrilled vice-chancellor the day after the budget. He was extremely pleased with the research investment that has been made by this government. I really support his view that Tasmania will now be a leader, especially when it comes to things like marine research. We have been putting a lot of effort into that, so it was very pleasing to see the Rudd government acknowledge that work.

I also want to talk about paid parental leave. As a parent of three children and with many friends who are of child-bearing age, I think this is a very important thing for a government to do, and it is the Rudd Labor government that has done it. We will be investing $731 million over five years to implement a comprehensive paid parental leave scheme, and I am thrilled about that.

Sustainable pension reform, which I touched on earlier, has also been undertaken in this budget. This is pension reform of a type not seen in Australia’s history since the introduction of the pension and some changes that were made in the 1970s. I am really thrilled about the increase for single pensioners and the increase for couple pensioners. Across my electorate, there are more than 17,000 pensioners who will benefit from this reform, and I would like to put on the record that they are extremely pleased with the outcome of that pension reform.

A subject that I have previously put on the record before in this place as a member of the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Family, Community, Housing and Youth is carers. I spoke on the carers report recently and also on a recent carers bill, but I do want to acknowledge that the government will, with this budget, provide more and ongoing assistance to carers into the future.

We are also doing a lot to support small business. I have conducted some small business consultations in my electorate with the minister for small business. The increase in the highly successful tax break for small business, from 30 per cent to 50 per cent, has gone down extremely well in my electorate. We are doing a number of other things to support small business, including reducing the pay-as-you-go tax instalments, which will provide cash flow relief. By delivering on our investment in education, we are obviously providing local jobs for people. The extension of the first home owners boost will also produce more jobs and support jobs in Tasmania. There is the installation of ceiling insulation and solar hot water systems for local homes, the social housing construction and the community infrastructure grants.

I also want to put on the record today the $4 million for the Twin Ovals project in Kingston, in southern Tasmania, one of which will be built to AFL standard, which has been very well received by my local community. In addition, there is $2 million for the Bellerive Oval lights. This was really important because Cricket Australia had said that, if Bellerive Oval did not get lights, we would be at risk of losing the hosting of international cricket matches, so I am really pleased that the Rudd government has funded half the lights and the state government the other half. That means Tasmania will continue to receive its fair share of the international cricket market. In fact, it was recently announced that early next year Australia will play a test match at Bellerive Oval in my electorate, which I am sure will please many locals. It is a great investment and it will also inject money into the local economy.

I think that is pretty much all I want to put on the record now about the budget and its impact in Franklin, and what the Rudd Labor government is doing. I encourage those opposite to support the Rudd government’s budget measures. I am sure that the people of Franklin will be pleased with this budget, and I commend the bill to the House.

Debate (on motion by Ms Grierson) adjourned.