Mal Washer (Moore, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. I refer the Treasurer to the budget fringe benefits tax increase on working vehicles. Has the Treasurer seen the analysis by Deloittes which shows that a typical tradesperson who drives 26,000 kilometres a year will lose $2,000 per year, or a tradesperson who drives 41,000 kilometres per year will lose $3,000 per year? What has the Treasurer got against the hard-working tradespeople of Australia who do the right thing and just want a better life for their families?

Wayne Swan (Lilley, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We are supporting tradies in this budget and are absolutely proud of it. We are absolutely proud of supporting tradies in this budget. We have added to the $5,000 instant asset write-off an ability for people like that to write off the first $5,000 of the purchase of a ute. We are really proud of bringing in this initiative, but it will not happen if those opposite have their way because they are going to oppose it. The fact is that I know they are acutely embarrassed by that fact.

No, I have not seen that analysis. I will have a look at it. The fact is that we have made some changes to fringe benefits taxation, but those people who are using their vehicles for work can fill out a logbook and there will be no change for them.

Darren Cheeseman (Corangamite, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for School Education, Early Childhood and Youth. Will the Minister explain how this year's budget makes every school a great school?

Peter Garrett (Kingsford Smith, Australian Labor Party, Minister for School Education, Early Childhood and Youth) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for his question. The fact is that this budget is about setting up Australia for the future, and education is a key component of this budget. We on this side of the House know that education is the great enabler. With education and training we develop our skills, we increase participation, we deliver productivity and we ensure prosperity. That is what this budget is all about. I am pleased to be able to outline some of the initiatives—$800 million worth—identified in this budget which will deliver important education reforms for Australia.

This budget provides $425 million over four years for national rewards for great teachers. These rewards will foster the development of a nationally consistent performance management system for teachers for the very first time. From 2014, the top 10 per cent of teachers identified through this system will receive a bonus of up to 10 per cent of their salary. There is extra new funding in this budget, with some $200 million more in support for students with disabilities. This initiative is really important because we can now deliver therapy services, in-school training, teacher training and additional technologies to government schools, Catholic schools and independent schools that have kids with disabilities in their classrooms. I was especially pleased at the response that the government had to that initiative.

There is $18.1 million for the Teach Next program. Here is an opportunity to create new pathways for teachers, particularly those with expertise in areas like maths and science. There is a $7 million investment in the development of an Australian baccalaureate, enabling Australian secondary students to acquire a credential of international standing—increasingly important in a globalised world. There is an additional $222 million in funding for the National School Chaplaincy Program. This will mean that an additional 1,000 schools, particularly schools in regional, remote and disadvantaged Australia, have access to chaplains. I did note that this was welcomed by the Australian Primary Principals Association. As well as that, from 2012, Indigenous students in regional and remote Australia will have access to the Indigenous Ranger Cadetship initiative. This will give those Indigenous students an opportunity to gain recognised qualifications and then gain work in the Working on Country Indigenous Rangers program, which is very successful around Australia.

These reforms are supported by education stakeholders. The Business Council of Australia is congratulating the federal government for the leadership it is providing on school education reform. The Australian Federation of Disability Organisations, the Australian Special Education Principals Association and the Parents Council are welcoming the More Support for Students with Disabilities Initiative. I did note that the Australian Special Education Principals Association said 'applause to the Gillard government'. They called it a huge step forward, and indeed it was.

This government continues to deliver great reforms and solid investment to education, and that has been a hallmark of this budget. We do that on the back of record investment, nearly double what the coalition had spent, making sure that every kid in our schools in Australia gets access to a great education and that every school is a great school. So tonight the opposition leader has to tell us whether or not he will continue to maintain the $2.8 billion in cuts to education that the coalition have identified—cuts to teacher quality, cuts to students who are learning in low-SES schools, cuts across an education agenda that this government is delivering at this important time. Every child deserves the best education they can get. This government is delivering that education to every child.

Jamie Briggs (Mayo, Liberal Party, Chairman of the Scrutiny of Government Waste Committee) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. Will the Treasurer advise the House why electrical retailer Harvey Norman can supply a fully installed set-top box for $168 yet your government is handing out more than double that under its set-top box scheme? Can the Treasurer guarantee that this scheme will not just be another roof batts, computers in schools, green loans, solar panels and school halls fiasco?

Wayne Swan (Lilley, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I do really welcome this question because the campaign that is being conducted by those opposite and some sections of the media about this matter has been inaccurate and irresponsible. Thirty-eight thousand have been installed. If there were some substantial problem here, given that they have been generally installed across the electorates of those opposite, we might have heard a peep about it. If something were going wrong we might have heard something about it from those opposite. We have heard nothing, because this is a program which has integrity. It is one that has been supported by those opposite. This is what the member for Mayo had to say about this on 25 May 2009:

It is right that the government does help Australians, particularly those at the lower end of the income scale, to switch over to digital TV.

What hypocrisy, what absolute hypocrisy. The costings that have been used and the way in which this has been approached have not taken into account that when these things are installed there is a service which goes with it. It is not just a question of the set-top box. I know there are members over there who are going into the homes of pensioners and who think they have got good value. But they are not speaking up for the pensioners of Australia. And we make no apology for supporting the pensioners of Australia with this important program because, if it were not there, too many of them would be left in the dark when the digital switchover happens. So this is a good program, it has a good social purpose, but once again it is being absolutely trashed by those opposite for base political purposes.

Jamie Briggs (Mayo, Liberal Party, Chairman of the Scrutiny of Government Waste Committee) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek leave to table the ad which says you can do this for 168 bucks, not double the money!

Leave not granted.

Ed Husic (Chifley, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. Will the Prime Minister outline the government's approach to delivering more infrastructure to the people of New South Wales and how this is being delivered in the budget?

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

I thank the member for Greenway for his question. I know that he and members, such as the member for Lindsay, work hard to represent Western Sydney in this place and they do a fantastic job.

Mr Hockey interjecting—

Sorry, I should have said the member for Chifley. Thank you to the shadow Treasurer for the correction and giving me the opportunity to congratulate another Labor member on representing his community and representing the interests of Western Sydney in this place.

The member has asked me about infrastructure investments. Infrastructure investments are of course core to the budget that we delivered on Tuesday night—in transport, in broadband, in clean energy, in housing, in schools, in universities and in hospitals. I have been asked directly about investments in New South Wales and I want to make it very clear to the parliament that the federal government is delivering more funding in infrastructure to New South Wales than any other state. All up, New South Wales receives $12.1 billion through the Nation Building Program. One in every three infrastructure dollars goes to New South Wales, their fair share per capita and more than any other state. We have committed $3.5 billion directly to Sydney's transport network. Just in case anybody is asking themselves the question 'Which government has best delivered for Sydney's transport network?' I ask them to consider that $3.5 billion figure compared with the Howard government's investment of $350 million over 12 years. That is, we have spent 10 times as much in a third of the time.

This budget allocates an additional $1 billion for the Pacific Highway. That brings our investment in the Pacific Highway to $4.1 billion compared to the Howard government's $1.3 billion. On the question of our commitment to infrastructure in New South Wales, I ask people to compare and contrast those figures. Of the $4.1 billion, new funding for the Pacific Highway is $750 million and in accordance with our usual partnership we are asking the New South Wales government to match this.

There has also been money redirected from the M4 East. I know there has been some debate about this and I have been particularly surprised to hear Premier O'Farrell's claim about the M4 East. So let me advise the House of the following. First and foremost in relation to the M4 East money: this is Premier O'Farrell's contract with New South Wales—the commitments that he is going to keep—and there is no mention of the M4 East. Yesterday, in state parliament, the New South Wales Roads Minister said:

The New South Wales Liberals and Nationals have been advised that the M4 East extension is not currently shovel ready and that further work is required to define the scope of the project, to complete the planning process and to carry out an environmental assessment, including consultation with the community.

In other words, if we wanted to spend the $300 million, even if we wanted to extend this congested motorway, we could not do so. I have personally discussed this question with Premier O'Farrell and an arrangement has been reached between our two governments. So we will continue to work in a spirit of national interest with the New South Wales government. But let me say to Premier O'Farrell that I believe that spirit needs to be matched with a cooperative spirit on his side. He has said in the past that matters of infrastructure should be above party politics. We will stick to that standard and we look forward to Premier O'Farrell doing the same.