Peter Dutton (Dickson, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. I refer the Treasurer to comments in his budget speech that the government will 'make new medicines and immunisations more affordable'. Is the Treasurer aware of any deaths as a result of the government failing to fund Erbitux on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme?

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

The government takes the issue of listing medicines and the funding and paying for that element of health care extremely seriously. Frankly, I think that question was just despicable.

Daryl Melham (Banks, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Defence. Will the minister update the House on the progress of the construction of three new air warfare destroyers?

Stephen Smith (Perth, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for his question. As the House might recall, in 2007 the then Minister for Defence, Brendan Nelson, now our ambassador in NATO, announced the acquisition of three air warfare destroyers for the Royal Australian Navy. This government, in the Defence white paper 2009, confirmed that we would proceed with the acquisition of these three new ships, and they ships are currently due for delivery in December 2014. When complete, the air warfare destroyer will be one of the more capable types of warship of its size in the world. They provide advance air defence against missiles and aircraft for self-protection, as well as for other ships and for land forces in coastal areas.

The total cost of the project is about $8 billion, with a significant benefit for local Australian industry. Overall, the estimate is that around 50 per cent of the total value of the project will be spent in Australia. The ships are being constructed in 90 separate blocks, which are being fabricated in three separate Australian shipyards: in Adelaide at the ASC shipyard, in Melbourne at the BAE Systems shipyard and in Newcastle at the Forgacs shipyard. They will ultimately be assembled in Adelaide.

Today, the Minister for Defence Materiel and I announced a reallocation of work for that project. This is necessary because, in addition to the air warfare destroyer work, the Melbourne BAE Systems shipyard is also building blocks for the superstructure for the two new landing helicopter dock ships due for delivery in 2014-15. The Melbourne shipyard is stretched, working on two major projects at the same time. The government, the Air Warfare Destroyer Alliance and BAE Systems takes the schedule for these two very important projects most seriously. In February of this year, BAE Systems advised the AWD Alliance of potential schedule delays. As a consequence of that, I met with BAE Systems United Kingdom in London in March of this year. The Minister for Defence Materiel speaks regularly to the CEO of BAE Systems Australia, Jim McDowell, and on this particular matter has met and spoken with him on a number of occasions in recent months.

Over the last few months the AWD Alliance and BAE Systems have been working very closely to prepare options to improve the production outcomes, and earlier this month BAE Systems presented the alliance with a plan to adjust this workload on the air warfare destroyer project. The advice of the alliance was that if no action were taken to relieve the pressure on the Melbourne shipyard the first ship would be two years late. As a consequence of these discussions and that possible outcome, the Air Warfare Destroyer Alliance, with the support of BAE Systems and with the support of the Minister for Defence Materiel and I, propose to take the following action.

Firstly, up to 13 steel blocks will be reallocated among the three Australian shipyards in Adelaide, Melbourne and Newcastle and up to five blocks will be reallocated to Navantia in Ferrol, Spain. This action will reduce the schedule risk for both this project and the LHD, landing helicopter dock, ships project. The Air Warfare Destroyer Alliance has advised that this action will reduce the estimated delay of the completion of the first ship by up to 12 months and all three AWDs by the same period. It will also reduce the pressure on BAE Systems to complete its work on the LHD ships.

Importantly, I am advised that there will be little, if any, adverse impact on the current Melbourne BAE Systems shipyard workforce, which is around 300, as a result of this decision. That workforce will continue to have the opportunity to work on the AWDs as well as the landing helicopter docks, and that is a good thing for Melbourne as it is a good thing for Adelaide and Newcastle.

Warren Truss (Wide Bay, National Party, Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. I refer the Treasurer to evidence in Senate estimates yesterday that the duplication of the Pacific Highway will cost an additional $7 billion above everything that is provided in the forward estimates. How will the Treasurer meet the Prime Minister's promise to complete this project by 2016 and still return the budget to surplus by 2012-13?

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

Through a prudent fiscal policy and strict fiscal discipline, and working with state governments who will have to bear their share of the burden. We will do that in both those ways. I will tell you what: we have shown a lot more interest in the Pacific Highway than those opposite. I happen to know our commitments are much larger than theirs, and we have put them all in our budget and they are all funded.

We have a commitment and a priority for the Pacific Highway that those opposite never had. The other thing that they will not do is tell anybody how they are going to fund any of their commitments. How would they fund the Pacific Highway?

Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Education, Apprenticeships and Training) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise on a point of order, Mr Speaker. As the member for Mackellar pointed out yesterday, there is provision in the standing orders for a minister, if he does not know the answer to a question, to simply say so and return to the House later and answer the question. He is clearly not answering the question and I would ask you to draw him back to the question or sit him down.

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

There is no point of order. The Treasurer will respond to the question.

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

As someone who has travelled the Pacific Highway a lot in my life, one of the things that I am proudest of in this budget is the commitment of $1 billion to the Pacific Highway. I am really proud of that. I am proud of the performance of our roads minister here, the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, who has made a very big commitment to the Pacific Highway and, of course, the Independent members, who have a real interest in this highway. I know how dangerous this highway is because I am a Queenslander and I have driven it all my life. We have a commitment there that has not been there from those opposite. Our total commitment is $4.1 billion, compared to the Howard government's $1.3 billion. That is the answer to your question.

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

The member for Boothby.

Andrew Southcott (Boothby, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Primary Healthcare) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr Speaker. My question is to the Treasurer.

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

Order! Sorry, no. The member for Boothby will resume his seat. I made a mistake—and I admit mistakes. Not many people here do.

Opposition members interjecting—

The difference was that the Chief Government Whip was on his feet.

Honourable members interjecting—

He was not. I do not really appreciate the very smart way that I have these arguments with senior members of the frontbench in this manner. If the member for North Sydney has a problem when I correct the mistake that I made, he can raise a point of order. It was not a mistake. The incident that he remembers from earlier in the week was about the rotation of the call. I gave the call on the rotation. The fact that maybe the Leader of the Opposition was a little slow is not something that I highlighted at the time. But I will not, when I can recover from a mistake and I have admitted a mistake, have it challenged in the way that the member for North Sydney did.

Joel Fitzgibbon (Hunter, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have a very relevant question to the Leader of the House. I ask him: how are members of the House approaching negotiations on the conduct of the proceedings of the House?

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

I thank the member for Hunter, the Chief Government Whip, for his question. Indeed, as of today, at 1.30, we have passed 112 pieces of legislation through this House—112 supported, zero opposed by this House of Representatives. And we have done that in just eight months. How does that compare with our predecessors? Those opposite would like to say that this parliament cannot function properly because it requires proper negotiation. The fact is that in the first 12 months of the Howard government 108 bills were passed by the House of Representatives, so we have been more efficient and more productive on this side of the House in terms of getting legislation through. Big changes have gone through the House, on the economy, on child care, on family services. This parliament is working efficiently and effectively. Through cooperation and discipline, this government is implementing its agenda to secure the future prosperity of this country.

Of course, we know that discipline is pretty important. I was sent an email earlier on today and it said this:

Last night we lost a division because the following five Coalition Members failed to support their colleagues:

Malcolm Turnbull (5 missed divisions)—margin 14.86%

He has always had a problem with emails!

Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Education, Apprenticeships and Training) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, on a point of order. I assume, in order to be directly relevant, the Leader of the House will refer to the fact that they failed to get a quorum yesterday for the government.

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

The Manager of Opposition Business knows that that is outside the standing orders. It is not a point of order; it is a point.

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

It then goes on to list Ian Macfarlane, Alby Schultz and the number of divisions that they have missed, then John Forrest—even Luke Hartsuyker, the Deputy Manager of Opposition Business. And it goes on to say this:

This behaviour is totally unacceptable and shows great disrespect to their colleagues and the Coalition as a whole.

As a result of the absence of these Members, the following Members missed an opportunity to raise issues important to their electorates …

And it goes through the members Tudge, Kelly, Simpkins, Southcott and Frydenberg and their respective margins. It then goes on—and it gets better. It says:

It is an interesting point to note that all the Members who missed the division occupy safe seats, while, of the Members prevented from speaking in the adjournment debate three are first term Members and all occupy marginal or key seats.

It then goes on to say:

Members are elected to Parliament to represent their constituents. That includes being present when the Parliament divides on a question.

As we know, they are so divided opposite they cannot even make it to divisions.

For the benefit of honourable members, I table the signed letter from Hon. Warren Entsch, Chief Opposition Whip, Patrick Secker, Nola Marino, Mark Coulton and Paul Neville. They are all having a go there, and I know that this was of great interest particularly to the member for Wentworth, who saw it as part of the attack by the Leader of the Opposition. This is a Leader of the Opposition who has done for political discourse what the vuvuzela did for World Cup soccer—lots of noise, interesting at the beginning but annoying when that is the only noise it can make. The only noise it can make is one of opposition.

Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Education, Apprenticeships and Training) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, in the spirit of the Leader of the House tabling the letter, I seek leave to table yesterday's Hansard section dealing with when the House closed down because the government could not maintain discipline in the chamber.

Leave not granted.

Andrew Southcott (Boothby, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Primary Healthcare) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer, and I refer the Treasurer to the announcement that SA power provider ETSA Utilities will raise household power bills in South Australia by 10 per cent this year and over the next two years utility bills will rise by $623 for the forgotten families of South Australia.

Mr Champion interjecting —

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

Order! The member for Boothby will resume his seat. The member for Wakefield will leave the chamber for one hour under standing order 94(a).

The member for Wakefield then left the chamber.

Andrew Southcott (Boothby, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Primary Healthcare) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Over the next two years, utility bills will rise by $623 for the forgotten families of South Australia. Given that the Prime Minister said before the election, 'There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead,' why is the government making life even harder for families, already struggling with cost-of-living pressures, by introducing a carbon tax which will add a further $300 to household power bills?

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

I thank the member for that question. The government absolutely understands the concern felt by electricity consumers about price rises that are occurring under the regulatory framework that has been in place not just under this government but under the past government. The member for Boothby is trying to draw a link between these price rises and the impact of a carbon price we do not yet have. That demonstrates what a baseless scare campaign they are engaged in. The fact is that there are pressures in the system and prices are going up and that is putting pressures on families. The opposition seek to say that is somehow a consequence of decisions that have been taken by this government. They know that to be completely false.

Andrew Southcott (Boothby, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Primary Healthcare) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, on a point of order on relevance: I highlighted the utility bills and asked why the government is adding to it by $300 through a carbon tax.

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

Order! The Treasurer is responding to the question. He knows that he has to be directly relevant, but he is responding.

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

On the eve of the last election, the member for Groom was openly honest about this, which is rare for the opposition. He said that prices are going up, and he said why: because there has not been sufficient investment in the network. They are very embarrassed about this statement from the member for Groom.

Opposition members interjecting—

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

The Treasurer will resume his seat until the House comes to order.

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

Everybody in this House knows that prices are going up and it has been caused by inadequate investment in the system over a long period of time. Those opposite might seek to deny it now, but they were open about it prior to the last election. For them to go out there now and run a baseless scare campaign somehow linking it to a future carbon price demonstrates just how dishonest they are. They know that the country has to face up to this tough decision. The government will face up to this decision. We will take a responsible decision in the interests of all consumers.

Amanda Rishworth (Kingston, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Employment Participation and Childcare and Minister for the Status of Women. How are key components of the budget targeted to get the very long term unemployed back into work?

Kate Ellis (Adelaide, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Employment Participation and Childcare) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Kingston for her question. I know that in the electorate she represents, which has some 2,068 very long term unemployed people, they will certainly welcome the additional assistance we have announced. We on this side are very proud of the 700,000 jobs that have been created since we have been in government. But we also see that, as we head towards an unemployment rate of some 4.5 per cent with an additional 500,000 jobs to be created in the coming years, this provides us with a unique opportunity. As a nation, we are faced with a unique chance to transform the lives of the very long term unemployed and to break the cycle of welfare dependency. As a government, we are absolutely determined that we are not going to leave anyone behind in this period of growth.

In this year's budget the government is investing an additional $227.9 million in new measures to specifically target the very long term unemployed. In Australia, currently 230,000 people are classified as very long term unemployed. We know that once a job seeker has been unemployed for one year they have a 54 per cent chance of being unemployed for at least another year; so we need to step in and break this cycle. Of the new funding, $94.6 million will be used to create 35,000 wage subsidies to be paid to employers who take on and retain people who have been unemployed for more than two years. This will create powerful new opportunities across the nation. These subsidies, totalling around $6,000 each, will be paid for at least six months and will be available to both private businesses and social enterprises, creating the opportunity to transform the lives of very long term unemployed Australians and those of their family members and their communities.

We also know that people who have been unemployed for a very long period can have difficulty accessing full-time work, because they often do not have the work experience and skills that employers are looking for. We know that a lack of activity is detrimental to people's health and wellbeing and undermines their job readiness, so the government is putting in place stronger requirements and more resources in order to keep the very long term unemployed active and job ready. Under previous arrangements of both this government and the previous government, job seekers only had to meet activity requirements for six months each year. Those who are now very long term unemployed will in future, under this government, be required to be active in their engagement for 11 months each year. Those job seekers will be required to undertake activities like job training, volunteering, job trials and Work for the Dole if they are to continue to be eligible for income support. We are allocating some $133 million through this budget to fund these activities.

We know the Australian economy needs workers if we are going to take advantage of the minerals boom and manage the challenges of an ageing population. This presents a very great opportunity for Australians who have been out of work for a large amount of time, who face significant barriers to re-engagement in the labour market. Our government is determined to provide those Australians with the incentives and the support they need in order to get back into the labour market. We are proud to have presented a budget directed towards this.

Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Education, Apprenticeships and Training) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. I refer the Treasurer to the fact that an average school in Victoria is spending up to $58,000 a year on power and other utilities. Will the government compensate schools like these for the increase in electricity prices as a result of the carbon tax or does the government expect these increased costs to be met through higher charges to parents?

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

I thank the member for his question because putting in place a price on carbon is a very significant and fundamental reform for the future of our country. In the past when this country has faced up to the challenges before it and put in place very significant reforms, like we did in the late eighties and early nineties, there were always very big scare campaigns being run during those times, particularly by those opposite. And they are at it again. The fact is that our economy would not have come through the global recession in the shape that it did if it had not been for the actions that were put in place during that period, particularly reforms like national superannuation, which was so important to get us through the global recession. The point I want to make is that you have to face up to the hard reforms if you want to be honest with people. If you want to talk to people about the future, you cannot put the hard reforms in the too-hard basket.

Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Education, Apprenticeships and Training) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The Treasurer was asked about compensation for schools as a result of higher electricity prices driven by a carbon tax. I would ask you to ask him to answer that question. It did not need debate or any—

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

Order! The member for Sturt will resume his place. The Treasurer knows his responsibilities in responding to the question.

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

I was explaining why we need to put a price on carbon. It is because it is absolutely essential to the job security of Australians and our future prosperity. That is why the government is engaging in a thorough consultation with the wider community, the multiparty committee and the business community. We are working closely to design an emissions trading scheme.

This parliament was within hours of an emissions trading scheme the year before last when the member for Wentworth decided that he could not do it and the Leader of the Opposition knocked him off. The fact is that this country has to price carbon. We on this side of the House believe in doing something about dangerous climate change—

Opposition members interjecting—

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

Order! Those on my left will come to order.

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

unlike those on that side of the House, who are now dominated by the climate change deniers and led by the Leader of the Opposition.

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

Order! The Treasurer will bring his response to a conclusion.

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

So we will go through a consultation process to design an emissions trading scheme which is fair to the country, fair to households and fair to business.

Melissa Parke (Fremantle, 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 inform the House of the government's commitment to Indigenous education and how this has been received?

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 Fremantle for her question. Today is National Sorry Day, as the parliament has noted. It is more than three years since the historic apology to the stolen generation, one of the most important moments in the history of this parliament—in fact, in our history. The acknowledgement of past injustices and the commitment to the healing journey means that we now must redouble our efforts to close the gap. Not only today with National Sorry Day but with the beginning of reconciliation week, I think we as a nation have an opportunity to recognise the past, to understand that there was injustice and suffering, and to know that we are on the path to healing.

I did note my colleagues the Minister for Indigenous Health and the member for Lingiari reminding Australians that we are providing continuing support of some $54 million for programs to help the Bringing them home generation, the Link Up program and others. Right across Australia we will see Australian schools—public schools, independent schools and Catholic schools—having ceremonies that recognise and highlight the heritage of the first peoples, the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. These are terrific events. They create the opportunity for a more optimistic future. It means that young people, by participating in these events, are well placed to continue this reconciliation journey and to participate in it.

We know that we are profoundly committed to closing the gap, and education is the key. It means work, training and further study. It means independence, opportunity and hope. The fact is that education breaks the poverty cycle, a cycle that is experienced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. We know the gap between the educational outcomes of Indigenous and non-Indigenous people is unacceptably large, but we also know that there are some really good things happening out there in Australian schools that are changing lives. Yes, the national statistics tell us a sobering story, but the efforts of many of our schools, using the $2.5 billion national partnerships money that this government has brought forward, is encouraging.

Let me just identify a few of those encouraging stories. In Western Australia, 94 per cent of participating national partnerships schools are reporting improved engagement and participation of Aboriginal parents and communities. In the Hume region in Victoria, literacy intervention programs are seeing Indigenous student participation in year 3 NAPLAN reading move to over 90 per cent. In New South Wales we have Aboriginal community engagement strategies implemented in over 270 schools. Ninety-three have now got Aboriginal elders or community members working with teachers. That makes a big difference in a school. Two hundred and forty-four teachers from all the education sectors are undertaking Aboriginal education and cultural programs. Over 1,200 government school teachers are participating in training courses to support Aboriginal students. This makes a huge difference. The investment makes a huge difference. Sometimes there is one committed person who can make a difference.

To finish, my favourite story is of the Elliott School in the remote Northern Territory, which employs a 71-year-old woman as a home liaison officer. She visits family homes and talks to kids, parents and carers. There was an average attendance of 60 per cent in semester 2 in 2009; it is now 72 per cent and their NAPLAN results are showing improvements. I think that this investment and some of the examples I have highlighted show what an important role education plays. In this House, we are committed to reconciliation and continuing the investment to help Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students.

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

Mr Speaker, I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper.

Peter Dutton (Dickson, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I wish to make a personal explanation.

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

Does the honourable member claim to have been misrepresented?

Peter Dutton (Dickson, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes.

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

Please proceed.

Peter Dutton (Dickson, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

During question time today I asked a question of the Treasurer about a drug that had been recommended by the independent PBAC to the government. At the conclusion of the answer to my question there was an interjection, a false interjection, from the Minister for Health and Ageing to suggest that she had not received that advice. I thought that was quite misleading and inappropriate and I seek leave to table this document.

Ms Roxon interjecting—

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

Order! First of all, that is not a proper personal explanation. The member for Dickson has sought leave to table a document.

Leave not granted.

The member for Dickson will resume his seat. The Minister for Health and Ageing will withdraw.

Nicola Roxon (Gellibrand, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Health and Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I withdraw.

Opposition members interjecting—

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

Order! It is not helpful to make comments like that.

Alan Tudge (Aston, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I seek to make a personal explanation.

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

Does the member claim to have been misrepresented?

Alan Tudge (Aston, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I do.

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

Please proceed.

Alan Tudge (Aston, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It follows from my comment yesterday. Having examined both the Hansard and the government statement that was issued post question time yesterday, it is clear that—

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

Order! The member for Aston must go to where he has been misrepresented, not give a preamble.

Alan Tudge (Aston, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I refer again to the Treasurer's comments yesterday in question time when he claimed that I have said recently that I do not support the direct action policy of the coalition.

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

Mr Speaker, on a point of order: the member for Aston gave a personal explanation on this issue yesterday—precisely on this issue. He cannot get a go every day.

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

We would all get through a lot more if we were all quiet. I find it very strange that some people suggest it is the case only with certain individuals. The member for Aston will resume his seat. I think that this is a very rare attempt to follow up on something where there has already been a personal explanation. I might excuse the member for Aston, as he is a newer member and given that he has perhaps seen what members of longer standing do. If members do not have respect for the present occupant of the chair they might at least have some respect for the institution of Speaker. I simply indicate to the member for Aston that if something else has happened then it is only that that can be referred to, not what happened in question time yesterday. I remind the member for Aston that personal explanations are on indulgence, which is given by the Speaker and can be withdrawn by the Speaker. The member for Aston must explain to me where he has a further grievance. The member for Aston.

Alan Tudge (Aston, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr Speaker. There was also a statement issued by the government after question time which also suggested that I did not support the direct action plan. In both instances—

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

Order! The member will go to that statement.

Alan Tudge (Aston, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In both instances they are incorrect and have misrepresented my position. I have never made any comments on direct action other than to be supportive of it.

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

Order! The member for Aston will resume his seat. The member for Aston has explained where he has been misrepresented.

I present the Selection Committee report No. 22 relating to the consideration of bills. The report will be printed in today's Hansard. Copies of the report have been placed on the table.

The report read as follows—

Report relating to the consideration of bills introduced 25 May 2011

1. The committee met in private session on Wednesday, 25 May 2011.

2. The committee determined that the following referrals of bills to committees be made—

Standing Committee on Agriculture, Resources, Fisheries and Forestry:

Standing Committee on Infrastructure and Communications:

I present the Auditor-General's Audit report No. 44 of 2010-11 entitled Performance audit: AusAID's management of tertiary training assistance: Australian Agency for International Development.

Ordered that the report be made a parliamentary paper.

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

A document is presented as listed in the schedule circulated to honourable members. Details of the document will be recorded in the Votes and Proceedings.

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

I have received advice from Mr Scott nominating himself to be a participating member of the Joint Committee on the National Broadband Network.

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

by leave—I move:

That Mr Scott be appointed a participating member of the Joint Standing Committee on the National Broadband Network.

Question agreed to.

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

I have received letters from the honourable member for North Sydney and the honourable member for Kennedy proposing that definite matters of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion today. As required by standing order 46(d), I have selected the matter which, in my opinion, is the most urgent and important—despite our tetchiness during the day—that is, that proposed by the honourable member for North Sydney, namely:

The failure of the Treasurer to respond to imminent threats to the Australian economy.

I call upon those members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places.

More than the number of members required by the standing orders having risen in their places—

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Treasurer could be forgiven for not responding to this MPI because he is indeed himself the most significant threat to the Australian economy, and that is why the Treasurer is not able to deal with the matter in any simple way. That has been perfectly revealed during the course of this week, when the Treasurer has engaged in a rather slimy and slippery defence of his own position in relation to the mining tax and the concessions and the reduction of concessions sought by the Western Australian government in relation to iron ore fines.

With the government determined to close down any sort of debate in relation to this matter, this is now an opportunity to explain what really happened. On 1 February 2010 the Grants Commission had an extensive discussion and reaffirmation about high and low royalties and differences between lump sum iron ore, which is high, and of course iron ore fines, which were regarded as low. On 10 March the Western Australian Treasurer, Troy Buswell, wrote to the Treasurer wanting confirmation on the entitlement of Western Australia's share of GST. Not long afterwards, on 2 May, the Treasurer announced, with the former Prime Minister, the second iteration of the mining tax—the first being the one in the Henry review. Then, a few days later, the Under Treasurer of Western Australia wrote, quite obviously concerned, to Dr Ken Henry, stating:

… I seek your urgent confirmation that "scheduled increases" in Western Australia would include the removal of existing iron ore royalty rate concessions, which would see both fine and lump iron ore royalty rates being levied at 7.5 % …

It is quite interesting, because the government, through the FOI process, redacted the last paragraph, which has now been revealed, and I quote: 'This issue was previously raised in correspondence between the then Western Australian Treasurer, the Hon. Troy Buswell, and the Hon. Wayne Swan ahead of the March 2010 meeting of the ministerial council, where assurances were given that the Commonwealth would direct the Grants Commission on this matter.' So, quite clearly, by 10 May last year the Treasurer was properly informed that Western Australia was going to wind back the concessions in relation to iron ore fines. That letter was never responded to as far as we are aware. So, when the Secretary of the Treasury in Western Australia wrote to the Secretary of the Treasury here in Canberra concerned about an issue directly going to the matter that has been debated this week, there was no response, and until this day we understand there has not been a response to the Western Australian government. Far be it for the Treasurer to claim that he was not informed.

On 17 May the Treasurer received his own brief from the Department of Treasury and it went on to say: 'Western Australia indicated at a recent Commonwealth Grants Commission meeting prior to the announcement of the RSPT it was considering increasing the royalty rate on iron ore fines from the current rate of 5.625 per cent to 7.5 per cent rate for lump ore.' It is not qualified, it is not talking about the Pilbara, it is not being in any way specific about a particular class of iron ore fines; it is the general concession applying to iron ore fines. The Treasurer knew this, because on the very same day that he received this advice from the Treasury he addressed the Western Australian Chamber of Commerce, where he said, 'We are prepared to talk further with state governments who might have been making their own plans to capture a fairer share of resource wealth through lifting royalties.' A fairer share. So the Treasurer now is so critical of Western Australia for removing the concessions on iron ore fines that he not only said that the states understandably have to do it but he wants to talk to them about it. On the same day at a doorstop, he was asked by a journalist:

Premier Colin Barnett has flagged that he wants to increase iron ore royalties to the global rate of 7½ per cent. He flagged that before the Henry Review. Will you say yes or no to whether that 7½ per cent royalty rate—

will apply. We know that this Treasurer never answers a yes or no question, so I am going to cut short the very long-winded answer. The Treasurer then said:

The fact that Premier Barnett is looking at very substantial increases in the royalties demonstrates the point that I was making to you before – that these royalty regimes have not kept pace with the underlying value of the resource, which all Western Australians and Australians do own.

So now, when Western Australia does exactly what he was encouraging them to do, he stands up and criticises the Western Australian government. Of course, on 2 July 2010 the government announced the deal that they had done with Xstrata, BHP and Rio. In the fact sheet associated with that deal, it says:

It goes on to say:

State royalties are assumed to be equal to 7.5 per cent of sales revenue and are credited against the MRRT liability to produce the net MRRT liability.

What does that mean? It means that there was always an assumption by this government that the state governments would remove concessions and it was prepared to rebate up to 7.5 per cent. Quite plainly the government is encouraging confusion in relation to this matter. On 20 October, and the Prime Minister herself has quoted this in this parliament, Premier Barnett says on ABC radio that they have no plan to increase royalties. That is where the Prime Minister stopped, but he actually went on to say, 'we did get rid of some concessions, and perhaps some other concessions that in time might be phased out.' That is what he said—so he is going to phase it out. On 21 October Premier Barnett is quoted in the West Australian as saying:

The state has no intention of increasing royalties but we will certainly preserve the right to do so.

In November 2010, the Western Australian Treasury said in a submission to the Commonwealth Grants Commission that the Premier had recently indicated that the state had no intention of increasing royalties, but they would certainly preserve the right to do so. On 16 November, the Western Australian Under Secretary, failing to have received a response to his first letter, writes again to the Secretary to the Treasury asking what is going to happen to the Western Australian state budget due to the treatment of royalties. In February 2011, the Treasurer writes to the chairperson of the Grants Commission—he referred to this today in question time—saying that, in regard to the removal of iron ore fines royalty rate concessions in 2010, 'the classification of iron ore fines should not move between mineral royalty rates groups in between methodology reviews'.

In relation to the first round of the wind-back concessions, the Treasurer, here, wrote to the Grants Commission and said 'don't penalise Western Australia'. It was the very same principle, the very same issue and was based on the very same assumption, that a royalty rate regime would be at 7.5 per cent. Premier Barnett, just a few days later, said on Perth radio that if they wanted to refund to the mining companies increases in state royalties, then they had to pay for that out of their own revenue; that was their choice. On 18 May, last week, the chief of staff of the Western Australian Premier rings up the chief of staff to the Treasurer and he says, 'We are going to lift the royalties in the budget tomorrow; we are going to remove the concession on iron ore fines tomorrow, in the budget.' Two days later, the Treasurer goes into the media and claims it came as an enormous shock—he says:

Well first of all Mr Barnett did not communicate that he was going to do this to us.

So, over the last four days, the Treasurer has stood by his words of last Friday. He claims that what he said was absolutely right—it all came as a surprise, even though there is a huge amount of information that proves that it was not a surprise. He said it came out of the blue.

All of the evidence now points to the fact that not only is the Treasurer confused, not only is the Treasurer confusing, but the Treasurer is incapable and incompetent when it comes to managing the challenges of the Australian economy. This is a pattern of behaviour from his earliest days as Treasurer, in 2008, when he said that the inflation genie was out of the bottle. He went on to introduce a budget in 2008 that was in fact inflationary. It put up the price of alcopops, it put up the price of cars and it would effectively put up the price of private health insurance. That is what he did—he introduced an inflationary budget at exactly the time that he and the then Prime Minister were declaring war on inflation.

Then came the financial crisis. The Treasurer, so lacking in belief in his own integrity, so lacking in belief in his own competence, hides behind the Secretary to the Treasury, always releasing documents and private advisory notes from the Secretary to the Treasury to himself. He is so lacking in confidence that he is hiding all the way behind Ken Henry. It took us weeks to find out that in fact in that crisis room there was no Governor of the Reserve Bank; it was all being filtered through the Secretary to the Treasury, the man who was hiding the real Treasurer of Australia. What happened? Mistakes were made. There were a number of different positions on the government guarantee on deposits. Do you remember that? There was an unlimited guarantee on deposits, and then it was limited to $1 million, and reclassified again, not only creating confusion but also muddling the protections that were necessary for the financial system.

Then we saw the stimulus package—a stimulus package that we had the courage to vote against because we could see early on that there was waste—waste in the pink batts program, waste in the school halls program and waste with the $900 cheques being sent out to people. Tens of thousands of those cheques were going not only overseas to stimulate offshore economies but also to dead people—as if there was anything that could stimulate them! Of course there is one program that I do not forget that was part of a rescue package that the Treasurer is so proud of—I can see the Special Minister of State smiling—and that is Ruddbank. What about Ruddbank? That was a cracker of an idea. The Prime Minister and the Treasurer wanted to set up their own bank to bankroll property development. The iconic infrastructure that they said they would finance at that crucial time was Vision Tower in Brisbane. The Treasurer himself said it was a great idea to fund that—the only problem was, it went bankrupt three days later. That was the leadership of the Labor Party.

But, of course, it comes down to the fundamentals—the deficit. What an unsightly brawl between the Treasurer and the Prime Minister back in 2008. It took them 21 days to work out after MYEFO that they might have to go into deficit. Then in 2009 the Treasurer could not bring himself to say what the deficit was in the budget speech. He broke new ground. Not only did he break new ground by refusing to name the deficit; he broke new ground because it was so big. Of course, we all remember the government coming in here time and time again saying they were temporary deficits. They look pretty damn permanent to me. When it comes to debt, we all remember how the Treasurer was encouraging the then Prime Minister not to mention the number—$200 billion. Do you remember that? It was too big a number for them to get their minds around. Even on this budget night, when the budget net debt went from $94 billion to $107 billion, the Treasurer said it was tiny. That is the word he used: 'tiny'—'very tiny' he said on 2UE.

When it comes to banking—this is a Treasurer that has no leadership—on 40 occasions he warned the banks, 'Do not increase interest rates beyond the Reserve Bank rate,' and then of course they did. He was going to ride in on a horse and stop them with exit fees. That was the solution he was going to come up with. And on tax: we have had 19 new tax grabs since 2007. We have had the Henry tax review, and to solve all Australia's tax problems we are going to have a summit, just like the 2020 Summit.

There are a whole lot of issues here that just keep going on and on. The Treasurer is asked a simple question about inflation and he cannot answer it—it takes him minutes. He is asked a simple question about a flood levy and he cannot answer how many people are going to have to pay it. He was asked by the member for Longman, 'When did Labor last deliver a surplus?' He could not answer it. He went on ABC radio the next day and he still could not answer it. This Treasurer is the biggest threat to the Australian economy. (Time expired)

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I listened very carefully to what the shadow Treasurer had to say on this matter of public importance. Unfortunately, he tended to vindicate what one anonymous senior staffer said at Menzies House: that the shadow Treasurer, if he ever became Treasurer, would be an incredible stain on the Liberal Party.

I find that the Liberal Party and indeed its country branch allies, the National Party, have never seen a myth they do not like to exaggerate. I was listening carefully to what the shadow Treasurer had to say. As I listened to him try to pretend that Australia is not in fact an OECD nation that is doing far better than other nations in the OECD, I was reminded of the Liberal Party's ongoing commitment to untruths. I was reminded of the weapons of mass destruction that we never found, I was reminded of the children overboard and I was reminded of Work Choices.

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Peter Slipper (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! I realise it is Thursday afternoon, but there are far too many audible interjections.

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Even so, not content with the legacy of the past, the shadow Treasurer wishes to renew the great tradition of Liberal myth making with his unfair and factually unbased attack on a great Treasurer. We will start off with the exhibits of this mischievous Hans Christian Andersen like bit of bully boy bluster from the wannabe Treasurer of the wannabe tea party of Australian politics. I have listened very carefully to this discussion that somehow the Western Australian government did not tell anyone about its desire to increase royalties. As a part of the exercise, I have on me some of the great culprits of the current political debate. I have some iron ore fines here.

Opposition members interjecting—

Peter Slipper (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Hughes will not interject.

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have here some iron ore fines. I am sure most of the Liberal Party have never seen any. In the same tradition, because they might not actually know what an iron ore fine is, I also wish to refresh the memory of the House. On at least eight occasions—not seven, not six, not five but eight occasions—Premier Barnett said he would not increase royalties. He said in an article in the Australian Financial Reviewnot exactly Green Left Weeklytitled 'Barnett rejects iron ore royalty rise', on 4 September 2010:

In the future I think there is a case for the fines iron ore rate to be equivalent to the lump royalty rate or closer to that, but it is not something that we are moving on now. It won't be in next year's budget.

For the benefit of some of the members opposite, that is this budget. He said, 'We will not be moving on royalties in the immediate future.' As much as the opposition may seek to shout its way into government and shout over the facts, Premier Barnett said on ABC radio on 20 October 2010, 'We have no plan to increase royalties.' The following day, in that paper of record the West Australian, he said, 'The state has no intention of increasing royalties.' In an interview with the Australian, another paper of record, on 30 October 2010, 'I have no plans to increase royalties.' He then said on a fifth occasion—not content with four occasions—

Opposition members interjecting—

I am glad to see that the member for Kooyong has recovered. He then said, in his government's own submission to the Commonwealth Grants Commission in November 2010 which was sent to the Treasurer's office by the undersecretary, in relation to iron ore royalties, 'Further changes are not on the horizon.' As the Premier recently indicated—that would be Premier Barnett, for the edification of the opposition backbench—'the state has no intention of increasing royalties'. How often does a politician have to say he is not going to increase royalties before those opposite will believe him?

On a sixth occasion, on 21 December 2010 Reuters reported that they said there was no proposal to increase royalties again. Six times it was said. That was clearly not enough.

Mr Tony Smith interjecting—

The member for Casey may be interested to learn that on 23 February 2011—that would be this year—it was reported in the Financial Review:

Colin Barnett said there were no plans to lift the royalty rate for fines iron ore from 5.6 per cent to match the lump rate of 7.5 per cent. Mr Barnett said that while the different rates didn't make sense to him, the government had no plans to increase the fines rate in the foreseeable future.

I would assume that in the common parlance of the great English language that the foreseeable future would go for at least the next three months. That day, on 6PR—a radio station, if you were not aware of that—he made it very clear: 'We don't have any plans to increase royalties in Western Australia.'

Opposition members interjecting—

Peter Slipper (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! I understand that the interjections are good natured, but I am finding it difficult to listen to the minister. Honourable members on my left will remain silent.

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No-one is keeping the member for Casey here. We had always reserved the right to do that, but I understand that they do have to turn up because some of their colleagues missed divisions last night. On 6PR radio Premier Barnett said on those magic airwaves of the radio: 'All I'll say is simply that we are not contemplating one at present.' That was less than eight weeks before the budget. Even if the opposition are still content to besmirch the reputation of a great Treasurer by trying to pretend that Premier Barnett did not say these things, we have to then actually look at what his accomplishments are. I think that, whenever you look at a matter of public importance—

Mr Frydenberg interjecting—

Peter Slipper (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The honourable member for Kooyong will remain silent for the remainder of the MPI.

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We can only wish, Mr Deputy Speaker. When we look at this matter of public importance, I would have thought the shadow Treasurer, in order to have a debate about the merits of the government, would realise this is not a one-horse race. We have a beast called the opposition. I am using a horse analogy as opposed to any other point about that.

Mr Tony Smith interjecting—

It is a saying, Member for Casey—you need to get out and about. I am going to use several criteria to establish why I think our Treasurer is better than their shadow Treasurer. They are fair criteria; I will submit them for the House's consideration. The first will be spending, the second will be savings, the third will be inflation, the fourth will be the tax-to-GDP ratio—

Opposition members interjecting—

GDP, for the opposition backbenchers, is the gross domestic product. I will cover our handling of the global financial crisis—we would like to conveniently forget the war, would we not? We will look at our handling of the natural disasters and we will look at our fiscal position. In fact, why do we not put in a plan for Australia as a criterion and why do we not talk about jobs? The jobs number is the one that dares not speak its name among the opposition. These are the criteria on which, I think, you can judge our Treasurer versus their imposter.

Let us start with spending. We kept real spending growth, and we are keeping real spending growth, at one per cent. That is the lowest growth rate of any five-year period since the 1980s.

Mr Hawke interjecting—

Mr Ewen Jones interjecting—

Peter Slipper (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The honourable members for Mitchell and Herbert will also remain silent for the balance of this debate on the matter of public importance.

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In the last five years of the unlamented, departed coalition government, real spending growth reached 3.7 per cent. There is a beautiful set of numbers, as a former Prime Minister would have said—us, one per cent real spending growth; them, 3.7 per cent real spending growth. You cannot trust those people with the cash registers.

Then we get to savings. We have made $100 billion in savings since we have been in power and all you can do, when we put up the savings gold medal, is choose to come not second or third—you want to be right at the back of the queue. You want to look at a $10.6 billion black hole.

Then we look at the tax-to-GDP ratio. This is a number which the opposition conveniently overlooks, because the opposition are the great myth makers of Australian politics. They say one thing and they do something else. The tax-to-GDP ratio is Commonwealth tax receipts as a proportion of Australian economic activity. Let me put it in context. We are taking 21. 8 per cent of GDP or, to put it another way—

Tony Smith (Casey, Liberal Party, Deputy Chairman , Coalition Policy Development Committee) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What is GDP?

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is gross domestic product, Member for Casey. You will have your chance.

Mr Tony Smith interjecting—

The member for Casey has in fact had his chance. I am disappointed that they do not promote him to the front bench; he has more wit than half the people in front of him. Our tax-to-GDP ratio is 21.8 per cent. If you imagine the Australian economy as being $100,000, under us you are paying $21,800 in tax. But what was it under the scallywags of the opposition when they were in government? It was 25 per cent. So there was old Mr Howard and Mr Costello putting their hands in your pocket for $25,000 in every $100,000 in the Australian economy. We are better at keeping down the tax-to-GDP ratio.

But it does not stop there, members of the House. Let us look at our handling, and the Treasurer's handling, of the global financial crisis. I know that the shadow Treasurer once famously called the global financial crisis a mere hiccup. Let me tell the House: it was more than a mere hiccup around the world. Thank goodness we had a Labor administration and Wayne Swan as our Treasurer. If you do not take my word for it—unfortunately some in the opposition are not enamoured with what I am saying, because the truth hurts—let us have a look at what the OECD said.

Mr Tehan interjecting—

The OECD, Member for Wannon—it is not the name of a type of cow. The OECD said it considered Australia's stimulus package to be among the most effective in the OECD, that it helped to avoid a recession and that there was already an infrastructure deficit from the past from continuous underinvestment in that area. And we know who was responsible for that—those opposite.

There was also the IMF. Before the conspiracy theorists leap to their acronym dictionary, let me be clear that I am not talking about the International Metalworkers Federation; I am talking about the International Monetary Fund. They have endorsed what our government did. Then let us look at Peter Anderson, the chief executive of ACCI. On 12 May 2009 he said:

The investment by this government was overdue and will contribute to a more efficient and competitive economy when recovery arrives.

In the Australian Financial Review on 3 June, 21 economists said:

Deploying our strong balance sheet to use otherwise idle resources—or to put it more compellingly, deserted factories and unemployed workers—to build assets that improve our lives and our economy in the future, seems much more appealing; much more commonsensical than retreating into phobias.

Sound advice for the opposition. We have seen more and more people endorse our handling of the GFC.

But it does not stop there. When the natural disasters struck our country—tragically, in many cases, with loss of life, but also incredibly significantly economically—who was there to help rebuild the roads and the schools and the community? Was it the coalition when they were asked to help lift resources? No, not at all. They were missing in action.

Mr Truss interjecting—

No medals for bravery for the Leader of the National Party. No medals for bravery for the National Party. They abandoned their own people. I admit their members of parliament did good work for individuals distressed by the floods, but as a party, when they came into this place, they opposed the flood levy.

Let us look at plans for Australia. Only one side of this House has a plan for Australia.

Mr Hunt interjecting—

Here comes the member for Flinders, ready to another write a thesis on climate change—I do not think so. We have a plan for Australia. We have a plan for jobs.

Peter Slipper (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The honourable member for Flinders knows it is grossly disorderly to stand and shout at the minister who has the call. If he wants to interject, he should do so from his seat in a dignified way.

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

He may well want to, but I appreciate the Deputy Speaker's ruling. I have gone through a list of what we have done and a list of what they do not stand for. I have gone through the accomplishments of our Treasurer and I have also examined this specious and baseless attack—pretending that the Premier of Western Australia had not said, on at least eight occasions, that they were not going to increase royalties.

But there is a little bit more here for the information of the House. If the opposition seriously want to be a government—we hear them barking and we hear them noisily shouting, 'Election! Election!'—then what they have to do is reassure a whole lot of people out there that they actually have a plan. At the moment, people cannot be confident that the opposition have a view about what to do. Any mug can knock, but not everyone is capable of running the show, and that is the challenge for the opposition. The people opposite do not have a view on superannuation. They are happy to put 15 per cent superannuation in their own pockets or defined benefit—beautiful money if you can get it—and I do not mind that. But what I object to—

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

That is weak, Bill. You are weak.

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Member for Mayo, you should be ashamed of your position. You will not support the people in your electorate getting 12 per cent superannuation.

Mr Briggs interjecting—

Peter Slipper (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Mayo will remain silent.

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Stand up and do the right thing by your electorate—

Mr Briggs interjecting—

Peter Slipper (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I warn the honourable member for Mayo.

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Stand up and support your punters who might not have enough money when they retire. Why not support 12 per cent? Indeed, if they are so ready for government, why are they backing conflicting remuneration structures for financial advisers? Why not, if people need good financial advice, let financial planners work with their customers instead of get all the commissions and conflicted remuneration structures?

Mr Briggs interjecting—

Peter Slipper (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I remind the member for Mayo that he is under warning. One more word and he is out.

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We see a lot of contradictions in the opposition. They do not want to tackle problem gambling. They are not particularly interested in our measures to lower the corporate tax rate from 30 per cent to 29 per cent. They are not interested in supporting—

Opposition members interjecting—

Michael Danby (Melbourne Ports, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You didn't even support the Pacific Highway.

Peter Slipper (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Melbourne Ports is not in his seat. He will cease interjecting.

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Melbourne Ports for his ongoing commitment to the Australian economy and the Australian people. The opposition will not even deal with issues of climate change. It is one thing to knock our plan—Her Majesty's loyal opposition have the right to disagree with the government—but it seems to me that there is an obligation, if you are going to knock the plan, to say what you are going to do about it. We know that they do have a plan to spend $10 billion picking winners amongst the biggest polluting companies, but that is not a real plan.

We believe that we have a very good Treasurer, and we think the shadow Treasurer needs to pull up his socks. (Time expired)

Luke Hartsuyker (Cowper, National Party, Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this matter of public importance. It is interesting to note that, when the Howard government was in power, we had a regime that delivered consistent surpluses year after year. We had a government that had the confidence of the Australian people. We had a government that people believed could deliver efficiently and effectively. But sadly, with the arrival of the Rudd and Gillard governments, there has been a loss of faith by the Australian people in the ability of their federal government both to deliver and to deal with imminent threats to the Australian economy. It is interesting to note that the shadow Treasurer highlighted the fact that it is this government and this Treasurer who present the greatest threat to the Australian economy. They have a complete inability to deal with Australia's economic challenges. On this Treasurer's watch we have seen an economy go from surplus to deficit, the levels of government debt reach record levels and this country plunge into deficit. In typical Labor fashion, this government has increased taxes, spent at record levels, wasted billions of dollars and plunged the country into a record $55 billion deficit. Labor is governing as they always do. They have not delivered a surplus since 1989, and this is simply business as usual for a Labor government.

We hear the Treasurer speak of future surpluses that are just over the horizon—' coming soon to a country near you'—but the reality is that he has not delivered a surplus, and I can tell you, Mr Deputy Speaker, that he will not deliver a surplus, because this government does not have the courage to ease spending, to pay back its debts and to bring the budget back into surplus. It is into tax grabs and debt financing rather than responsible economic management. If this government was fully focused on delivering a surplus, we would not need to increase the gross debt limit to $250 billion. This Treasurer is simply incapable of delivering a surplus that he speaks about in the future. By 2014, the government will be spending $20 million a day on interest payments alone, just to service its debt. This is money that could be going into roads, into schools, into better health services and into services for regional Australia.

One of the interesting risks to the Australian economy is a project that is being trumpeted by this government as the way of the future: the National Broadband Network. The potential for blowouts in costs and increasing burdens for taxpayers because of the National Broadband Network is greater than for any other project undertaken by a government in our history. There are already very bad warning signs—some very imminent threats—relating to the National Broadband Network. It is becoming clear that the NBN will never meet its IRR projections or its revenue projections, that it will be over cost and that it is not going to deliver the sorts of economic boosts that the government claims it will.

Let us go to the interesting point of the project's progress at the moment—the issue of time, which is so very important in the final cost at which this progress project would be delivered. Virtually every element of this project has been delayed. The Tasmanian rollout has been delayed 10 months, the completion of the first mainland sites has been delayed, NBN Co. have indefinitely suspended the tender process for contractors for infrastructure and now we have found that the second release-site stage has also been delayed. The $11 billion deal with Telstra has also been delayed—it is some six months behind schedule.

The NBN Co. is pointing the finger of blame for delays. The blame has been levelled at contractors, at the ACCC and at Telstra. These are all supposed to be reasons that the rollout is behind schedule. NBN Co.'s business case makes it clear that the rollout will have that impact on the project viability and the return.

It is interesting to note that, by 30 June 2012, the rollout is projected to reach 35,000 homes. But 15 months into the rollout, how many homes do we have connected? Instead of the 35,000 homes, do we have 10,000 homes connected? No, we do not have 10,000. Do we have 5,000 homes connected? No, we do not have 5,000. In fact, we have 607 homes connected to the NBN.

Mark Coulton (Parkes, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Seven in Armidale!

Luke Hartsuyker (Cowper, National Party, Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

'Seven in Armidale!' the Nationals Chief Whip adds. He is very right—there are seven in Armidale. I will get to Armidale in a minute. So, rather than having reached the target of 35,000 homes in just over 12 months time, we are well on the way: we have 607. Yet 'Trust me,' says Senator Conroy!

You have to look at the take-up, which is another important part about the viability of this project. What have they achieved in Tasmania? Of the 4,000 eligible households, they achieved a 15 per cent take-up. That was when people could receive the project for free. So they came along and spent $50 billion on a project, they gave it away and only got a take-up of 15 per cent amongst eligible households. It is unlike the iPhone when people queued in the snow to get one—they gave it away for free and people still did not take it up. They are 15 months into the rollout and they have 607 customers and 784 staff. I think the minister should make it his No. 1 priority to make the number of staff fewer than the number of customers. It would be a good objective to have a number of customers greater than the number of staff.

It is also interesting to note the Armidale rollout. There was a lot of fanfare and discussion about the first mainland site, only to achieve a take-up of seven customers—the magnificent seven, as I referred to them. I was really pleased that those seven people signed up; it would have been embarrassing if no-one had signed up. One of those customers was Mr Stroud, who signed up because he wanted access games. The NBN enabled Mr Stroud to play World of Warcraft at the highest level. I am pleased that he is pleased, but when you consider that it is a $50 billion project and when you consider the opportunity cost of capital I think it is a real issue for this country that a major part of the demand for broadband services is for recreational services. It seems incredible that we are investing so heavily at a time when the demand drivers that are going to deliver the return on investment for this project cannot be demonstrated. We are paying billions of dollars that could have been spent on other vital infrastructure projects so that Mr Stroud can, to his delight, play World of Warcraft at the highest level. It does raise very serious revenue questions.

We have the IT industry raising questions about the cost and complexity. Why did NBN Co. suspend tender negotiations? There were 14 companies who came in well above budget. What does that say? NBN Co. are trying to say, 'It is not that our budget was wrong and that we underestimated the cost; it is that the contractors got it wrong.' It is interesting that the CEO of one of the 14 tenderers, Mr David Stewart of Leighton Holdings, said on Tuesday in reference to NBN Co.:

… some of the things that people are asking us to do are impossible for us to even price.

What confidence can you have in an organisation that at this early stage has contractors unable to price some of the proposals that are put to them only 15 months into a rollout that will take longer than a decade? Mr Stewart continued:

Often, you find with any new enterprise that is set up as a special purpose vehicle, all the experts decide they can change all the Australian standards, change the contract conditions, change the risk profile and fix up an industry that was probably OK before they started.

This government and NBN Co. have no idea about the price pressures facing the IT industry. They have no idea how to deliver this project on time and on budget. A cost of this magnitude is putting the Australian government budget under significant threat. With the revenue projections likely to fall well under what was expected for this project, the already slim return of seven per cent is absolutely at risk. This is a potential financial disaster that will have to be financed by the taxpayers of this country. It is an imminent threat to getting this government budget back into surplus. It is an imminent threat to the rollout of other infrastructure projects in the future. There will be a diversion of capital from projects that would deliver higher rates of return to one that quite clearly is not going to deliver the rates of return that have been promised.

So under this Treasurer's watch the country has plunged from surplus into deficit. This Treasurer has no notion about putting down a budget that will set this country up for the future. We have a Treasurer who is unfit for the position he holds.

David Bradbury (Lindsay, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am pleased to be able to contribute to the debate on this matter of public importance that was proposed by the member for North Sydney. I note that the matter of public importance was, 'The failure of the Treasurer to respond to imminent threats to the Australian economy'. I must say that I have listened long and hard to the protestations of the member for North Sydney, but in the entire 15 minutes of his speech he did not even bother to set out what he thought those imminent threats to the economy were.

To his credit, the member for Cowper at least attempted to identify one threat that he believed existed in relation to the National Broadband Network. There is no doubt in my mind that, like all of those Liberal state members of parliament in my electorate at a recent Building the Education Revolution opening, when it comes to the opening of the NBN in his electorate I am certain the member for Cowper will be there for happy snaps just to make sure that he cashes in on the rollout of the NBN in his electorate.

When I try to ascertain what the coalition believes these imminent threats are it seems that the entire substance of the member for North Sydney's contribution related to the fracas over the royalties issue in Western Australia. The Assistant Treasurer went through in great detail the repeated commitments that had been given by Premier Barnett. On eight occasions within eight months, and most recently within eight weeks of the printing of the budget, he ruled out an increase in the rate of royalties. Regarding this discussion about whether or not the Commonwealth Treasurer knew about the plans of Premier Barnett, let us have a look at the public record. I reaffirm the points that the Assistant Treasurer made by simply pointing out that every single one of those public commitments that the Premier of Western Australian made indicated that he would not be supporting an increase in the rate of royalties.

Let us have a look at some of the genuinely imminent threats to the Australian economy, and let us have a look at the way in which this Treasurer and this government are responding and dealing with those threats. We could talk about those threats that occurred during the global financial crisis or we could talk about the threats that occurred as a result of the natural disasters that we faced. You would have thought that these were the sorts of imminent threats by which the performance of this Treasurer and this government would be judged. They were the imminent threats that real Australians faced. They were the things that impacted on the lives of everyday Australians across this country.

When it came to the global financial crisis we must proudly stand behind the record of what this government delivered. It was a government and a treasurer that acted swiftly and with the degree of decisiveness that was required to ensure that this economy avoided recession, unlike any other advanced economy in the world. Not only did we avoid recession, but we have delivered over 700,000 new jobs since we came to power, at a time when millions of jobs had been shed right across other advanced economies in this world. Indeed, we managed to create jobs and not see a loss of jobs.

In terms of the fiscal record of this government, we also see a clear pathway to return the budget to surplus. I would have thought that that was a threat that faces the economy—the threat of rising interest rates in the event that we do not contain government spending and we do not get the budgetary position of the Commonwealth back into order.

But that is the very essence of this budget. It is about delivering a surplus by 2012-13. It is about tackling some of those important challenges, such as skills and labour shortages, this country is facing. And this is not a new challenge, albeit the interruption of the global financial crisis meant that some of those threats abated for a short time. But the Reserve Bank gave the former Howard government 20 warnings in relation to capacity constraints and skills and labour shortages and the imminent threat that they posed to the economy through higher interest rates and, consequently, more mortgage stress for people out there in communities such as the one I represent. If we look at those imminent threats we can see that when the coalition were in government they failed abysmally to address those imminent threats. But they are at the very heart of the budget that the Treasurer handed down this year. It is about delivering opportunities to ensure that we are able to get more people into work. We already have a participation rate at record levels in this country, but we want to get more people into work. We want to use this once-in-a-generation opportunity of mining boom mark 2. We want to get the benefits out of it, some of which were squandered under mining boom mark 1. We want to get those benefits for the people who have been stuck in unemployment. We want to ensure that we provide them with the assistance and the incentives to get them into the workforce to play a part in the national challenge of meeting the many challenges that flow from the mining boom.

During the global financial crisis there was often a lot of talk about allegations of waste. I heard the member for North Sydney talk about the allegations of waste. When it comes to the member for North Sydney, he at least did come into this place and vote against that package. I note that the member for Cowper was offered up as a speaker today. I thought that was interesting. I feel a great degree of sympathy for him. I know that there has been a lot of talk about the leak that the matter of five individuals missing the vote was all about undermining Malcolm Turnbull, the member for Wentworth. Indeed, if the truth be known, it was a very evil plan to undermine the position of the member for Cowper. What is the member for Cowper's position again? I am not sure that we know what his position is. The member for Cowper was here on occasions when the global financial crisis was about to strike and the stimulus package was being voted on.

I remind the House that the Leader of the Opposition, for all of his bleating about the stimulus package, did not even turn up to vote on the stimulus package. I will quote from an article in the Daily Telegraph on 8 March 2009 titled 'Tony Abbott Slept through the Key Vote'.

Mr Tony Smith interjecting—

Peter Slipper (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Casey.

David Bradbury (Lindsay, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I do want to quote from that article, because it sets out in great detail the failure of the member for Warringah. It said that Mr Abbott told the Sunday Telegraph that the group had consumed a couple of bottles of wine, but he denied that he had fallen asleep.

Tony Smith (Casey, Liberal Party, Deputy Chairman , Coalition Policy Development Committee) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You said it was the Daily Telegraph.

Peter Slipper (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Casey will remain silent.

David Bradbury (Lindsay, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The article said that he had told the whip the reason he was not there to vote on the stimulus package was that he fell asleep through it. I have often suggested that those on the other side slept through the global financial crisis, because they want to deny its existence. But when it comes to the Leader of the Opposition he may well have slept through it, because he certainly slept through the vote on the stimulus package. It is hardly the record of someone who is fit to govern.

While we are looking at the imminent challenges, I thought it was also worth having a look at some of the longer-term challenges. I note that the member for Flinders is with us this afternoon in the chamber. The member for Flinders has really let the cat out of the bag when it comes to the opposition's approach to tackling climate change.

Mr Tony Smith interjecting—

Peter Slipper (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The honourable member for Casey will remain silent for the rest of this contribution.

David Bradbury (Lindsay, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

When it comes to the opposition's approach to tackling climate change, perhaps they have not talked about climate change today because they do not see it as being an imminent threat. Maybe they see it as being a medium-term or a longer-term threat. In this debate there has been a failure to address some of those longer-term challenges. But the member for Flinders let the cat out of the bag when he was interviewed on 7.30 just a couple of days ago. He was asked whether or not the so-called direct action plan—this is subsidies for polluters—would provide long-term certainty for the investment community. The best he could come up with was to confirm that the policy does not even look beyond the next 10 years. It is a policy that is directed towards a target of 2020. But if you are out there in the investment community and you want to make some of those hard investment decisions about whether to invest in the new technologies of the future—whether to make those 30- to 50-year investments across the lifecycle of an asset—if you want some certainly don't go to the coalition because, by his very admission, the member for Flinders has indicated that his policy does not even look beyond the next 10 years.

So, when it comes to imminent threats, they have failed to address them. We saw the opposition leader's attempt at a budget in reply.

Mr Hunt interjecting—

Peter Slipper (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Flinders will remain silent.

David Bradbury (Lindsay, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If this is about trying to force an election to give people an opportunity to determine whether or not this government should continue to govern, then I will simply say that the Leader of the Opposition should have done a lot better than he did in presenting one of the poorest attempts at a budget in reply speech. It is no wonder he was frightened off from trying to attempt one— (Time expired)

Tony Smith (Casey, Liberal Party, Deputy Chairman , Coalition Policy Development Committee) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In the very short period of time left in this matter of public importance, following that contribution that amazingly was worse than the Assistant Treasurer's, let me say it has been another bad day for the Treasurer. He had a bad question time, but he has had a bad MPI from those opposite. You would not have thought that the Treasurer would have a bad MPI from those opposite. But let the record of the House show that the Assistant Treasurer declared Wayne Swan, the Treasurer, to be a great Treasurer. This is a bad sign for the Treasurer. He used to say Kevin Rudd was a great Prime Minister, but only in the days and weeks before he completely ratted on him.

Debate interrupted.

Peter Slipper (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! It being 4.30 pm I propose the question:

That the House do now adjourn.

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

I might just pick up from where that great blues man, the member for Casey, was going in that respect. The Assistant Treasurer, who did dub in that contribution in the MPI—

Mike Kelly (Eden-Monaro, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Which blues do you follow?

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

Carlton Blues, Parliamentary Secretary—the mighty Carlton Blues, that is. The Assistant Treasurer, who did dub this Treasurer 'the greatest Treasurer' in his speech a short time before, is the weakest person in this parliament. This is a person who operates only ever behind closed doors, in a faceless manner with a sharp knife. This is the Assistant Treasurer who told the former Prime Minister before the election that he had his full support only to knife him—so much so they had to replace all the carpets in the ministerial wing, as reported in the Daily Telegraph this week.

This Assistant Treasurer is the most weak, heartless man. He can never do it to someone's face. He comes in here and backs up his Treasurer, but he runs around every single boardroom in this country and tells them that he wants his job. He wants his job and then he wants the Prime Minister's job. The Assistant Treasurer has all ambition and no ability. He gave an appalling MPI speech in support of his Treasurer, and we all know why. We hear this from all the corporates in this country who say to us that the Assistant Treasurer rolls up to their boardrooms and says, 'Swanny's not up to it; I'm going to be there shortly.'

There are some reasons for the Assistant Treasurer to say those sorts of things, because this Treasurer is clearly incompetent. We saw that this week in question time. He is a man who has in the past suffered terrible accusations being made about him on issues in which he has been involved, including I note the shadow minister for innovation, industry and science earlier in the week referring to a bagman. That refers to allegations that there was money passed in an election campaign.

Peter Slipper (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! I warn the honourable member for Mayo that standing order 90 points out that all imputations of improper motives to a member and personal reflections on other members shall be considered highly disorderly. He is skating very close to breaching that standing order. I would commend its provisions to him.

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

I take the Deputy Speaker's advice, but I am referring to articles that were in the Courier Mail. But it is the performance of this Treasurer which this parliament should find completely abhorrent. We know that the Treasurer has made mistake after mistake, such as spending too much money. The budget this year quite clearly shows that this is a government that has lost control of our finances—deficit budget after deficit budget, debt building up to over $100 billion for the first time in our history, another $50 billion deficit and the claim that we will only return to surplus in 2012-13. If you look at the budget papers, Mr Deputy Speaker, you will see that is purely because this government is taxing more. This government is not making the hard and necessary decisions to cut spending. It is taxing more and the revenue is up. There is not any chance that it will get close to returning to a surplus. We do not believe the government ever will because this Treasurer oversees waste and deficit spending.

Let us look at some of the mistakes this Treasurer has made. The first was stating that the banks need not pass on cuts in official interest rates. The Treasurer told a press conference on 8 January 2008:

… it is entirely their right as a commercial organisation to take this decision in their commercial interests …

Second, he made a comment to Laurie Oakes on 7 September 2008 that the pension was too low for him to live off, yet he did nothing about it. Thirdly, he told the ABC in 2008 that people affected by government policy should be sent to Centrelink. He said 'these people should investigate whatever opportunities they have through Centrelink'. Fourthly, when asked about the forecast rate of inflation on the release of the Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook, he undertook to cite a figure, saying, 'Who has got my chart?' That comes off the back of a very direct question we asked him in question time this week about whether he could refer to a figure in the budget and we were told by the Treasurer that it was not his job to play word games. He said that the member could go and find it in the budget papers.

It is a responsibility in question time in this place, when you are responsible for an area of government, to answer questions relating to that area of government. You constantly try to get that focused on in question time. Very clearly, the job of the Treasurer is to answer specific questions about his budget. This Treasurer is incompetent and not up to it. But he is a whole lot better than the Assistant Treasurer.

Melissa Parke (Fremantle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

While the death of Osama Bin Laden brought an understandable analysis of its effect on Islamic extremism, there continues to be inadequate recognition of the fact that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, now in its 63rd year, remains both a powerful rallying cause for such extremist groups and a source of general grievance for Muslims worldwide. In recent years, the Pentagon and US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates have noted that the absence of Middle East peace is having a negative effect on US national security interests in the region.

The failure to resolve the long-running conflict also impacts on Australia's national security, from its relevance to our military involvement in Afghanistan to the reality of its impact on our near neighbour Indonesia, the world's most populous Muslim nation. I have recently returned from a study tour of Palestine together with my parliamentary colleagues, the members for Calwell, Farrer and Shortland. This was the first time I had been back in the region since I worked for the UN refugee agency UNRWA in Gaza from 2002 to 2004.

I stand here tonight as someone who has lived and worked in the region and seen both sides of the conflict. I am not pro-Israel or pro-Palestine but pro-reconciliation, pro-peace and pro-justice. It is the policy of Australia's major political parties and it is Australian government policy to support a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict. This necessarily means independent states of Israel and Palestine living side by side in peace and security. There must be a win-win outcome for the two sides or there will be no resolution of the conflict. There must be a commitment to non-violence on the part of both sides and all forms of violence against civilians are to be condemned in the strongest terms. However, too often the conflict is spoken of as if it is only the Palestinians who need to change their behaviour. The frequent rocket fire from Gaza into Israel by militant groups is a clear violation of international law. But so too is the disproportionate use of force by Israel against civilians that was evident in the war on Gaza. Also contrary to international law is the blockade on Gaza, which constitutes collective punishment of the civilian population, which has crippled the economy and left thousands of young people without any prospect of work or of leading lives of dignity and which has left 80 per cent of the Gaza population dependent on aid. So too is the program of establishing Israeli cities, roads and the wall in the occupied territory.

In East Jerusalem and the West Bank, almost every aspect of Palestinian life and the economy is controlled by checkpoints, closures, settlements and their buffer zones, and by Israeli-exclusive roads, the wall, house demolitions and an opaque administrative system of permits—required for building, residency, driving, work, access to agricultural land et cetera—that severely restricts freedom of movement, access to health and education services and the capacity of Christians and Muslims to access holy places. It is this context of occupation that is often missing in discussions about the conflict, which usually centre around the issue of security alone.

Security for both Israelis and Palestinians is a legitimate issue, but it should be understood that there is no parity of power in this equation. Israel is one of the largest military powers in the world and the only nuclear power in the Middle East. It has militarily occupied Palestine for 44 years. Last week US President Barack Obama called for a Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders. He noted:

The Palestinian people must have the right to govern themselves, and reach their potential, in a sovereign and contiguous state.

Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu has rejected the 1967 borders as 'indefensible'. Yet the illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem are an ongoing poke in the eye to the peace process and to a two-state solution because these so-called 'facts on the ground' form physical obstacles that may foreclose the establishment of a viable Palestinian state.

Despite the challenges presented by the occupation, the Palestinian authority has been advancing peaceful resolution of the conflict, and the relative peace experienced by Israeli citizens in recent years is a direct result of these efforts. This is more than the peace that existed at the time of the Northern Ireland agreement brokered by George Mitchell. And, instead of being seen as a threat, the unity agreement between Fatah and Hamas should be regarded as a positive step towards the possibility of peace. Earlier this month Haaretz, Israel's oldest daily newspaper, reported that the Israeli foreign ministry had advised the government to see the reconciliation as a strategic opportunity and to refrain from attacking it. The Haaretz editorial said:

It would be correct for Israel to recognize the Palestinian unity government in order to conduct a dialogue and neighborly relations with the Palestinian state in the future.

Israelis and Palestinians alike are entitled to live in peace with dignity and freedom, and to choose their own governments. It is not sustainable to require Palestinians to be stateless persons under the control of another country forever. On our visit we saw Palestinians drawing renewed hope from the Arab spring unfolding in the region around them. Australia, as a respected middle power country, is in a position to play a constructive role to help ensure a balanced outcome for both sides and 'to act as a living bridge between despair and hope'. (Time expired)

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Heidi Maree Clarke-Lewis was a young woman with her whole life ahead of her when she entered Wagga Wagga Base Hospital on the evening of Thursday, 30 April 2009. Only six months earlier, on 18 October 2008, Heidi had married the love of her life, Steve Lewis. Heidi and Steve were happily married and were starting to plan a family. Heidi, who hailed from Narrandera, had a successful career as the media officer for Wagga Wagga City Council and a very happy and bright future ahead of her.

Heidi presented in the emergency department with severe abdominal pain that Thursday night and was diagnosed with an ectopic pregnancy and booked for laparoscopic surgery, a fairly routine procedure. Tragically, Heidi died on the operating table that same night. After nearly two long years, in April this year the coronial inquest over Heidi's death was held. Three official recommendations were made by the Deputy State Coroner, Hugh Dillon: (1) that the New South Wales Minister for Health undertake a study of the costs and benefits of digitally recording surgery, (2) that the Murrumbidgee Local Health Network consider emergency checklists and (3) that the Murrumbidgee Local Health Network review its on-call procedures.

Mr Dillon's closing remarks were particularly poignant. He told Heidi Clarke-Lewis's family that her life had not been a waste and that her death added weight to the demand for more regional health funding. I agree 100 per cent with Mr Dillon's remarks and so too does Heidi's grieving family. As Heidi's sister Mrs Kathy Langley read in her statement to the inquest:

We may have one of the best health systems in the world, but we are still nowhere near good enough while lives are being lost so carelessly throughout the hospital system. Surely the expectation to receive decent professional medical treatment in this country is a right and not a privilege.

Mrs Langley is correct. Medical treatment in Australia is a right, not a privilege. Why then is there such a line drawn between city dwellers and regional Australians? You should not have to live in metropolitan areas to receive top level health care and have top level health facilities. However, a line has been drawn—a line which sees that for every Medicare dollar spent on a city dweller, only 51c is spent on their regional compatriots. This is unacceptable. Every Australian deserves to have the same amount spent.

Wagga Wagga Base Hospital services upwards of a quarter of a million people right across the Riverina and South West Slopes. For many this is their lifeline in a crisis. In the country you do not have a choice. You have to use the facilities available. As Mrs Langley quite rightly told the inquest, a new hospital would encourage more qualified staff. Again today I acknowledge the former and present New South Wales governments and the federal government for the contributions they have made towards a new, long overdue Wagga Wagga Base Hospital. But more funding is needed to ensure the complete rebuild of the current dilapidated hospital. This is a project the people of the Riverina have waited for, and waited and waited. They are tired of waiting and they are tired of inadequate facilities.

I have written to the New South Wales health minister and the federal health minister stating the full details of Heidi's case. Heidi was a real person, not a statistic, not merely a number on a medical list kept by health bureaucrats. She was a warm, caring, healthy, happy person who always thought of others first, who had everything to live for. Her death at age 29 was tragically unfortunate and totally unnecessary. I trust that by highlighting the issues the Wagga Wagga Base Hospital faces, and the concerns of Mrs Clarke-Lewis's family and indeed those of the Deputy State Coroner, Wagga Wagga will receive facilities at least equal to those of most other communities in Australia. The constituents of Riverina deserve nothing less. We must ensure we learn from the loss of the young, beautiful and loving Heidi so that her death was not in vain.

Yvette D'Ath (Petrie, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Today I rise to speak about the Petrie Schools Summit for 2011. This is a summit that I run each year and which brings together students, principals and teachers from schools across the electorate of Petrie. The Schools Summit is a full-day workshop on eight important topics that the schools have contributed to. We work through the topics and at the end of the day the ideas are put together in a submission that will be presented to the Prime Minister, the federal Minister for School Education, Early Childhood and Youth, the state Premier and our local mayor so that all three levels of government are aware that our local young people and educators have a voice. This year's topics were: bullying, the proposed year 7 transition to high school, the value of arts and education, community spaces for young people, healthy Australia in the future, media and social wellbeing, role models and iPads in schools.

I would like to thank Deception Bay State High School for hosting the summit this year. Every year a different school in the electorate hosts the summit. Not only did Deception Bay State High School host the event this year; its hospitality students catered the event and were assessed on their preparation and service of the food, which was absolutely exquisite. They did an amazing job.

We had 114 participants this year: 36 primary school students, 11 middle school students, 22 secondary school students, 27 educators and 18 chairpersons overseeing the 13 working groups. Twenty-four schools participated in the event: Aspley East State School, Aspley State High School, Bounty Boulevard State School, Bracken Ridge State High School, Bracken Ridge State School, Clontarf Beach State High School, Clontarf Beach State School, Dakabin State High School, Deception Bay Flexible Learning Centre, Deception Bay North State School, Deception Bay State High School, Deception Bay Community Youth Programs, Deception Bay State School, Grace Lutheran College, Grace Lutheran Primary School, Hercules Road State School, Moreton Downs State School, Mueller College, North Lake State College, Scarborough State School, Southern Cross Catholic College, St John Fisher College, St Joseph's Catholic Primary School and St Paul's School.

We had convenors from across the electorate including representatives from local Indigenous groups, businesses, our Police Citizens Youth Club, the Queensland Police Service Child Protection and Investigation Unit, Regional Development Australia Moreton Bay, Brisbane Airport Corporation, School Community Relations, Redcliffe Environmental Forum and the owner of McDonald's Bracken Ridge, as well as a youth worker from Deception Bay Community Youth Programs. We had the president of Lions Recycle for Sight Australia, the director of MW Training, staff from Moreton Bay Regional Council, staff from Chameleon Housing, the manager of BallyCara Retirement Village, staff from Dolphins Health Precinct and radio commentators from 99.7 FM community radio. These people turned out to oversee and chair these working groups all day long. They gave up their time for free to work with these kids to get their ideas because they understand the importance of giving young people a voice and how important it is that all levels of government listen to that voice. That is what this summit is all about.

I look forward to putting this year's submissions together and presenting them to the various levels of government. I look forward to coming back into this chamber to report on the ideas that have come out of this year's Schools Summit. This is a great opportunity for our young people—from private schools and public schools, primary schools and secondary schools—to come together, sit around a table and share ideas and then go away having built new friendships and relationships. The students quite often keep in contact with each other after the event to keep sharing ideas. This is how you bring communities together. Once again, I congratulate Deception Bay State High School for being the host and showcasing their school at the Petrie Schools Summit for 2011.

Adam Bandt (Melbourne, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, you and others in this place may have seen the front page of the Age this morning, with its lead story headlined 'Australia investing in nuclear arms'. Australia's $74 billion Future Fund has been found to be investing our tax dollars in companies that manufacture nuclear weapons components. Utterly shamefully, this includes companies based in countries that are not signatories to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.

Fifteen companies are receiving $135.4 million from us to build medium-range and intercontinental ballistic missiles and nuclear-armed submarines, and to test launch systems of nuclear missiles in India. This is absolutely shocking in the face of the valuable and internationally recognised work on nuclear disarmament that our government has progressed in recent years. Whilst the government continues to state its vision for a future free of nuclear weapons, the Future Fund is enabling, aiding and abetting those who make weapons of mass destruction—weapons that kill millions of people. This investment must cease immediately.

Today in Senate estimates, my colleague and the Greens spokesperson for nuclear issues, Senator Scott Ludlam, after questioning the Chief Investment Officer of the Future Fund, ascertained that the fund had not sought legal advice before defending its investments in nuclear weapons manufacturers. It was also revealed that the fund had been of the position that the treaties Australia had signed on to did not preclude the fund's investment in nuclear weapons manufacturing companies.

Let me be absolutely clear: the treaties that Australia has signed on to are disarmament treaties, and these treaties disallow the fund's investment decisions. To take but one example, under article 3(c) of the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty of 1985, Australia has undertaken:

(c) not to take any action to assist or encourage the manufacture or acquisition of any nuclear explosive device by any State.

Let me also be absolutely clear that the investment decisions of the fund are questionable at best, and in my opinion overtly disallowed in the context of Commonwealth law. Section 13 of the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty Act 1986 explicitly states that:

A person who does any act or thing to facilitate the manufacture, production, acquisition or testing by any person (including a foreign country) of a nuclear explosive device (whether in or outside Australia) is guilty of an offence …

Yet, even today, it was revealed in Senate estimates that the fund has, to date, presumed its actions were legitimate, despite its own stated policy not to finance companies involved in activities that are unlawful in Australia.

I strongly suggest that this matter is not simply a technical issue of whether or not this fund is breaching Australia's legal obligations. First and foremost, the fund should not be in the business of financing nuclear weapons as a matter of moral imperative and should cease all such investments immediately. That a decision was taken in the first place to assist the Indian nuclear program—India not being a signatory to the non-proliferation treaty—is, in my eyes, a serious error of judgment on both legal and moral grounds. Larsen & Toubro, a company that the fund invests in, tests India's nuclear missiles and builds India's nuclear armed submarines. Under no circumstances should Australian tax revenue be used for such a scandalous purpose.

It is certainly not too late for the fund to alter its investments, and I commend its representatives for undertaking today to seek the necessary legal advice on Australia's obligations under the non-proliferation treaty and other treaties that it is signatory to. With some urgency, but also goodwill, this matter can be rectified quickly and the fund can continue its important role in Australia's economy without these damaging investments. As was pointed out in estimates today, the Norwegian pension fund and the New Zealand Superannuation Fund have both deemed it unethical to finance nuclear weapons companies and have both ceased investing in nuclear weapons manufacturing companies. Again, I commend the representatives of the fund for resolving to explore a similar path.

Nuclear weapons are the ultimate tools of destruction. Their use has enormous and catastrophic humanitarian consequences. They cause unimaginable suffering across communities and generations. The Future Fund has recently done the right thing on ceasing investment in cluster bombs, and it now has the opportunity to do the same on nuclear weapons. I welcome its commitment today to consider its position, and I hope that sanity prevails such that Australia's tax revenue is no longer used to finance the proliferation of nuclear weapons. (Time expired)

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

Today I would like to inform the House of the status of the some of the many Building the Education Revolution projects in my electorate of Deakin. On many previous occasions in this place I have spoken of the great results that have been achieved in our local schools through funding under the Primary Schools for the 21st Century program. Since 3 March this year, when I last spoke on this subject, I have had the pleasure of attending another five openings of new school buildings in Deakin. On 9 March it was at Tintern Girls Grammar School in Ringwood East. On 15 March it was at Burwood Heights Primary school. On 16 March it was St Thomas' Catholic Primary School in Blackburn, and on 18 March it was at both Marlborough Primary School in Heathmont and Eastwood Primary School in Ringwood East.

The projects have made an enormous difference to the schools, and have been enthusiastically received by students, parents and teachers. There are many more projects finished or close to finishing, and the next few months will be a very exciting time for many of the local schools in Deakin as they also get to use their new facilities. The opposition squeal about BER rip-offs, but these are real projects that provided real local jobs when they were needed most and have given local schools a new and modern outlook.

Having touched on the issue of BER rip-offs, I think I should comment that I have now heard of three instances of BER rip-offs in my own local area. Schools that have been promised funding are now hearing that the money has been cut. That is right—cut. Members may well ask, 'Who has cut the money?' Ted Baillieu and the Liberal Party of Victoria have cut the money. Some on the other side are laughing at this. Do you think this is a laughing matter for schools? I have news: we will keep going with this.

Schools such as Antonio Park Primary School, which had initial approved funding for $2,500,000 to build a new performing arts centre for the amount of $2 million and to demolish and rebuild the asbestos ridden portable building that now houses the after-school-hours centre, now hear that $500,000 is to be taken away from their school. Heathmont East Primary School was allocated $2.725 million to build a new multipurpose building to house badly needed new classrooms at this fast-growing school. Yet they are now told that $225,000 has simply been taken away and the refurbishment of existing buildings that was going to be undertaken has been scrapped. Just outside of my electorate, Warranwood Primary School believed they were allocated $2.7 million to construct a new building and refurbish parts of the school but then, once the main building was nearing completion, they found that the amount they were promised has been dropped and they are at least $200,000 worse off.

I have long been aware that there could be adjustments in allocations to schools in Victoria under the BER program, but in each case consultation and agreement is required. As I understand it, there has been no genuine consultation, if any, and no agreement has been reached. Indeed, two of these schools, Antonio Park and Warranwood Primary—if we go back through the history of them both—were initially allocated $3 million under the BER. One of the things that was done in Victoria at the time was that some schools that did not need quite as much helped out others that needed a bit more and both of these schools voluntarily gave up $500,000 of funding each to put into the eastern region pool so that other schools could benefit from it. Indeed, Heathmont East Primary School, another school I mentioned, is a school that benefited from this. They received an extra $225,000 on top of their $2.5 million, taking it to $2.725 million. But that has gone as well.

I fear that these examples may be only the tip of the iceberg and that the state Liberal government is ripping off many more schools in other areas and regions as well. It is now time for the Liberal Party and Mr Baillieu to come clean with school councils, parents, teachers and students of these schools and tell them what they have done with the money allocated to their schools under the BER program. This is, of course, federal money. This is money that schools knew they had. They had paperwork that said what they were going to receive. Yet when they come to the end of their build and they say, 'We need to do some more works around the schools and we know we have some money left over,' they will then all of a sudden be told, 'No, you don't.' I do not accept that the Liberal state government of Victoria can just walk in and knock off federal funds allocated to these schools and neither should anyone in the school communities involved.

Question agreed to.

House adjourned at 16:59

Andrew Leigh (Fraser, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

to move:

That this House:(1) recognises that:

(a) 23 June is the United Nations' Public Service Day;

(b) democracy and successful governance are built on the foundation of a competent, career-based public service; and

(c) the day recognises the key values of teamwork, innovation and responsiveness to the public; and

(2) commends the Australian Public Service on continuing to be an international model of best-practice public service and providing outstanding services to the Australian community.

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

I rise to present a petition for a post office in Eaton. The locality is in the shire of Dardanup. It is a rapidly growing community in my electorate in the south-west of Western Australia, with a population of over 10,000 people. It is expected to grow to 15,000 people by the end of the decade. Eaton is also a service centre for the surrounding areas of Burekup, Roelands and Brunswick Junction. At the heart of the Eaton regional community is the Eaton Fair Shopping Centre. Surrounding this are three schools, with two, Glen Huon Primary School and Eaton Community College, in the immediate vicinity. The heart of Eaton also contains the Eaton recreation centre, the library, a day-care centre, shire offices and a medical centre. It is a central hub.

Within 500 metres of the shopping centre there are two retirement villages, including an aged-care facility that will, with soon-to-be-completed expansions, house over 500 residents. Many of these residents and others of retirement age living elsewhere in Eaton no longer drive but use Gophers and walkers to get to the shopping centre. They do not want to take those Gophers and walkers two kilometres to the next post office. Currently residents have access to a postbox in which they can post their letters at Eaton. They can buy stamps from the great local newsagency. However, they cannot pay their bills, their fines or licence fees.

The people of Eaton and surrounds deserve a real and centrally located post office. This is commonly recognised—so much so that private citizens have flocked to sign this petition. I would like to thank Val Melville, the principal petitioner, for her efforts with this petition. A resident of Bethany Fields village, a retirement centre not fair from Eaton Fair, Val is surrounded by those who are demanding this service. She has worked tirelessly to put this together. A total of over 4,637 people have signed this petition asking for the government to take action on their behalf. Nearly half of the local population who have gone out of their way to make an effort to express their views. I urge the government not to ignore them. I again thank Val Melville for all of the work that she has done. The presence of a post office in the Eaton Fair Shopping Centre for these residents is needed, particularly for those who are not in a position to drive or walk the two kilometres to the nearest other post office.

The covering paper of this petition reads: 'The undersigned citizens of the south-west of Western Australia draw to the attention of the House the lack of a fully licensed post office in Eaton Fair Shopping Centre, which is being upgraded to the Eaton Town Centre.' I ask that the government not ignore this.

The petition read as follows—

To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives

This Petition of the undersigned citizens of the South West of Western Australia draws to the attention of the House the lack of a fully licensed Post Office in Eaton Fair Shopping Centre which is being upgraded to Eaton Town Centre.

For the Attention of the House:

A fully licensed local Post Office Service is a vital and urgent necessity for the community of Eaton and surrounding areas.

Eaton is a rapidly growing community currently serviced by a Post Box and facilities to purchase stamps.

Within 500 metres there are two retirement villages which at capacity will house over 500 residents, some of whom like some other Eaton seniors cannot drive cars and rely on gophers and walkers to access the shopping centre. They are more likely to use mail!

A close to hand licensed Post Office is desperately needed for mail and as a facility to pay bills and licenses.

Eaton and its nearby communities use the shopping centre as a one stop shop for their needs seven days a week. The town centre also includes three schools including a senior college, a day care, recreation centre, library and medical centre.

This petition of citizens of Eaton in the Shire of Dardanup, Western Australia asks the House to request the Government, which is denying the petitioners urgently needed local official post office services, to take action in placing a Post Office in Eaton Fair Town Centre.

from 4,637 citizens

Petition received.

Mark Dreyfus (Isaacs, Australian Labor Party, Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On Saturday, 7 May I attended the centenary celebrations of Noble Park Primary School. Starting life with 26 students in 1911, it grew to 100 students by 1917 and now has 260 students. The centenary celebrations were a great opportunity to reflect on the past and to catch up with old friends. I had the pleasure of meeting three generations of Noble Park students at the centenary, including Lloyd Lancaster and Keith Wilson, who attended Noble Park Primary School in the 1930s. At the celebrations, Lloyd approached Keith, saying, 'You look to be the same vintage as me.' After exchanging names, they started a journey of remembrance, including many stories resulting in much laughter. Keith's daughter Sharon said: 'It was a joy and privilege to see these two gentlemen joined after all these years exchanging stories of behind the shelter shed. They are old Noble Park boys with spirits strong for our great city. Why would you live anywhere else?'

This is an appropriate occasion also to remember the first teacher at Noble Park Primary School, Miss Olga Ernst. Miss Ernst was a wonderful teacher and a great Australian. She wrote her first collection of Australian fairytales, called Fairy Tales from the Land of the Wattle, when she was just 16. This is a special book because it was one of the first to take European fairy stories and put them in an Australian context.

Our community is now very different from that experienced by Olga Ernst in 1911, and not only because Noble Park was then a small rural settlement rather than a suburb within a city of over four million people. There was no electric light then. No-one in the Noble Park community would have had a motor vehicle, and many of the students would have come to school by horse. But we are culturally richer now than we have ever been.

This richness is reflected at Noble Park Primary School, where most students come from a non-English-speaking background, with up to 35 languages being spoken. Just as Miss Ernst made European fairy stories into Australian stories, students at Noble Park Primary School will make their cultural traditions part of the Australian story. The stories that start at Noble Park primary are the stories of Australia's future.

I am sure Miss Ernst would be proud of what her little school, which started life in a rented hall in 1911, has become. I wish to congratulate David Rothstadt, the principal at Noble Park primary, and all the staff, parents, friends and students for the enjoyable and well-organised centenary celebrations, for contributing to the ongoing success of this excellent school and for the valuable contribution that they make to our community.

Steven Ciobo (Moncrieff, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak about ongoing industrial action, namely strikes, that is taking place at the Gold Coast University Hospital building site. This hospital is an important piece of infrastructure for the people of the Gold Coast. For too long, successive state Labor governments have ignored the very real and growing demand for health services in our city. This project has already been delayed by a number of years as a result of mismanagement by the state Labor government. Now, to rub salt into the wound for the people of the Gold Coast, for my constituents in Moncrieff, we have a situation where the trade union movement continues to flex its muscles in a way that could only be described as demonstrating that they are completely out of control.

We have had in excess of 16 days of disputes at the Gold Coast site. We now have a strike that is illegal going into its second week. Further compounding the problem is that, earlier this week, apparently somewhere in the vicinity of several hundred trade unionists from the building site made a convoy into Brisbane and blocked all four lanes of the M1 between the Gold Coast and Brisbane.

It is fair enough for trade unionists to argue their case and to seek to do so through strike action, but it is not fair when that strike action adds to the costs for taxpayers. It is not fair when that strike action further delays a project that has already been delayed by a couple of years. It certainly is not fair when they continue to hold strike action even though they have been ordered back to work by Fair Work Australia. It is absolutely not fair to those people from my electorate and its surrounds who are simply going about their business travelling to Brisbane for work on a route that is already heavily congested—again, because the state Labor government has not invested in the M1—for there to be a rolling blockade, effectively, of the M1 with tens of thousands of people delayed for in excess of an hour or two on their commute to work.

The trade union movement are engaging in pure self-indulgence when it comes to their strike action on the Gold Coast University Hospital site. It is taxpayers who end up paying the price for this. This project continues to become more expensive as these strikes continue. Most concerningly, in what is an already depressed construction market on the Gold Coast, this sends a very clear message, and that is that anyone looking to develop on the Gold Coast, anyone looking to do any construction activity, needs to be very wary of the trade union movement adding to their costs substantially, because they will take strike action whether it is legal or not. I say, on behalf of the community, it is time they got back to work and dealt with it in the way in which the law intends for it to be dealt with.

Julie Collins (Franklin, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Community Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would like to talk about some great news from the federal budget—specifically from the health infrastructure fund regional priority round—for the Huon Valley community and particularly for the residents of Cygnet in my electorate. We were allocated $1.2 million for a new purpose-built Cygnet medical centre. I would like to congratulate the Huon Valley Council on its submission. This purpose-built medical centre has been a long time coming. It has taken a couple of years of lobbying, by the council and by me, so I was really thrilled to be able to announce that this purpose-built facility will be coming to Cygnet. The project is an investment in terms of medical facilities in the local community, it will attract health professionals to the area and it will also be a boost to the local economy as the stimulus from the Building the Education Revolution program winds up in that local community. We are also starting work soon on the new Huon trade training centre, which will also be in the Huon Valley.

The residents of Cygnet should be very pleased to be getting this facility. I was taken to have a look at the current medical centre a couple of years ago. It is an old building made of weatherboard and vertical board. There is an older GP there who wants to retire, so it is really good that they are going to have this new purpose-built medical facility. It is building on other investments that the government has made. Since 2007 we have invested quite heavily in the Huon Valley, with the support of the council. I was able to open the Esperance Multipurpose Health Centre refurbishments just a few weeks ago. I also opened the Huon Doctors Surgery refurbishments, funded by the federal government, and the Geeveston and Dover medical centre refurbishments, also funded by the federal government. The council has been working very hard investing in local health services, with the support of the federal government, in delivering wonderful services to the local community there.

The centre will include five consulting rooms, a treatment room, space to accommodate case conferencing and teaching sessions and access for emergency vehicles. It will also provide training facilities for the training of registrars and medical students. It will be a wonderful investment in that local community. We have been lobbying for a long time for this, and I want to give my thanks to Minister Nicola Roxon for her ongoing support for health care in that area and for the funding that came through the priority round of the health infrastructure fund.

Southern Tasmania and my electorate were also able to benefit from the multimillion dollar upgrade of the Royal Hobart Hospital that was also funded. All of Tasmania, but southern Tasmania in particular, including a lot of my local residents, will have access to the rebuilt Royal Hobart Hospital after its $565 million upgrade.

Jane Prentice (Ryan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This week marks the 10th anniversary of Macular Degeneration Awareness Week, and I rise today to support this initiative. How precious is our sight? Seeing the beauty of the world around us is something many of us would take for granted. But to lose the ability to see would be devastating. Sight is a gift we should not overlook. Macular degeneration is the leading cause of blindness in Australia, affecting central vision. It is age related, with one in seven people over the age of 50 affected by the disease. The incidence of macular degeneration increases with age. With my electorate of Ryan being home to over 3,000 residents in aged care, it is an issue that is of great importance to me and to those I represent.

It is estimated that there are 17,700 new cases of macular degeneration every year in Australia, and this costs the economy $2.6 billion a year. There is currently no cure for the disease, but early detection can slow the process and offers the best chance of retaining one's sight. With this in mind, the Macular Degeneration Foundation aims to raise awareness of the disease and encourages all Australians, particularly our older Australians, to regularly have their eyes checked—including their macula. The macula is at the very centre of the retina in your eye and is responsible for fine detail and your central vision. You read with your macula, distinguish faces, drive your car—anything that requires detailed vision. It is important to take care of your macula. You cannot change your genes or your age but living a healthy lifestyle, not smoking and eating well can help prevent the onset of the disease.

To truly appreciate the value of your macular health, I encourage everyone to visit the Macular Degeneration Foundation's website and take the Amsler Grid test. This will tell you if you have the early signs of macular degeneration. The foundation knows that, whilst early detection gives you the best chance of beating macular degeneration, it is imperative that we find a cure. As Australians, we have all seen what has been achieved by the pioneering work of the Fred Hollows Foundation. Finding a cure to make forms of blindness preventable makes an enormous difference to anyone's life. Finding a cure for Australia's leading cause of blindness is challenging, yet, if we are all aware of the issue and work together to find a cure, that can be achieved.

With this in mind, the Macular Degeneration Foundation have announced their single biggest commitment to research regarding the disease. They have recently launched the Macular Degeneration Research Grants Program, which will provide $1.5 million to researchers in this area over the next three years. The foundation's aim is for Australians to collectively raise $10 million over the next 10 years so that together we can find a cure for the leading cause of blindness in Australia. I encourage everyone to get behind this cause and remember to check your macula.

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

An excellent speech by the member for Ryan—I wholeheartedly endorse those sentiments. Statistically, Australians are the most charitable people in the world and, since the Queensland floods and Cyclone Yasi, the way Australians as a nation—sometimes as strangers, or as mates—are simply people who genuinely care is not only exemplary but extraordinary.

Many months after and following the tragedies in both Japan and New Zealand, Australians are still giving and helping Queenslanders to restore, rebuild and repair their great state. In my own electorate of Chifley, people from every background have pitched in and collectively worked towards raising as much money as they can. But, no matter how much money is raised, there is still much more to be done.

I talk with my Queensland parliamentary colleagues about the effects on their electorates and what their constituents are doing to rebuild their lives. I was especially moved by the member for Blair's comments in his discussions with me and in his condolence speech, where he said:

The damage to the lives of the people of Blair is as raw as the landscape around the Lockyer Creek, the Brisbane River and the Bremer River.

He also said:

This was our Hurricane Katrina …

The member for Blair told me that the clean-up costs will be more than a billion dollars, but it was the fact that most of the schools in his electorate were wiped out that caught my attention. We talked about doing something different, something practical, for them and we focused on two schools that would benefit from a helping hand.

Brassall State School lost three buildings, every computer, every piece of sports equipment, every teaching aid down to every piece of paper. Near Ipswich basketball stadium, which was destroyed and will cost about $800,000 to repair, is Bundamba State School. All of its buildings were flooded and school and sporting equipment destroyed.

With the Chifley spirit in mind, we set out on a mission to connect our communities. The Chifley-Blair Sister Schools Project was set up, bringing together members of both the local P&Cs to help raise funds for essential school equipment, in particular sports equipment. On Sunday, 22 May, I hosted a family fun day flood fundraiser for Brassall and Bundamba state schools. The member for Blair attended to talk about his electorate's experience firsthand. His remarks were insightful, personal and emotional and they gave a firsthand perspective of the devastating impact of the floods and the recovery work required. More than 30 members of local P&Cs participated and, through the effort, nearly $4,000 was raised.

The children at the event painted a banner for the schools as a goodwill gesture. It said: 'A problem shared is a problem halved.' Hopefully, the Chifley-Blair Sister Schools Project has helped lessen some of the burden of rebuilding while demonstrating the power of community from one electorate to another, from one P&C to another and simply from one friend to another.

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to highlight this Labor government's refusal yet again to listen to the concerns of remote and rural communities across Maranoa and rural Australia. In particular, I refer today to those areas that receive television through the remote licence area conditions.

Last week I found out that the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, Senator Conroy, had blocked the proposal by the Remote Area Planning and Development Board, which is based in Longreach, which would help communities in remote television licence areas after the switchover to digital television. The proposal would have seen funding under the Australian government's Satellite Subsidy Scheme pooled and directed towards converting the existing retransmission facilities. The board was merely hoping to replicate a service which has operated successfully for many years. The minister's decision is quite clearly a punch in the guts for people in those communities of rural and remote Australia.

For decades, local councils and remote communities have rebroadcast an analog television terrestrial signal. This meant that households, businesses, caravan parks, hotels and motels could receive their television via an antenna. The minister has now decided that the broadcasters will no longer be required to install digital television ground infrastructure for communities with fewer than 500 residents. Remote communities will now be forced to take up the government supported Viewer Access Satellite Television at a cost for connection of between $1,000 and $1,500, which is much more than the government's Satellite Subsidy Scheme cost of $400 in standard areas and $550 in remote areas.

We still have no subsidy available in remote communities under the proposal for hospitals, health clinics, motels, hotels, and caravan parks. What will happen in these communities under the proposal is that the signal will only be received on a satellite dish. Imagine going to a community today without a mobile phone signal. That is what it will be like in these communities. If you are an outback tourist going into many of these communities, as part of the great outback odyssey, the only way you will be able to receive television is if there is a satellite dish. Hotels are going to have to convert to the satellite signal with their own money. I have hotels and motels in my electorate saying it is going to cost them up to $15,000 to convert because they are moving from a terrestrial signal to a satellite-only solution, and under the terrestrial signal all they had to do was convert some of the televisions in the rooms. It reminds me of the Labor government under Paul Keating when they shut down the analog mobile service without a suitable replacement. This is yet another example showing that this government does not understand the needs of rural and remote Australia. (Time expired)

Gai Brodtmann (Canberra, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would like to use this opportunity to talk about the recent forum I organised and moderated for Canberrans looking to start a small business. As someone who has gone through the difficult, risky, frustrating but deeply rewarding process of starting a small business, I wanted to use my connections and knowledge to help Canberrans to start out on their own. I wanted to do this for two reasons. First, small business provides a means to diversify the Canberra economy and capitalise on all the wonderful talent we have in this city. Second, small business provides a means for giving people opportunities to enter the workforce or employment that is more fitting to their lifestyle. Here I am talking about young mums who have babies at home who want a more flexible and possibly part-time working environment, and small business provides them with that flexibility. I was particularly interested in encouraging women to start their own small business. I know they often have some great ideas and it is just a case of knowing what to do.

To keep the event exclusive and to give people value from this free event, I wanted to keep the numbers relatively small so that people got value through one-on-one contact. I was expecting about 25 people to sign up and actually got double that. All in all, 38 people attended my first business seminar, a number that exceeded my expectations and the actual bookings, to listen to presentations on the processes of how to start a small business and the kinds of things that need to be considered when starting a business. Participants also learnt about various services, networking opportunities and programs run by various groups, both government and nongovernment, that are aimed at assisting small business. They were also provided with information on the many support packages that have been made available to small business under the Gillard government and details of what we are doing for small business in terms of taxation arrangements and assistance to streamline the process of setting up a small business.

I would particularly like to highlight the award-winning website business.gov.au, which provides services and information about start-up, taxation, licensing and legislation, as well as transactions on ABN Lookup, compliance and licence applications. It is continually being refined and is constantly responsive to the needs of business. I would also like to highlight Enterprise Connect, which also gives Australian businesses tools, skills and knowledge to improve their competitiveness and productivity in order to maximise their growth potential. Finally, I would like to mention the actions this government is taking on behalf of small business in the budget, particularly the $5,000 tax deduction for motor vehicles and also the reduction of PAYG instalments for small business.

My forum was a success and I look forward to holding more in the future.

Josh Frydenberg (Kooyong, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on an issue which is of great concern to all people in Kooyong, the proposed National Disability Insurance Scheme. When I was at university I was a volunteer tennis coach for the Kids Tennis Foundation and had the privilege of coaching kids with Down syndrome. It opened my eyes. Since then I have met with many inspirational people with disabilities and with their families and carers. They each need and deserve our complete support to ensure they have every opportunity available to them. The NDIS is an important step towards this goal.

In Kooyong we are fortunate to have numerous organisations and individuals who are driving the NDIS reform. The Chairman of Yooralla, Bruce Bonyhady, is a constituent and friend, and his energy and acumen have been instrumental in getting us to this point. Wonderful local organisations like Villa Maria in Kew, one of Victoria's largest providers of disability services, the Association for Children with a Disability in Hawthorn, and Belmore Special School in Balwyn are all playing their part. Just last week I again visited Q ArtStudio, which provides an important environment for talented artists with a disability to reach their potential, and just next door VATMI Industries have a huge warehouse providing employment in packaging and boxing to hundreds of people with disabilities.

Today more than 750,000 Australians live with a significant disability. To carry on their daily lives they require regular care, support and specialised equipment, services that often come at great cost to families, who are invariably under significant financial pressure. While state and federal governments have already provided significant funding to the disability sector, some $6.2 billion in 2009-10, the system is not working; it is broken. The Productivity Commission's draft report on disability services released in February found that there is a current unmet need for support of $6.3 billion and that too often access to financial support is determined by where someone lives or how they acquired their disability. The draft report also found that people wait years for specialist equipment like wheelchairs, that their funding for service providers was uncertain and inadequate and that there was a distinct lack of access to respite and home modifications, requiring those with disabilities to stay in hospital when it was clearly inappropriate for them to do so.

A new national scheme providing insurance cover for all Australians in the event of a disability is a groundbreaking reform. With funding to come from consolidated revenue, it is estimated that around 360,000 people will receive scheme funding. Such a system would be more equitable, more efficient and more effective in delivering critical services to people in need. This reform will require bipartisan support and will need the federal, state and territory governments to overcome the argy-bargy of traditional jurisdictional battles. At the federal level the coalition has made clear we are working with good faith with the government, for the status quo is no option.

I join many colleagues on both sides of this House, and thousands of people in Kooyong, in saying that disability support is core government business, one of the most important functions a government can fulfil, and I hope the National Disability Insurance Scheme becomes a reality.

Sid Sidebottom (Braddon, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

One of the great advantages and privileges we have in our job is to see what ordinary everyday Australians do for each other in volunteering. It is the 10th anniversary of the United Nations International Year of Volunteers and I, along with lots of colleagues in this House, have been privileged to present national volunteer awards recently. Over five million volunteers in Australia give around 730 million hours of volunteer time valued at something like $15 billion, though they never measure it like that, and in Tasmania there are over 130,000 volunteers in 5,000 not-for-profit organisations and more. In my electorate I was really pleased to be able to acknowledge some of the volunteers that do this fantastic work. For example, June Baker has done tremendous work for Strathdevon aged care; Josephine Weeks and Judy Ling for the tremendous service that they have given to the Central Coast municipality and community; Julia Butler Ross for the Central North Wildlife Care and Rescue Organisation; Kaye Cameron for tireless work for the Burnie Eisteddfod; Diane and Mick Davis for their tremendous work on the Penguin Visitor Information Centre; Linda Munday for Zodiac Gymnastics Club; Gwen Pulford for the CWA Devonport and the fantastic work she has done through that organisation; Pamela Hutton for her tremendous work for Riding for the Disabled; and Sarina Laidler and Greg Morris, for instance, on King Island and their fantastic work there. I want to congratulate those people and all those other volunteers in my electorate who give of themselves and indeed create the fabric of our community.

Sarina on King Island is employed as a health promotion officer and has done much work beyond her paid employment. She is an active member of the multipurpose advisory committee for the local hospital, a volunteer for the Tasmanian Ambulance Service for many years and an inaugural member and creator of the Phoenix Community House management committee, which has also auspiced the creation of the King Island Men's Club. She is also a very active member of the local Lions Club, as well as giving in every other way, even in the Parents and Friends Association on King Island. She has a fellow member on King Island, Greg Morris, who has given tireless work to the King Island Regional Development Organisation, the King Island Volunteer Ambulance Service, the King Island Natural Resource Management Group, the Uniting Church parish council, the King Island shipping group, the King Island Chamber of Commerce, the SES and even the King Island Telecommunications Working Party. (Time expired)

Peter Slipper (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In accordance with standing order 193, the time for members' constituency statements has concluded.

Before calling the Clerk to introduce the next item of business, I would like to take this opportunity of welcoming Father Peter Rose, the Parliamentary Chaplain, to the gallery. He has got incredible patience. He seems to sit in the main chamber and here for an amazing number of hours and I think we can only admire his diligence, tenacity, patience and forbearance.

Before the debate is resumed on this bill, I remind the Main Committee that, pursuant to the resolution agreed to by the House on 10 May 2011, this order of the day will be debated concurrently with Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 2011-12 and Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2011-12.

Debate resumed on the motion:

That this bill be now read a second time.

to which the following amendment was moved:

That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: "while not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House:

(1) condemns the Government for incorporating in an annual appropriation bill provisions to increase the limit on government borrowings above the total of $200 billion;

(2) recognises that a special case must be made for such a significant increase in borrowing limits and that the Government must explain any special circumstances that it believes justify such an increase; and

(3) demands that the Parliament be given the opportunity to consider separately and vote on the proposed increases in borrowing limits set out in Part 5 of Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 2001-12."

The immediate question before the chair is that the words proposed to be omitted stand part of the question.

Stuart Robert (Fadden, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Defence Science, Technology and Personnel) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to support emphatically the omission of words and the change put forward by the member for Goldstein. When we reflect upon this budget in its entirety and the three appropriation bills it is important that we look upon the facts as stated in the budget, starting with the prebudget rhetoric of a tough Labor budget, of tightening of belts, and all we actually see is union mates being rewarded with millions and millions of dollars and $2 billion being slugged out of the pockets of families because of wasteful spending. In this budget the government delivered total savings of only about $2.7 billion over five years where total spending is almost $1.9 trillion. That amounts to 14c in every $100 and the majority of savings do not even come in until 2014-15, miraculously after the government has delivered their long-awaited surplus. As the member for Longman so eloquently put it last night in parliament, 'I celebrate my 21st birthday soon. In that time a Labor government has never delivered a surplus budget.' As all market commentators have agreed, this budget will do nothing to stop interest rate rises. It is also instructive to note that one-third of all Labor's savings are actually new taxes. It is a vagary of taxation law and of the way Treasury operates that a taxation hike is construed as a saving. We note from the budget that the budget deficit for the current year, 2010-11, is soaring to $49.4 billion. The forecast deficit for 2011-12 has blown out by $10.3 billion to a staggering $22.6 billion deficit for the next financial year. The net government debt is climbing to a record $107 billion in 2011-12 and it is forecast to remain at over $100 billion in the foreseeable future, at least to the next four years—that is, net debt of $4,700 for every man, woman and child, for every Australian.

Gross borrowings required to furnish the debt, as well as provide the necessary cash flow and so on, are forecast to go over $200 billion with the government requesting authority to increase gross debt to a quarter of a trillion dollars. It is a typical, old-fashioned, Labor budget—big on taxes, big on spending, very low on helping householders battle high costs of living, low on helping battlers deal with the high cost of petrol, electricity, gas, groceries, health costs and home repayments. There are no tax cuts for the first time in eight years, just tax hikes.

Appropriation Bill (No. 1) is for ordinary annual services of $72.85 billion and Appropriation Bill (No. 2) is looking at $7.4 billion to allow full annual appropriations in the Consolidated Revenue Fund for services that are not ordinary annual revenue. Appropriation Bill (No. 2) also increases the government's gross debt ceiling from $200 billion to a quarter of a trillion. Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) is $180 million to deal with the appropriating funds for the proper running of government services.

The Prime Minister was right when she said this was a traditional Labor budget. She was spot on. There is no duplicity here. There is no 'There'll be no carbon tax in my government' here. She was spot on when she said, 'This will be a traditional Labor budget,' and it has been—a huge deficit, huge borrowings, huge debts and huge taxes, all spun with a rhetorical line about being tough. The only thing they are being tough on is their lack of resolve to save money. They talk about the need to repay debt but they lift the debt ceiling to record levels. They talk about easing cost-of-living pressures and then they slug $2 billion out of family assistance to pay for wasteful spending.

As a matter of fact, in November last year we were told that the deficit for 2010-11, the current financial year, would be $41½ billion. On budget night it was revealed to blow out to almost $50 billion, a change of almost $10 billion—they got it wrong. In November we were told that net debt would peak at $94 billion; we are now told it will peak at $107 billion, or a $13 billion blow-out. Not only is net debt to stay above $ 100 billion for at least the next four years but the government will continue to borrow $135 million a day and Labor's debt repayment will be a staggering $7 billion a year. Cumulative interest on Labor 's debt will be more than $26 billion over the next four years. That is the legacy of this Labor government. Think of the infrastructure, the railheads, the ports, the hospitals, the community services that could be funded if this government had not wastefully spent money on recurrent expenses.

Labor does not like to admit that we have the highest interest rates in the OECD and among the highest home mortgage rates in the world. Labor's reckless spending and borrowing has seen interest rates higher than they would otherwise be. Since budget night there has been universal consensus that Labor's budget will have zero impact on the Reserve Bank's monetary policy, nor does anyone admit that under the Rudd-Gillard governments we have seen the greatest growth in government spending since the days of Whitlam. The best that could be said about the situation is that at least Whitlam had some style about him. In less than four years Labor has beaten Paul Keating's record. When he left $96 billion in net debt in 1996 the coalition paid that off and in just four years we are now left with $107 billion of debt. Labor's spending as a percentage of GDP is 25.2 per cent, almost three per cent higher than the last year of the Howard government. I note that it is not as high as the Scandinavian countries that the government likes to point to with respect to good policy, where government spending as a percentage of GDP is up to 50 per cent. Perhaps that is where this government wants to go: the ultimate nanny state. You the taxpayer and I the taxpayer do not know what is good for us, but the nanny Labor government clearly does.

Spending has gone from $271 billion in 2007-08 to $362 billion in 2011-12 under this government. It is the greatest growth in real spending since the disastrous Whitlam years. Yes, Prime Minister, you were spot-on on budget night: this is a traditional Labor budget, boots and all. While the government said it was bound by tight fiscal rules and would offset all new spending with savings measures, the budget papers tell a completely different story. The government cannot even manage to offset new spending in 2011-12, with a $2.3 billion deficit in that area. Of the $21 billion in savings the government claims over the forward estimates, at least 30 per cent of them are new and increased taxes and they will spend $19 billion of it on other stuff. In fact the $1.7 billion flood levy is actually claimed as the biggest saving in the budget. It is staggering that a flood levy is called a saving. It is mind-boggling how much money is being wasted. They could not even find $1.7 billion in a $360 billion budget to deal with natural disasters that are inevitable in a land of drought and flooding rains. It all harks back to pink batts, school halls and $900 cheques, all stuff that our children will pay off because of the reckless spending.

Now we see a $1.7 billion blowout as a result of Labor's failed border protection policies. The Labor government stood here for years and said: 'It is the push factors that are doing it. There is nothing we can do.' They have now reversed that and said: 'We will open Manus Island. We will take a one for five swap with Malaysia. That will stop it.' They have now realised it is the pull factors. It is a complete sham. Labor in opposition prior to 2007 condemned the Howard government for spending an 'abhorrent' $100 million dealing with our borders. They said such expenditure was a tragedy. The Prime Minister, when she was in opposition and we were getting three boats a year, rolled out that great line, 'Another boat, another policy failure.' Well, Prime Minister, we are getting three boats a week and $100 million has now become $1.7 billion. We are now finding the Deputy Secretary of the Department of Immigration and Citizenship with his head through a manhole trying to convince asylum seekers to get down from a roof. That is what things have come to with this Labor government.

The bottom line is that the budget is based on a lie. The carbon tax revenue is nowhere in the budget, nor are any expenses associated with it. This carbon tax is a tax the Prime Minister said would never happen. 'There will be no carbon tax in a government I lead,' she said, hoping to win an election, only to reveal the truth a few days later. Revenue from the mining tax is factored into the budget, yet a tax is not even bedded down and apparently starts on the same day that the carbon tax is meant to start. The carbon tax is not in the budget but the mining tax revenue is. We know the carbon tax will simply export jobs and increase the cost of everything. Let us take cement, for example. The cement process uses a chemical process to release carbon dioxide to take, ostensibly, limestone and reduce it down, and 50 per cent of carbon dioxide emissions in cement production occur through that chemical process. There is no way to improve it and there is no way to rationalise it. Another 35 per cent is in the following processes, before you release the small balls of cement basis, and then 15 per cent is in the large rolling and crushing machines. The bottom line is that there is no way to reduce emissions in the production of cement. So how is the carbon tax going to work in the cement industry? Apart from all cement being imported, all we have done is move emissions offshore. Instead of using power from black coal fired power stations we are going to move emissions offshore to nasty, brown wet coal power stations in China. Emissions will go up and jobs will go down, but apparently this carbon tax is good for us. Revenue from the mining taxes is in the budget; revenue from the carbon tax is not in the budget.

Labor plans to borrow $18.2 billion for the NBN over the forward estimates, yet the potential for waste in this project is frightening. It will be a $50 billion project, and we all know that 80 per cent of IT projects blow out. It could be much higher. This is government betting on picking a technology when we know, right now, as a statement of fact that for every one user of wired broadband there are seven users of wireless broadband. I say to the government: how does your NBN help me with my iPad? How does it help me use my tablet and my mobile communication devices? How can it possibly work? How does it help me use wireless on my laptop? It does not. This is a government picking technology winners because Minister Conroy could not get the 2007 election policy correct of $4.7 billion and broadband to 98 per cent of Australians. On a flight to PNG the former Prime Minister changed his mind to $47 billion and broadband to 90 per cent of Australians. Well done; no wonder Labor knifed you in the back.

The budget is a house of cards, further illustrated by the decision of the Western Australian government to increase iron ore fines royalties by over $2 billion. Under the terms of the Prime Minister's agreement with the big three, the Commonwealth is obliged to credit in full all increased royalties from mining companies that are subject to the MRRT. This is of course added pressure on Labor's budget.

What is particularly galling is the hit on families: $2 billion will be gouged for the freezing of indexation of family tax payment supplements and upper income thresholds, despite the government talking down the impact of these changes at a time when families are struggling with massive cost-of-living increases. Electricity has gone up by 51 per cent since this government came to power. The truth is that $2 billion ripped away from struggling families will hurt them in one shape or form.

On top of that, as if we did not have overpriced school halls, pink batts and solar panel disasters, we have $376 million on 'building the entertainment revolution' through set-top boxes. It is absolutely and utterly deplorable. The budget is a sham. It is an incredibly wasted opportunity, and the Prime Minister is right: it is a typical Labor budget.

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

I do like the member for Fadden. He will be disappointed that I am not wearing my bootstraps as I stand to speak about this very Labor budget. I want to let the member for Fadden know that my electorate is very pleased about the benefits that will come from this very Labor budget, to this very Labor and indeed very needy electorate, which is what Labor budgets tend to be about. They are about assisting those people in our community who are probably more disadvantaged than others and who are in greater need of services. In a moment I will talk about my community and how this budget will be of benefit to them. Firstly, however, in relation to how the previous Howard government dealt with illegal entrants, the infamous Pacific solution—and though I will say this and it will go into Hansard, I stand to be corrected—border protection might have cost about $100 million but I remember the figure of about $1 billion as being the cost to the Australian taxpayer for running the Pacific solution.

Stuart Robert (Fadden, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Defence Science, Technology and Personnel) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

$70 million.

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

I do not think that it was $70 million. I remember that there was a lot of debate at that time about the enormous amount of money that was being spent. I have a recollection of some serious criticism of the government in relation to its insistence on spending a lot of money maintaining one individual on Nauru. I say this because this issue of illegal entrants is a very important issue to this country and it has been for a long period of time. It is an issue that carries many costs, one of which is a financial cost. So if we want to play politics with who is spending more and who is spending less and who is doing a better job of managing this, my view is that we need to look at the global situation and put our problem in the context of what is going on internationally. We might find that other regions in the world, especially in Europe, shoulder a greater burden of illegal entrants than this country does. I do not want to downplay the significance of the problem for Australia, but I want to make this point because we talk about it all the time without thinking. There are other places in the world that are dealing with this issue where the problem is 20, if not more, times worse than ours. So we need to keep it in perspective.

Back to the budget: this very Labor budget is of great benefit to my electorate and I am very pleased to speak to it today. I am particularly pleased to speak to it because the budget has introduced a very significant initiative aimed at assisting people back into the workforce. I know that we talk about this all the time. All governments talk about their desire to help people get back into the workforce, and lots of programs are devised and lots of money is spent to help people, whether they are from the disability sector, young people or mature age workers. This is a problem that has been with us for some time. We spend a lot of money and a lot of words on trying to get people back into work. We do that because it is very important for people to be working. Having a constructive life—one in which you are responsible for your day-to-day living—is very important. The dignity of work adds to the dignity of self. There are a whole series of other important psychological factors there, so we talk a lot about getting people into work.

But there is always one group of people who, for whatever reason, seem not to be able to avail themselves of these programs, and a lot of those people live in my electorate. My electorate has a very high rate of unemployment for young people—probably one of the highest in the country. It has been like that for a long period of time. There are a lot of reasons why that is the case. Over my years as the member I have always been perplexed—like a lot of our service deliverers—as to why we cannot succeed in reducing that unemployment level. One of the reasons is that, while there are a lot of services provided, at some point people are not getting the best information regarding how they can either get a job or get the relevant training necessary to get them into long-term employment.

Someone has finally decided to acknowledge this and try and do something about it. The government, through this budget, has announced a $304 million package that is aimed squarely at the unemployed and in particular the youth unemployed and those on long-term income support, the most vulnerable people and the people who need the greatest assistance and support to get into the workforce. The $304 million package involves 10 locations in the country. This is a package that requires the local communities to develop a structure. My electorate of Calwell is one of those 10 locations. The Hume City Council, which shares, as I have said many times before, the same borders as the federal seat of Calwell, is one of the local government authorities to have been chosen. I make the point that the package is an initiative of this budget, it is a very important initiative and it is part of the budget's aim to build a bigger workforce. We do this through more targeted investment in skills and training and through all sorts of measures to encourage participation. But, more importantly, through this program we will do it by actually helping people to learn about the prospects and those things that are available to them in the community so they can actually be helped. Not too much attention has been paid to that aspect of it in the past. We do this at a time—and, again, I speak very much about my electorate—when it is expected that, nationwide, unemployment will fall from its current level of about five per cent to about 4.5 per cent during the next two years. It is expected that half a million new jobs will be created. I know that they are only figures but, obviously, the people that cast the economic trends have a fair idea of where the employment prospects are in this country. There is no doubt that we have great potential for growth in Australia. We acknowledge that a shortage of participants in the workforce will be one of our drawbacks if we do not address it. We need to do that at a time when people, such as those in my electorate, are experiencing higher unemployment than the national average.

The intention of this $304 million initiative is to not only assist those people in my electorate but also provide a structure that they themselves create, not one that is imposed from above but one that is developed from the ground and responds specifically to the issues that prevent people from availing themselves of programs. It is the local community on the ground that will decide how it creates a pathway for its community. Of the $304 million funding, $38.2 million over four years will be allocated to support this local workforce participation through what will be called the Community Innovation through Collaboration initiative. Collaboration, I think, is the key word here, because it will work with all the stakeholders and the service deliverers.

The sum of $25 million has been allocated for a Local Solutions Fund for community organisations to deliver the programs, as I said, to help access educational and employment options, and a further $13.2 million has been set aside to provide service coordinators and community based facilitators. Whilst it is important for the community to be brought together to actually develop a structure to assist itself, it is necessary to have an overall coordinator who is not necessarily attached to any of the major bureaucracies but who is there to assist the community and help them work their way through the plan of action that I am looking forward to my community putting together in the next few months.

I was very pleased about this announcement. When I got back to my electorate last week I thought it would be absolutely important to hit the ground running on this one. I recognise that we have an opportunity to shape and mould this program. I am happy to report to the House that we called together some of our major local stakeholders to brief them about the government's package and to discuss how they saw this potential and how they thought we could bring it all together so that it could maximise the benefits for our people.

Local members will have a significant role to play in this, and I think that is a very good thing—local members know their community better than anybody else does, so we have a very important role to play in setting up this local advisory group. I decided that I would invite a core group of people from my electorate—the key stakeholders—who I thought would serve as the initial consultation group. I want to list them because they are very important people not only to me as a member of parliament but also to my community. I want to start by mentioning Mr Tony Coppola, who is the senior manager at Northern Melbourne Regional Development Australia. They are responsible for building partnerships between all levels of government, local business, community groups and key regional stakeholders in order to provide responses to economic, environmental and social issues affecting all of Melbourne's north. Mr Coppola is also a representative of North Link and its executive director, Mick Butera, assists him in this role.

I also invited the founder and executive officer of the Bridge of Hope Foundation, Mr John Walsh. Bridge of Hope is a registered charity that specialises in training and providing job opportunities for troubled youth and those in juvenile detention. The group of young people who are referred to as juvenile offenders—I have a very large number of those young people in my electorate—is one that we tend to forget about. We do not even talk about them, let alone try and devise opportunities for them. These are a particularly vulnerable group of young people because they have special needs. Many of them will end up in juvenile detention for a whole series of reasons which I will not go into. The key is what happens to them when they get out. Many of them will only be 16, 17 or 18—young people who need to be assisted back either into education or into some sort of training and given an opportunity. Often people do not want to deal with juvenile offenders, they do not want them.

We all face discrimination. I would probably face discrimination if I were suddenly to become unemployed—the discrimination that comes with being a mature-age person. It might mortify me to think that, but my age might be a problem for me in the workforce. These young people have all sorts of other problems. They are not as empowered as I or someone else may be. They need a fair go and they do not get a fair go. We need to change attitudes towards them before we can even help them. So I want to commend John Walsh and the Bridge of Hope, which hopes to do a lot of work in this area but needs to partner with government. I invited him to this meeting because I think they have a very important role to play.

The CEO of Brite Services, Margaret Ruff, was also invited. Brite is one of those extraordinary organisations that I have had the pleasure of representing. Brite is probably the only Australian disability enterprise in this country. It is an organisation that specialises in the employment of people with disabilities. I say it is unique because it started off being a sheltered workshop some 25 years ago when we did refer to these organisations as sheltered workshops. Thankfully, we all learnt that that was not very flattering language to use. These are people with special needs but nevertheless they like to work and Brite offers them long-term employment and they have become a thriving business. I am very proud of Brite because they have managed to win contracts for their people and there is a long future ahead for the people who work at Brite.

Another person who I invited was Ian Adotey. Ian is from the Broadmeadows Community Neighbourhood Renewal Project, which comprises another set of people who specialise in assisting the most vulnerable. Finally, I invited the CEO of Spectrum Migrant Resource Centres, Mrs Rosemary Kelada. Spectrum does an incredible amount of work for new immigrants in my electorate. They implement Australia's very successful settlement services. Unfortunately, I am running out of time, but I want to thank them for coming to that meeting and I look forward to working with them in the next few months to implement the government's program. (Time expired)

Darren Chester (Gippsland, National Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Roads and Regional Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would like to raise several issues today in relation to the federal budget and also some broader concerns within my electorate. Firstly I want to highlight the need for the federal government to support an application for $65 million to expand and enhance the Latrobe Regional Hospital under the Health and Hospitals Fund regional priority round. This application is for funding to build a new improved emergency department and additional endoscopy facilities and offer more beds for acute care.

By way of background, LRH is a designated regional health service and major provider of acute, subacute, mental health and specialist age care services for the Gippsland community. LRH is also an important teaching and training facility working in close partnership with Monash University School of Rural Health and Monash University Gippsland Medical School. Gippsland has some of the poorest health outcomes in Victoria. Current facilities fall well below existing standards and are not adequate to meet growing community needs, which are affecting LRH's ability to meet its designated role as a regional hospital and a teaching facility. This situation will be exacerbated in the future with predicted growth in demand of 13 per cent over the next 10 years. It is critical in that regard that the federal government recognises the growth that is going on in the Latrobe Valley community. With an ageing population, the increase in demand on our health services is apparent and I encourage the federal government to continue to invest in facilities at LRH in particular. The improved facilities and the increased capabilities will also make it easier for us to recruit and train medical specialists in the region and reduce the burden on Melbourne health services. Naturally there is a double benefit in that regard—we can actually service more people in our local communities rather than having them be forced to go to Melbourne, adding to the waiting lists in Melbourne. This is an opportunity for us in regional areas. I am advised that the cost of unnecessary patient transport at the moment is in the vicinity of $29 million a year, and that money could be recouped by government as a result of expanding this facility so that more patients can be treated in the Latrobe Valley.

We also have the hidden health issue of patients who are deciding not to seek treatment because it is too difficult for them to access it, particularly in communities like Gippsland where the travel to Melbourne can be in excess of three or four hours. People are making the decision that it is all too hard to go to Melbourne, find accommodation and access services in the city. I admit it is hard to measure this particular issue, but I constantly receive anecdotal information about people from the more remote parts of my region who are choosing not to pursue advanced treatment because they have to go to Melbourne. It is a key concern for us in our regional communities.

It is one of the reasons I have been so keen to be an advocate in this place for Rotary Gippsland Centenary House, which provides accommodation units for people who are receiving treatment at LRH. I would like to congratulate the federal government and the state government for continuing the level of bipartisan support for this magnificent facility. The Gillard government has supported the community fundraising efforts by providing $1.5 million for the next stage of the development, which will see nine more units being built. I actually inspected the progress on these units only a few weeks ago and I can report to the House that all is going very well there. It is going to be a magnificent addition to this facility, which has been such a crucial part of providing accommodation and care for people as they are away from their home at a very stressful time in their lives. I do take this opportunity to encourage the minister to visit our region for the official opening of this facility. It would be great to see her there for the occasion, which we hope will be towards the end of this year. I am sure she will be impressed by the work of local builders. I congratulate the organisers and the board of management for engaging the local building firms to undertake this project.

The planned upgrade that we are talking about is stage 2A of a larger redevelopment, so we are talking about substantial amounts of money. A master plan has been endorsed by the Victorian Department of Health, under both the previous Labor state government and the current coalition government. The project does have government support. It also has widespread community support, particularly the rebuilding of the hospital's emergency department where waiting times have become an issue of increasing concern. I have a great deal of sympathy for the staff at the front-line of the emergency department. They often cop all the poor headlines in terms of people being forced to wait for treatment and to wait on trolleys for extended periods of time. The staff bear the brunt of that criticism when, really, they are completely overwhelmed by the demand for services. I do encourage the federal government to continue to work with the state government on this most important upgrade and opportunity to expand the facilities at LRH.

On another positive note, it would be remiss of me not to take this opportunity now to mention the $23 million worth of funding announced by the federal government on 7 April last year. This funding was to expand the Gippsland Cancer Care Centre and provide an additional 414 radiation treatments and 8,000 chemotherapy treatments. I understand expressions of interest will be advertised next week for construction on this project. Again, it is a project which is much needed, tragically, in my community. The expansion of the Gippsland Cancer Care Centre will make LRH one of the prime facilities for the delivery of cancer care services in Victoria and according to LRH staff this funding will allow for a significant expansion of the radiotherapy, chemotherapy and dialysis units as well as an expansion to the pharmacy. It is tragic but it is a fact of life in my region that there is a growing need for cancer treatment in the broader Gippsland community and it is essential that patients can access these services in our region. The expansion will make LRH a leader in this area as the cancer centre doubles in size. On behalf of my community, I do welcome the funding from the federal government in that regard.

It is also important, in the context of that federal funding, to mention the fact—and reflect on it—of the inspirational efforts of the local community and the financial contribution they have been able to make to support this initiative. The Gippsland Cancer Care Centre has been the beneficiary of many fundraising events in recent years, several of which I have had the opportunity to attend. They have always been very well run. I refer to things like gala balls and community fun runs. It is a remarkable effort when you look at the socioeconomics of my community. They have been able to raise in excess of $3.5 million since the Gippsland Cancer Centre Appeal was launched in 2003. That is in addition to the fundraising that has been going on for Gippsland Rotary Centenary House. So I do take this opportunity to thank my community for their work in that regard. I thank the various board members who have served as volunteers on those fundraising committees, the business sponsors, the philanthropic organisations and the members of the broader general public who have been prepared to give their time and their money in such a generous manner. I think regional communities are renowned for such efforts and it is a real tribute to the people of Gippsland that they are such committed stakeholders in our health services. Although I have focused a lot on the Latrobe Valley here today, let me assure the House that right across my region there are auxiliaries and community based boards which are doing an extraordinary job every day of the week to supplement whatever government funding is available through the various health budgets. Without the efforts of these volunteers the health situation in every part of Gippsland would be far worse.

On a separate issue also to do with public health, I want to draw the attention of the House to an issue which is developing as quite a significant concern in the Bairnsdale district—a colony of flying foxes which roosts on the banks of the Mitchell River. It has been the subject of increased public debate in East Gippsland. I acknowledge that this is primarily a state issue but federal responsibilities do come into force under the provisions of the EPBC Act. I have brought this issue to the attention of the minister for environment but the urgency of the issue is about to escalate following the issuing of a health warning by the Victorian Department of Health only yesterday. A flying fox found at Bairnsdale has been detected as carrying the Australian bat lyssavirus and I will refer directly to the warning by Victoria's Chief Health Officer, Dr John Carnie. He says:

Under no circumstances should people handle flying foxes on their property as some diseases they carry, such as Australian Bat Lyssavirus, are transmissible to humans, …

Australian Bat Lyssavirus is a rare, but fatal disease which may be transmitted from flying foxes to humans.

Domestic pets may also be at risk. The virus is transmitted through being scratched or bitten by a flying fox.

It goes on to say:

Although it is known that many flying foxes across Australia carry the virus, instances of transmission to humans are very rare, with only two cases ever having been recorded—both of which were seen in Queensland.

Australian Bat Lyssavirus is detected from time to time in flying foxes in Victoria, but no human cases have ever occurred here. The disease has never occurred in domestic pets in Victoria.

While that is reassuring to some extent, the fact that the Victorian Chief Health Officer has had to issue a warning in relation to flying foxes in the Bairnsdale area is of great concern to my community. I would also like to refer to comments from a nearby resident who has written to the federal minister for regional development to raise her concerns in this regard. The letter describes the situation in Bairnsdale:

Since 2003 we have had a problem with bats. The bats have created a very comfortable colony amongst the residents of Bairnsdale, which increases by the year and have extended to 33,000 in number at times … As we have had an unusually wet year, the putrid smell has become unbearable for anyone living within the town.

The bat colony is in a forested area along the Mitchell River amongst poplar trees, situated within meters, between and in front of residential homes in the township and affects residents as far as a kilometer away …

The letter goes on to describe the battle by residents to have poplar trees removed. It is worth reflecting that the poplar trees are an introduced species and they are affected by white ants, in this particular case. The resident is critical of the lack of action by the Department of Sustainability of Environment, and I quote her again:

We do understand that the bat colony is protected, we are not asking for them to be killed, just removed. We feel that if the trees (which are considered dangerous and overhang a public footpath/bicycle track along the river banks) are removed, the bats are intelligent enough to find another forested area (of which there is plenty in the Gippsland area) in which to live.

We are now given to understand from a report issued by the DSE that they want the bat colony to remain, as they consider it to be a tourist attraction and if the trees are removed, they will erect artificial roosts for the bats! The report also states that they wish to educate us on the benefits of 'co-habiting with wildlife'. We think that this is plain stupidity given that the people writing these reports do not live anywhere near the bats and consequently, do not have to tolerate the constant noise and putrid stench from these animals, with which we have to live.

Having had the opportunity to inspect the colony personally, I have to agree with the letter writer: there is a stench associated with the flying foxes. The quality of life of nearby residents is being severely compromised and the constant noise is having an impact on people's health—and that is without even considering the issue of disease which may be borne by the flying foxes. So this warning from Victoria's chief health officer will, I think, escalate the concerns within my community. At a local level I have been working with my local state MP, Tim Bull, who I know is trying to find a way through the layers of bureaucracy to resolve the situation. At a federal level I will be seeking assurances from the federal government that it will not be using the provisions of the EPBC Act as an excuse to interfere in this matter. The location of the colony is a real problem for my community, and the local agencies need to develop a management plan which balances difficult environmental issues but clearly places the rights of the human population ahead of the flying foxes.

In the short amount of time I have left I would like to reflect on one other matter which relates to the federal budget, the federal government's failure to support my efforts to secure Commonwealth funding for the Princes Highway east of Sale. I have raised this issue in the House on several occasions in the past. I have also raised it directly with the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport and, to be fair to the minister, he has given me a fair hearing in this matter. I have tabled petitions from my community, which reflects the level of concern throughout the Broader Gippsland region. The Princes Highway east of Sale is currently not eligible for Commonwealth funding in any form whatsoever; it is a responsibility primarily of the state government. The highway from Sale to Traralgon has been the beneficiary of about $140 million of federal funding under a joint project to see some duplication works undertaken. That does not gel with the people of Gippsland. It does not make sense for them that such a major highway, which is in desperate need of government funding to improve it from Sale to the New South Wales border, will not be able to access Commonwealth funding in the future. The stretch of highway I am talking about has one of the highest accident and fatality rates in Victoria. Tragically, there was another death this week. Hardly a month goes by without a fatality on that road. I am not saying every accident is a result of the condition of the road, but there is no question that it is a contributing factor to the high accident and fatality rates.

I have been working with my local state MP, Tim Bull, in relation to this matter and just recently we both wrote a letter to the state minister seeking support to fund a safety audit and the development of a 10-year strategy to upgrade the highway east of Sale. We also want the state minister to assist us in lobbying the federal government to make the highway east of Sale eligible for Commonwealth funding.

From my previous discussions with regional VicRoads staff, there does not seem to be a long-term plan in place for the staged upgrade of even the most basic safety features such as shoulder sealing, more overtaking lines, realignment of dangerous corners and improvements to the road surface. With an increase in the use of the road by large recreational vehicles, along with the increased size of the commercial vehicles on the road—the trucks, the caravans and those large Winnebago type vehicles—we are seeing a very close interface between large vehicles when they pass each other on some sections of the road, particularly east of Orbost to the New South Wales border, where there is no shoulder for more than 40 kilometres. The margin for error is so small that we desperately need to do something about it. I fear that we are going to have a major accident on the road involving a bus carrying children or tourists through the region and it is going to take a situation like that before the state and federal governments recognise their responsibilities to undertake a major program of upgrading this stretch of highway. In my view, too much of the current debate about highway funding east of Sale is based on anecdotal evidence. There needs to be a complete safety audit with a view towards developing a 10-year strategy so the federal government can then buy into it and take responsibility for parts of the road that need to be upgraded.

In addition to the petition, which is still out there gathering signatures, our view is being supported by the local chambers of commerce. I believe that there is a real opportunity here for both the state and the federal road ministers to work in partnership with my community. I invite both the state and the federal road ministers to come to Gippsland, take a firsthand look at the road and see for themselves the risks that our motorists are faced with on a daily basis. (Time expired)

John Murphy (Reid, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2011-2012 and related budget bills. There is no doubt that Australia has an economy in a position envied by many in the developed world. Our national debt is among the lowest in the world at 7.2 per cent of GDP, 10 times less than the United States of America at 72 per cent; our unemployment level is nearly half that of other major industrial countries at 4.9 per cent, compared with 9.6 per cent in France and nine per cent in the United States of America; our official interest rates are still two percentage points lower than when the coalition lost office; and our terms of trade are the best in 140 years. On top of this, the Labor government has created 700,000 jobs since 2007, during the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, and we are aiming to create another 500,000 jobs.

These comparatively good economic statistics were not brought about by chance but rather by good governance and good decisions. There is no doubt that Australia dealt with the global financial crisis better than most. None of these outcomes would have been possible without the two stimulus packages that kept Australians in jobs. Although there are many Australians feeling the cost-of-living pressures, including in my electorate of Reid, it would have been much worse if the Labor government had not acted as swiftly and decisively as we did and the opposition had had their way, which was to cut millions of jobs.

Our government responded swiftly and appropriately when confronting the global financial crisis. That helped our country weather the storm. The 2011-12 budget is about keeping the economy healthy. We must not rest on our laurels. We must continue to strengthen our economy and create new opportunities. That is why this budget will get us back in the black by 2012-13 and spread the opportunities of the mining boom. As with all good governments, we must consider the context of our fiscal position and plan for an even better future, noting all of the obstacles and constraints. For the Gillard government, the expected tax collection over the last two years has been cut by $16 billion, as a result of historic national natural disasters, the GFC and the high Australian dollar. However, this will not prevent the government from making important investment in vital areas such as training, education and health.

The Chief Executive Officer of Australian Industry Group, Ms Heather Ridout, stated:

This year's Federal Budget is solid on the fundamentals of skills, infrastructure and fiscal responsibility. These investments will ease capacity constraints in these tight economic times.

Further, Ms Ridout noted on the establishment of a National Workforce and Productivity Agency:

All up, this substantial package, which delivers a significant new investment over a sustained period, will stand Australia in good stead in the years ahead. Ai Group argued hard for this, and we are delighted to see the proposals included in the Budget.

The National Workforce and Productivity Agency will work with industry to identify critical skills needs and develop workforce plans and issues. Another major role of the agency will be to administer the new Workforce Development Fund. As part of the focus on jobs, a new Workforce Development Fund will be created to respond to the most critical emerging skills needed in Australia and is expected to deliver 130,000 new training places over four years.

Our government is also committed to assisting apprentices, raising the quality of their training and providing incentives to keep them in training. This includes investing in a national apprenticeship mentoring program to support apprentices to finish their training, and developing new apprenticeship models that allow apprentices to develop faster and that recognise prior learning.

In my electorate of Reid, I have spoken previously on the wonderful facility of the Southern Cross Catholic Vocational College in Burwood. With joint funding from the federal government and the Catholic Education Office, today the college is a state-of-the-art trade training centre with over 100 students already enrolled.

I remind the House that, during the last federal election campaign, the Leader of the Opposition threatened that, if elected, he would stop the funding of trade training centres. Fortunately this did not occur, and I was very pleased to welcome the Prime Minister to Reid only a few weeks ago, and specifically to the Southern Cross Catholic Vocational College in Burwood, where she witnessed firsthand the state-of-the-art facilities on offer for students. The Prime Minister met some of our future mechanics, future beauticians and future carpenters. The Prime Minister even gave a short interview with aspiring journalists as part of their media studies—a recording that they will surely keep for posterity.

I am extremely proud to be a member of a government that continues to acknowledge the importance of trade training and support for apprenticeships. The initiatives continue to assist skills development in many different learning environments, and I welcome these initiatives.

In addition to the National Workplace Workforce and Productivity Agency, the Workforce Development Fund and a national apprenticeship mentoring program, our government will also offer students from years 9 to 12 a new national trade cadetship as an option under the Australian curriculum. The cadetships will be delivered through the trade training centres and other eligible venues, with up to 50,000 additional structured work experience places provided to students. This will assist in real work experience for apprentices and ensure they are ready to start their jobs with confidence once they have graduated. However, unlike the graduates of the Southern Cross College of Vocational Education, some Australians struggle with basic numeracy and literacy, and this is a barrier that prevents them from participating in the workforce. As I said before, this budget does not forget the people who need us most, and our government is supporting Australians to help themselves and improve their future work opportunities by improving their basic skills.

I could not agree more with the Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills, Jobs and Workplace Relations, Senator Chris Evans, when he said that basic training is paramount to building this country's workforce. That is why I am so pleased that this government is funding 30,000 additional places for jobseekers in the Language, Literacy and Numeracy Program. Without basic literacy, many people are condemned to a life of little opportunity and, sadly, in many cases, long-term unemployment. Our government has committed to changing this by providing long-term job seekers with critical skills to allow them to participate more fully in the workforce. This additional funding is targeted at job seekers who are registered with Centrelink and are identified as experiencing significant disadvantage in the labour market due to low levels of language, literacy and/or numeracy. These are targeted programs where each participant is given an individual training plan which is tailored to meet their specific needs. The training program is typically face-to-face and can be vocationally oriented. For those who are struggling in a large group setting, there is the opportunity for them to engage in small group training.

The increased funding of such programs helps break down these barriers for more Australians and allow them to not only improve their lives and engage in further study but to actively participate in the economy. Without literacy, these Australians are vulnerable. It is important that Australians who struggle with literacy do not feel ashamed and, instead, take action and are helped to improve their skills. Our government is supporting these vulnerable Australians to do just that. We are helping to break the long-term cycles of lost opportunity and unemployment by supporting Australians who need help with basic literacy to improve their skills and, in turn, improve their job prospects. None of the unemployed people I speak to really want to be reliant on unemployment benefits. The people I speak to want to work, and this initiative will help some of the most vulnerable in our society to be able to do just that. On this point, I note that our government believes in ensuring everyone is given the support and the skills they need to seek out employment. With unemployment at low levels, this indicates the government is on the right track.

Our government is also on the right track when it comes to education. We acknowledge and value the challenging but important job done by teachers throughout Australia, particularly those who teach students with disabilities. That is why our government will invest $200 million over three years to support students with disabilities in their classrooms and improve their learning opportunities. I believe this is due recognition of the need to improve support for students with disabilities. I am confident this added support will not only directly benefit students but will also be of immense benefit and assistance to their teachers. I commend the Treasurer for this investment and I am pleased to note that this investment has been welcomed by the New South Wales Teachers Federation.

The additional funding will provide new services, such as speech and occupational therapy, at-school and in-class support, as well as access to specialised equipment. For higher education, the government is making the significant investment of a further $1.4 billion to meet the demand for growth in university enrolments. In this year alone the extra funding will provide 480,000 undergraduate places. Funding will also aim to upgrade infrastructure at regional tertiary institutions and assist universities to support, attract and retain students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds. Despite the tough decisions on savings measures that our government made in this budget, education was one area where we did not hesitate to provide further assistance. The federal Labor government has nearly doubled the national education budget because it is core to our belief that education is essential to our long-term prosperity. A community with excellent skills has enhanced opportunities and can remain competitive in a global labour market. We are a government that believes in providing all Australians, irrespective of their background, the opportunity and encouragement to achieve that potential. There is only one area that could be more important than education, and that is health. Nothing is more important than the health of our family and friends. My electorate of Reid boasts one of the best hospitals in the state, Concord Hospital, as well as many local GPs and medical services and, being part of the inner west of Sydney, our services are rated among the best in terms of accessibility and quality. The Gillard government is making an unprecedented investment of $3 billion in health reform right across Australia. Notably, the government has made the largest Commonwealth commitment to mental health services in Australia's history, including $1.5 billion worth of investment in this budget. The $2.2 billion mental health reform package targets funding where the services in those communities need it most, with a total of 90 headspace clinics, as well as early detection to support young people with mental illness.

I know that my electorate would be very pleased to receive direct funding under this initiative. Many constituents have raised their concerns with me about the need for more funding for mental health, and this unprecedented investment by our government has led to many people emailing their support for this measure. So I congratulate the Minister for Mental Health and Ageing. I know families and friends who care for people suffering with mental health conditions realise how important accessible treatment is for their loved ones, and I am sure that the new funding will go a long way to addressing this very important matter.

I also commend the Minister for Health and Ageing on her Diagnostic Imaging Review Reform Package. I previously led a campaign for a magnetic resonance imaging service for Concord Hospital as well as Medicare funding for these MRI services. I recognised then the importance of access to MRI services to facilitate faster diagnosis of patients as well as early detection of disease. MRI services at Concord Hospital have been of invaluable benefit for the health outcomes of my constituents, and I am very pleased that the minister has announced that our government will be extending Medicare funding to cover the cost of more MRI scans than ever before in both metropolitan and, importantly, regional areas of Australia. Moreover, the package announced by the minister will also help to reduce the cost of MRI services by increasing the bulkbilling incentives for MRI services. I have seen firsthand the importance of access to these services, and I am delighted that these benefits are being extended to even more Australians.

Another important issue that I campaigned on in my electorate is quality dental care. I am very pleased that our government will establish a voluntary dental internship program to encourage graduates to expand their skills and work in the public dental system. The increase in the number of graduates will improve the access to much needed dental services.

I am very proud to be a member of this Labor government which is delivering for those in our community that need it most. I commend the Treasurer for making the tough decisions without compromising the vital areas of training, education and health. This is a budget that will stand our country in good stead for the future and will allow us to return to surplus by 2012-13. I stress again that we are leading the world in all the OECD countries in terms of the health of our economy. And in the aftermath of the global financial crisis and the dreadful natural disasters that inflicted our country last year and earlier this year, this government is proving once and for all that we are very, very economically responsible and any thought that the Labor Party in federal government cannot manage the economy should be allowed to rest once and for all. We are the envy of the world and it is little wonder so much capital is powering into our country and the value of our dollar is so high.

Mark Coulton (Parkes, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2011-2012 and comment on the budget, the first budget under the prime ministership of Julia Gillard and the fourth handed down by Treasurer Wayne Swan. For Treasurer Swan this is four budgets, four deficits and no surpluses. The three biggest deficits in the history of the Commonwealth have been under the treasurership of Wayne Swan.

This budget was labelled as tough, but it did not go far enough to curb Labor's years of wasteful and reckless spending. The waste that this government has overseen goes right back to 2007. We have seen programs, which may have been started with the best of intentions, that have blown out and not delivered—the school halls, the pink batts and the $900 cheques that went out during the stimulus package. The school halls program has a legacy that is still playing out in my electorate. Indeed, because of some of the poor selection criteria for subcontractors, I have got tradesmen in my electorate who are still owed money under the BER program. I find that most distressing. They believed that when they were undertaking work that was overseen by the Commonwealth government their payment would be safe. At the moment we still have those issues playing out.

This government is now looking to implement free set-top boxes for pensioners. This has all the potential to go the same way as the pink batts and the school halls. It is a $308 million program and is valued at $400 per person. A couple of weeks ago I was in a large electrical retailer in Canberra and you could buy a new digital television for less than that. So I think that, once again, while the intention may have been honourable, I believe this is going to get lost in the delivery.

Some of the alarming figures to come out of this budget are that the deficit has soared to $49.4 billion and net government debt has climbed to $107 billion. That puts government borrowing at $135 million a day. The interesting part is that the mining tax was mentioned in this year's budget but the carbon tax, which is due to be implemented on the same day, was not. While the intention behind the carbon tax may be to help boost the government's bottom line, it will rip the heart and soul out of Australia, no more so than in the electorate that I represent. Before the previous incarnation of the carbon tax, the emissions trading scheme, Professor Garnaut's report indicated that regional Australia would have an economic downturn of 20 per cent under the implementation of an emissions trading scheme while the cities would have one of eight per cent. The question I would like to ask is: why is regional Australia being asked to pay a large part of the burden for this grand gesture to prove that Australia cares about the environment more than anyone else in the world? The issue here is not whether you believe that the climate is changing and not whether you believe that man's activity has anything to do with it; the issue here is whether what has been proposed is going to have any effect on the climate. It certainly will have an effect in my electorate, which relies a lot on fossil fuel. We have a high freight component for everything that comes and goes, for the goods that we need and for the produce that we produce. We have a high fuel component in the crops that we grow and in the mining sector. Due to the fact that we live in a harsh climate, we rely heavily on energy to keep ourselves cool in summer and warm in winter. I fear what the proposed increases to electricity prices are going to do to the people of my electorate and to the most vulnerable, the pensioners, in my electorate. The Meals on Wheels volunteers were telling me last winter, even before the implementation of the tax, just with the increase in electricity prices so far, that when they were delivering meals to pensioners they were finding many of them in bed at midday, not because they were unwell but because they were frightened to turn on the heater because they worried about the cost of electricity.

The other issue is that in some ways it could have the opposite effect. In one small town, Mendooran, the supermarket owner told me that he is paying between $6,000 and $7,000 a quarter for his electricity. If that increases by 20 or 30 per cent and he becomes unviable and cannot keep his doors open, the 400 residents of that village will have no choice but to travel the 70 kilometres each way to Dubbo to purchase their basic requirements. I would think that would have a much larger effect on emissions and a negative effect on the environment.

Likewise, the cement plant at Kandos will close within months of this carbon tax being implemented. We will still require cement as one of the basic products that we use for road building and housing construction. We use a lot of cement. That will now be imported from elsewhere in the world. So, while there will be still the same emissions, or possibly a few more if it is going to a Third World country that does not have the same technology we do, the 200 people in Kandos who rely on that plant for employment will no longer have a job.

So it is not without some reason that I have trepidation about a budget that has a carbon tax not included but foreshadowed and a mining tax that will also severely impact on the viability of my electorate of Parkes, where mining now is emerging as a large part of the economy. Indeed, I think that the numbers of people now who gain employment from mining are probably similar to those involved in agriculture—it has moved at such a rate. The mining tax also underpins a lot of the promises that have been made to regional Australia for spending, so a lot of these announcements, certainly in the forward estimates of this budget, coming to regional Australia are very much contingent on the mining tax. The one hand giveth and the other taketh away. Certainly that is a great concern to the people that I represent.

The other component of this budget is the $1.8 billion flood levy. The great irony of that is that a large part of the Parkes electorate was flooded, maybe not as spectacularly as in some areas of Queensland but certainly with just as much devastation. Fortunately we did not have the loss of life that the people in Queensland had. It was a different flood. We had areas from late November right through till March that were affected by this flooding. While I think that nearly $800 million has been paid out by the government under the Australian government disaster relief program, very little of that has been available to my electorate. I made representations to the Attorney-General and he seemed to understand the case. He put out a press release naming 13 local government areas in the Parkes electorate that would be eligible for the Australian government disaster relief payment. But when those people fronted at Centrelink they were refused. The fine print said that, for them to be affected, the water had to have come from Queensland. I want to know why the water from Queensland is more devastating than the water in the Macquarie Valley, the Cudgegong Valley, the Namoi Valley and indeed the Castlereagh.

We had people who were severely isolated. One lady in the village of Quambone has a severely disabled son who was stranded on an electric bed for two days while they had no power. I am not blaming the budget for that; that is what happens, but she has been refused the government disaster relief payment because the water that surrounded Quambone and took out the power did not come in from Queensland. Residents of Goodooga were isolated for a couple of months because of water that came from Queensland; but they were refused payment because they were not deemed 'isolated', because they could walk from house to house—but there are no shops in Goodooga. They were isolated from Lightning Ridge. They had to rely on flood boats and they had to pay high prices for produce that was brought it. I find that quite mean-spirited and it was devastating to these people.

But the real kicker with this is that, because they were not eligible for the disaster relief payment, they are not exempt from paying the flood levy. We are not talking huge numbers, but a considerable number of people in my electorate who were severely impacted by the flood, had considerable loss and inconvenience, are now paying a levy to other parts of Australia. I understand that in some suburbs of Brisbane people were eligible for that payment merely because the power was disconnected for a couple of days—and I am not talking about the areas that were impacted by floodwater—but that is an anomaly and something I have been having a battle about since the end of January. It has caused a great degree of resentment and frustration with my constituents.

The Prime Minister this week announced that an extra 21,000 university students receiving youth allowance. Once again, students in Mudgee and Dubbo, considered inner regional areas, have missed out. For some reason they were considered not isolated and have not been eligible for the independent youth allowance. Hopefully the inquiry that is being undertaken at the moment will rectify that.

Another thing that was mentioned in the budget was the inland rail. I welcome the announcement of $300 million, I think, for the start of acquisition for the corridor for the inland Melbourne to Brisbane rail. It is one of the key pieces of infrastructure that not only will be of benefit to the people of the Parkes electorate but I believe will be of benefit to Australia as a whole. Certainly, the cities of Brisbane and Melbourne will also gain from that. But it was a little concerning yesterday in Senate estimates when Australian Rail Track Corporation representatives said that their priority was still the coastal route from Melbourne to Brisbane through Sydney. I think we need clarification and direction from the minister to the ARTC that the inland rail is a priority and that we should get that project going as soon as possible.

Another thing in the budget that is a concern for the people in my electorate are the changes to the fringe benefits tax for work vehicles and the further attempts to implement the private health rebate changes which will force more people onto public hospital waiting lists and away from private practice.

A lot of money has been going to regional hospitals in this budget, but I am concerned though about Dubbo base hospital. Dubbo base hospital had an excellent proposal of $57 million. Prior to the state election, the now health minister, the then shadow health minister, Jillian Skinner, promised that New South Wales would increase that by $50 million, on top of the $57 million, to make a worthwhile project for Dubbo. But this government removed $50 million and allocated $7.1 million to the Dubbo hospital. I think that was very short-sighted. It would make perfect sense to do this hospital in one go rather than in lots of little stages. The people of Dubbo were certainly disappointed by that change of heart. Thank you.

Tanya Plibersek (Sydney, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is a pleasure to contribute to the debate on the government's budget bills for 2011-12. These bills will help ensure that the benefits of a strong economy flow to each and every corner of our nation. New programs in the budget will help get more people into work and train them for more rewarding jobs. Just as the government's focus on protecting Australian jobs during the global recession helped to position our economy as the envy of the world, our focus on jobs when times improve will ensure that we maximise our advantages into the future. Unlike the previous Liberal government, this Labor government is not complacent as the sun begins to shine. As former US President John Kennedy said, 'The time to repair the roof is when the sun is shining.' Most importantly, the appropriation bills show that the government is on track for a surplus in 2012-13—on time as promised.

The core of the budget includes a plan to build the more productive workforce our economy needs including a $3 billion training package, new ways to get people into work, and critical new investments in economic infrastructure. Our plan for better schools, hospitals and health care includes a total of $2.2 billion for mental health services and $1.8 billion for regional health facilities, and there is cost-of-living relief for families, investments in a sustainable Australia and new assistance for small business and manufacturers, all while making the difficult decisions necessary to get back into the black by 2012-13, years ahead of the major advanced economies.

Through these bills the government is also making significant new investments in my portfolio of human services. The budget backs up the government's agenda to modernise the delivery of public services. In 2011-12 the government is investing $113½ million in service delivery reform. This vital reform program will deliver more one-stop shops, more self-service and more intensive support for people who need it. It will make public services more accessible, more convenient, more efficient and more targeted at the needs of individual Australians and their families. The new budget funding for service delivery reform is the culmination of a process that began when my predecessor, Chris Bowen, announced our plans in this area in December 2009. For customers, service delivery reform will drag the way the government deliver services away from low-tech, inefficient practices into the 21st century. It will provide more one-stop shops, better self-service options and more intensive support, as I said.

For our staff, our plans will create more opportunities to work in new and different areas across the portfolio. Staff will be able to go beyond their traditional roles and provide more hands-on assistance to people in real need in ways that cut across traditional silos and responsibilities. For the government, our plans will allow us to deliver services more efficiently and cost effectively by getting rid of unnecessary paperwork, combining back-office functions and refocusing resources on those people who need the most help.

Our reforms will free up resources to provide tailored support to people who face multiple complex challenges and entrenched disadvantage. The budget includes $19½ million to extend the successful Local Connections to Work program. In the first seven months of this program there has been a 50 per cent higher job placement rate for job seekers who had been through the service. The new funding will continue to support the program at the nine sites where it is already operating and will allow us to open five new sites a year between 2012-13 and 2014-15. There will be a total of 24 sites around Australia by 30 June 2015. Local Connections to Work provides tailored assistance that caters to the specific needs of disadvantaged job seekers in selected deeply disadvantaged locations. The service brings a range of services together under one roof that job seekers can then access more conveniently. At each site, a range of different service providers are rostered on to deliver services from the Centrelink office. The roster arrangement means that during an appointment a customer will have the opportunity to talk with a number of other services right there on site to provide the assistance they need to overcome their employment barriers. Where a particular service is not available on site, job seekers are helped to connect with that service off site.

Job seekers can also have joint meetings with Centrelink and employment service providers. Those meetings can extend to other community partners with the consent of the job seeker to identify their needs and quickly link them to the right support. This closer collaboration between Centrelink and other relevant agencies gives a more holistic view of the job seeker who, in most instances, will only need to tell their story once.

Local Connections to Work programs are already operating at nine locations around Australia. The program has been operating in Frankston in Victoria and Campsie in New South Wales since May 2010; in Ipswich, Queensland, and Elizabeth in South Australia since June 2010; in Burnie in Tasmania and Campbelltown in New South Wales since March 2011; in Morwell in Victoria and Port Adelaide in South Australia since April 2011; and in Maroochydore in Queensland since May 2011. The budget also includes funding for 44 case coordination trial sites around Australia. The first 19 case coordination sites will be rolled out in 2011-12, and 10 of those 19 locations are the same locations where the government is making extra investments through the participation agenda. Case coordination under service delivery reform will identify people in need of more intensive support and connect them to appropriate services. In the future, case coordination has the potential to be a far-reaching program and it is a key part of the government's broader agenda to modernise the delivery of public services to Australians and their families.

Under the case coordination approach, staff will provide tailored support to people who face complex challenges and entrenched disadvantage rather than simply giving them yet another form to fill out or another telephone number to call. The program will assist job seekers, but importantly will go far deeper than that. It will also support people who are homeless or at risk of homelessness, the recently bereaved, people in legal or financial difficulty, carers, people with mental health concerns, people with gambling dependency, and people with drug and alcohol issues. There will be different levels of service to reflect an individual's different level of need. Services will range from simple referrals, such as a training program or information about available services, to intensive support involving multiple coordinated appointments with non-government and local community services. A designated staff member will help customers, including by assisting them in their dealings with multiple government agencies like Centrelink, Medicare and the Australian tax office and giving them information about local services—for example, Alcoholics Anonymous, welfare rights, literacy programs, legal aid, gambling rehabilitation and financial counselling. They might help make appointments and they may be an advocate of behalf of the client with non-government services where necessary.

The budget includes a new $28 million investment in more one-stop shops—the co-location agenda. The co-location of Centrelink and Medicare offices into one-stop shops will provide much more convenient and accessible services in one location. The program will significantly improve the way public services are delivered throughout the community. By providing more than 500 new one-stop shops for public services across the nation, we can greatly improve access to those services, particularly for Australians living in rural and regional areas. The new offices will provide better access to Centrelink and Medicare services, from applying for Medicare rebates to making inquiries about family payments, all in one convenient location. That is great news for people in regional and rural areas in particular who may never before have had a Medicare office in their community.

Forty-two co-located Centrelink, Medicare and child support offices are already operating successfully, with another 12 to open across Australia by the middle of the year. The budget also includes a $24½ million investment to improve services for Australians in regional and remote areas and for the socially isolated. This new funding will extend the successful mobile office service and will provide many more outreach officers to help people in need. It will make it easier for Australians who live in rural and regional areas, as well as the socially isolated, to access government services and payments. The government's mobile offices made a huge difference during the recent floods, as well as during the drought, and so we are extending this vital service beyond 1 July 2011.

Mobile offices bring all of the services provided by Centrelink and Medicare directly to rural and regional communities, loaded into custom-built tractor trailers. In the past these offices were deployed to areas affected by drought, but more recently they were used in Queensland following last summer's natural disasters. Continued funding for the mobile offices and the introduction of a third office in 2014 will benefit up to half a million Australians who live more than 50 kilometres from a Medicare or Centrelink office.

I am particularly pleased that the budget includes funding for an additional 20 Centrelink community engagement officers. There are already 90 of these officers working at targeted sites across the country and they do a terrific job. They deliver essential outreach services outside the traditional office setting to people who are homeless or at risk of homelessness. They go to boarding houses, drop in centres and other places where people sleep rough to help them claim and maintain income support payments as well as provide referrals to other support programs.

The budget also includes extra funding for an additional 13 Centrelink social worker positions. Centrelink social workers provide counselling support and referrals to people caught in difficult personal or family circumstances. Social workers were deployed in large numbers to Queensland earlier this year to assist flood victims and were also sent to New Zealand following the Christchurch earthquake, and even to Japan to assist Australians who were there after the tsunami. Through these significant investments in the government's service delivery reform agenda, taxpayers will also save $130 million over four years through improved information and self-service facilities across the Human Services Portfolio. By reducing paperwork, moving forms online and improving the single portfolio website and phone number we are providing more self-service options for people who want to do business with the portfolio in that way. This will make contacting and accessing the services of Human Services agencies simpler for millions of Australians. That is just a quick snapshot of what we will deliver through service delivery reform.

The budget also includes around $280 million for the Human Services Portfolio so that it can play its part in implementing the government's participation agenda. We will be delivering more targeted assistance to help job seekers who are capable of work to find employment. A key component of this package is the $38.2 million investment in a new program, the Community Innovation through Collaboration initiative. The program will encourage local innovation to boost the life skills and work readiness of people with multiple and complex needs. It will be rolled out in the 10 locations around Australia that receive additional assistance through place based programs and support services. The program will ensure that the needs of local communities are addressed with well-resourced, collaborative and effective local solutions rather than a one-size-fits-all program that is controlled from Canberra.

Community Innovation through Collaboration comprises two separate measures: a $25 million Local Solutions Fund to help community groups deliver programs to assist local people to get the services they need, and $13.2 million for local service coordinators and community based facilitators to ensure that local services are delivered effectively in ways that benefit local families and individuals. By investing in local solutions the government can better assist local communities to address disadvantage, through tailored initiatives that draw on local expertise.

The Local Solutions Fund is a concerted effort to engage with community leaders and not-for-profit agencies, who know better than most about what works and what does not work for Australians and their families in disadvantaged locations we are targeting. The program will give locals a say, making sure that groups that help local people are actively involved in developing and delivering local solutions that address the limitations of existing services. By investing and modernising the delivery of public services as well as new programs to boost workforce participation, the government is ensuring that my portfolio will continue to make a positive difference to the lives of millions of Australians.

Luke Hartsuyker (Cowper, National Party, Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2011-2012 and its cognate bills. I welcome the opportunity to speak on this legislation, which appropriates the funding sought through yet another Labor budget built on deficit, borrowing and debt. This is a typical Labor budget. We heard the government speak of a budget containing tough decisions but, once again, the government's spin and rhetoric fail to be matched by its actions.

We heard the Treasurer say before the budget:

… if we are going to be Keynesians in the downturn, we have to be Keynesians on the way up again.

The Treasurer said:

… being a Keynesian means supporting a counter-cyclical fiscal policy with government making room for the private sector when economic growth is strong.

Well, by the Treasurer's own standards, the budget is a complete failure. In the true Labor tradition the budget crowds out the private sector at every opportunity in order to prop up its forecast of a 2012-13 surplus. That will only happen by the government manipulating the figures again next year.

Far from making room for the private sector, these bills will increase government competition in the debt market. In November, we were told that net debt would peak at $94 billion. On budget night it was revealed that net debt is now $107 billion, and the government is borrowing $153 million every single day. Each day we have the government out there competing against private enterprise and small business for funding and putting pressure on interest rates paid by small business and homeowners.

Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 2011-2012 seeks to increase the government's gross debt limit from $200 billion to $250 billion. So, instead of making tough decisions to produce a surplus, instead of cutting back on its spending, the government is simply increasing its debt limit and borrowing more and more taxpayers' money. Any surplus will be illusory as long as the government is paying back the debt. Cumulative interest on Labor's net debt will be more than $26 billion over the next four years. The repayments on government debt will be billions more than any surplus predicted by the government over the next four years. It is a budget built on debt and spending, and small business and householders and families will be the ones who have to pay. The Treasurer does not understand the impact of spending on interest rates. It is basic economics that record government spending and waste will increase the money supply in the economy and inflate prices. The Reserve Bank is given no choice but to increase interest rates to reduce the money supply and to reduce inflation. Interest-rate rises are not only hurting businesses but they are also increasing the cost of living. This government simply does not understand that there are many individuals and families feeling the pressure of cost of living and this budget does very little to help them. Again the government could help with inflationary pressures in the economy by easing spending and reducing government debt and competition in the credit markets.

The Treasurer states that the economy is crying out for workers but the reality is that not every sector in the economy is experiencing growth. Businesses operating in slow sectors are raising prices to deal with a combination of reduced returns, increased funding costs and higher interest rates brought about by this government. Labor simply does not understand that the government spending is inflationary and increasing inflationary pressures are adding into the cost of living. Aggregate annual inflation is currently 3.3 per cent, just about the Reserve Bank's target. But the aggregate figure does not give the full picture. According to the Reserve Bank, food prices are inflating by 11.5 per cent annualised. This has been constant over the past six months, well before the natural disasters hit Queensland. Transport costs have inflated in the March quarter by 10.6 per cent annualised, and this is hitting family budgets, workers and small business right across the country.

These pressures are being felt strongly in my electorate of Cowper. The electorate I represent is one of the most beautiful in Australia. In a geographical sense, we live in paradise: great beaches, beautiful national parks, a great subtropical climate. But behind the natural beauty of the region there are many North Coast residents struggling to make ends meet. A snapshot of the Cowper electorate provides insight into why this is so. In approximate terms the Cowper electorate has 20,000 age pensioners, 5,000 people receiving carers allowance, 9,000 on the disability support pension and 15,000 receiving Family Tax Benefit A and 11,000 receiving Family Tax Benefit B. Twenty per cent of families have only one parent and 37 per cent of couples have children. For the majority of those people the budget fails the very fundamental test of providing assistance with the increased costs of living. Indeed, the reality is that this budget locks in the Gillard government agenda, which will actually deliver a double-whammy to North Coast residents. In the first instance the budget fails to acknowledge that the rising cost of living is impacting on many low-income families and that their inflationary experience is far greater than the headline figures that are published from the Reserve Bank. Secondly, this government has made it clear that they intend to squeeze household budgets further by introducing a carbon tax. And they will be increasing it afterwards. That is one of the sinister things about this tax, that they will slip it in at a relatively low rate and then they will ramp it up. Watch this space. That will drive up the cost of everything.

Last Sunday as I completed my regular grocery shop I started to wonder about the Prime Minister and the Treasurer. I often wonder about the Prime Minister and Treasurer, I must say, but going through the aisles at Coles I wondered when was the last time the Prime Minister cruised down to the grocery store and when was the last time the Treasurer cruised down to the grocery store to buy some groceries. I guess the truth is that neither the Treasurer nor the Prime Minister has probably been to the supermarket anytime in the recent past. But the answer to that question really does not matter. The Prime Minister and the Treasurer are very much out of touch. If they were in touch with the Australian people then they would not be proposing to introduce this massive new carbon tax. They would be saying, 'We acknowledge the fact that the cost of living is rising rapidly, the fact that people are struggling to pay their mortgage, the fact that utilities are going up virtually every day of the week.' Hardly a day goes by without another headline relating to the increased cost of living. You would think that a Prime Minister and a Treasurer who are in touch with the Australian people would say, 'We mustn't do anything that is going to make this situation worse.' Our policy focus must be that we endeavour to take the pressure off the cost of living to ensure that the government is not out there in the debt market competing with the private sector, driving up interest rates. We should be trying to do that from a policy perspective. But what is the situation? It is exactly the reverse. We are going to impose a carbon tax that is going to drive up the cost of living—drive up the cost of every single thing that you buy—and we are going to tell the Australian people that it is good for them, that we are going to save the planet. I certainly commend Senator Joyce for raising the question: how does imposing a new tax cool the planet? The Prime Minister and the Treasurer have always failed to answer that question, a very important question indeed.

The carbon tax is going to make life difficult for the people on the North Coast. It is going to drive up the cost of everything they buy. It will drive up the cost of memberships in sporting clubs. It is going to adversely impact on volunteer organisations that are also struggling to make ends meet through increased electricity bills for Meals on Wheels or whatever other voluntary organisation you care to name. It is interesting that the carbon tax is off budget. It is not included in the budget at this point in time. This is a major tax reform—or we will not even call it a reform; it is a major imposition of a new tax, and it was not included in this year's budget.

Another important issue that faces Australia's financial future is how we are going to pay for the NBN and the benefit of the NBN. The budget papers detail that the government will be investing $27.5 billion in NBN Co. to build and operate the NBN. We hear from the government time and time again that the NBN should not be treated as a cost or an expense to government, yet for the NBN to be kept off balance sheet it must provide an internal rate of return above the government bond rate. The government's arrangements for the Commonwealth government business enterprises published by the Department of Finance and Deregulation state:

The required return on equity is the risk free rate plus the proportion of market risk premium appropriate to—

the enterprise. This means that in order to be kept off the government's balance sheets the NBN must at least generate returns at the risk-free rate, measured as the government bond rate. This is before we consider the market risk premium, a very important point indeed.

NBN forecasts a seven per cent internal rate of return which will just keep the project above the current 10-year government bond rate of 5.75 per cent and off the government's balance sheet. But it is becoming clear that the government and NBN Co. do not understand the risks associated with this project and any increased cost will effectively force the expenditure of the NBN onto the balance sheet as rates of return plummet. If our income does not come up to standard and up to the projections and our costs are higher than what is projected—and we already see that with the construction tender process—the IRR will fall. That will quite properly mean that the government's thinly veiled excuse for concealing the NBN from the budget figures will evaporate. It is interesting to note that on 1 April, April Fool's Day, NBN Co. indefinitely suspended their network construction tender because they felt the 14 tenderers were trying to charge too much for construction costs. It was April Fool's Day, and the government still has not woken up. The NBN Co.'s head of corporate services, Kevin Brown, all but accused the 14 tenderers of price gouging when he said:

NBN Co does not regard current pricing reflects capacity constraints in the industry, and we are progressing a different approach that we think will produce a better result.

We can ask if NBN Co. really thought that the tender submissions were in fact overpriced or whether NBN Co. are constrained by the funding being provided to them by the minister and the Prime Minister, who have no understanding of the costs and the risks in the IT industry. The government cannot increase NBN Co.'s budget because it will lower the internal rate of return for the project and therefore the IRR may ultimately fall below that hurdle rate which would require the project to be included on budget. The taxpayer component of capital expenditure for the NBN was originally $35.7 billion. We can legitimately ask whether the government lowered this amount to $27.5 billion simply because that is what it needed to produce a seven per cent IRR and keep the project off balance sheet so the government could claim a surplus next year. But without an understanding of the risks and an appropriate budget, this project is likely to blow out by billions of dollars. On Tuesday the CEO of one of the 14 tenderers, Leighton Holdings, Mr David Stewart, said the following with regard to NBN Co.'s tender process . It is quite interesting. He said:

Some of the things that people are asking us to do are impossible for us to even price.

He goes on to say:

I think if 14 contractors have come in with prices that seem like gouging, you would have to look at the contract to see what is going in those contracts because I don't think 14 contractors are necessarily missing the point.

Mr Stewart continues:

Often you find that any new enterprise that is set up as a special purpose vehicle all the experts decide that they can change all the Australian standards, change the contract conditions, change the risk profile and fix up an industry that was probably okay before they started.

The government simply does not understand the risks and price pressures in this industry, and we are heading for a financial disaster—one that is being kept out of the budget for strategic reasons and should be of great concern to all Australians. NBN Co. backed by the Prime Minister and the Treasurer are changing all the rules and destroying all the competition in order to prop up the internal rate of return.

We know competition policy rests on more competitors in the market. It produces a better outcome for consumers. It produces cheaper prices, yet with NBN Co., we are actually legislating for less competition. We are legislating to keep competition out of the market, which can only mean one thing: higher prices for consumers and a lessening in competition in the market.

This is a budget that has failed the Australian people. This is a budget that does not pass the test of being responsible. It does not pass the test of a budget that is required to deliver quality outcomes for the Australian people. This is a budget that is certainly not going to result in a surplus in 2012-13 unless we see a little more creative accounting from the Treasurer. (Time expired)

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise in the Main Committee here today on three budget appropriation bills which are being debated concurrently. They include the Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2011-2012, the Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 2011-2012 and the Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2011-2012

On the night of the budget and leading up to the budget, the Treasurer said that he declared that this was a budget that would deliver to regional Australia like no budget before it. I have got news for the Treasurer, because I do not know where he finds regional Australia but he did not find it in many part of Queensland, including my electorate. I am a representative of regional Australia. I am a representative of the seat of Maranoa and the voice of the people of Maranoa in this place, and Maranoa covers some 40 per cent of the land mass of Queensland. I fail to see how this budget will significantly benefit the people of regional Queensland. For instance, $500 million has been slashed from regional funding, and there is not a single new cent that has been introduced or announced for rail or road projects. We are talking about new money; not rebadged money but new money.

The Warrego Highway, for instance, in my electorate starts not far west of Brisbane, near Ipswich. The RACQ believe that it needs an injection of some $380 million just to repair the road, not to upgrade it. This is the highway between the port of Brisbane that goes out into the Surat Basin. I am sure you, Madam Deputy Speaker Bird, can appreciate the impact that the resources sector is having on roads in many of our communities.

The Landsborough Highway, which I am sure you would also be familiar with: not a single new cent for it. It leaves the Warrego at Morven and goes through to Cloncurry. It is the major highway from southern Australia leading to Darwin through Mount Isa: not a single new cent. The Gore Highway, the Cunningham Highway, the New England Highway in my electorate—all these highways are in the seat of Maranoa. Of course they extend well beyond the boundaries of Maranoa, but they have not received a single cent of new funding in this budget. Sure, some money was announced for flood damage as a result of the natural disasters last year and this year, and I welcome that funding and I acknowledge it. But we need more than just repairs to the roads as result of the flood damage. We need new money to upgrade these very important major highways that link with the Murray-Darling Basin, western Queensland, the Surat Basin—that huge resource area where the roads are under enormous pressure from the trucks and the volume of traffic, which has escalated to a point I would not have imagined in my lifetime—and the strategic roads to the outback. We used to talk about the beef roads many years ago going out to the Channel Country, the remote communities and the pastoral sector—well beyond the major highways. There is no money for those except for flood damage money, which will only repair the flood damage as a result of the recent natural disasters.

There are no plans to work on the second range crossing at Toowoomba, and I want to talk about this for a minute. During the natural disaster earlier this year, all the range crossings from my electorate right through to Kingaroy were cut and were out of action—Cunningham's Gap, Murphys Creek, Toowoomba Range, Heifer Creek crossing and D'Aguilar Highway from Blackbutt. All of those highways were cut, and that meant that normal traffic obviously could not move through but also that trucks with goods for those communities could not move through. Fuel comes in in tankers on a just-in-time basis. Food comes into the supermarkets and shops on a just-in-time basis. When I went into my local supermarket during the floods, I could not believe there was no food available. There were some non-essentials but there was no perishable food—milk and the basic essentials of everyday life. It was extraordinary. Why? Food, fresh vegetables, meat and all sorts of perishables come in by road just in time. These goods are being moved all the time on those highways, yet we were cut off from where the transport originates, which is mainly in the markets around Brisbane and the processing sector in the south-east corner. The trucks could not cross the range anywhere from north of Toowoomba and upper Kingaroy through to the border.

During the flood natural disaster I thought I had better fill my car with fuel. When I went to the fuel station, I found there was no fuel in town. Why? Once upon a time strategic reserves of fuel were held out in western Queensland at the fuel depots. Those days have long since gone and now fuel comes in almost daily to replenish the service stations. When the Toowoomba range and all the other roads I mentioned were cut, fuel and food could not be transported to our communities. We are so dependent on the road infrastructure and on this just-in-time basis for the delivery of so many essential items. We have to look at these highways and how we can ensure we are not cut off in the future from the delivery of essential items. The second range crossing is therefore critical in the longer term.

I believe Queensland was also dudded under the $1.8 billion announced by the government for regional health and hospitals. In the lead-up to the budget, I thought it sounded pretty good. Despite being home to almost a third of Australia's regional population, Queensland received just 12 per cent of the funding. Yet this was a budget for regional Australia. Payments have been massively skewed towards the Independents, who support this minority government. Tasmania, for instance, received some $80 million more than Queensland, despite having a fraction of the population. And this is meant to be a budget for regional Australia? The largest payment was a $240 million boost to the Royal Hobart Hospital in the independent seat of Denison, held by Mr Andrew Wilkie. It just defies logic. There were a few payments to Queensland hospitals, once again, along the coast, but there was nothing for the area west of the Dividing Range for the length of Queensland, north to the Northern Territory border, apart from one for Toowoomba, sitting on top of what we often call the great sandstone curtain.

The only money that we did see was, I think, some $4.9 million for the Royal Flying Doctor Service, which is certainly welcome, for the upgrade of their bases in Mount Isa and Longreach. But there was nothing like the $1.8 billion, nor the share that should have come to Queensland, going into regional hospitals.

We now find out that we are going to lose our Medicare access points. There are 840 Medicare access points across regional, rural and remote Australia. I understand that they will be phased out over the next three years and that 33 of these Medicare booths will be removed from my electorate alone. These are points where people can go with their Medicare claim, put their claim into the booth—it may be a rural transaction centre where local farmers can use the Q-Gap facility—and, within three days, they will have their money in the bank. We are going to lose those services from my electorate and also 840 across Australia.

I am told that you can now do it by telephone. I am meeting with Medicare later and I will be very interested in that meeting. I think we have all experienced that frustration, sitting at the end of the telephone, being told: 'Your call is important to us; you have advanced in the queue, so please don't go away.' Then you listen to some beautiful music for another three or four minutes and the same message comes back again. I am very concerned that that is the sort of service we are going to get, which will replace across-the-counter or face-to-face service.

Then we have the forgotten families in this budget. This is the first budget in eight years that has not seen a tax cut for families. Labor used to talk about 'working families'. Where are Labor's working families in this budget? We are going to see support for families cut at a time when they are facing tremendous cost-of-living pressures. Since this government came to power, electricity prices have risen by some 51 per cent. Grocery prices are up 14 per cent, and education and health costs are up by about 20 per cent and there have been seven interest rate rises in a row, increasing the average mortgage repayment by some $500 per month. The government is going to strip some $2 billion from families by freezing indexation on key family tax payments and income thresholds for the next three years. Families did not get a tax cut but corporate Australia did. That just defies logic. There is a tax cut for large companies, publicly listed companies, corporate Australia but not families.

Then we see the rollout of the digital television switchover. Some $400 will be available to people on pensions and income support, to switch over from analog to digital. Anyone who has been to any electrical store lately will have seen that you can buy a set-top box for up to $40 or $50, not $400. In some cases, you can buy a digital television set for less than $400. Whilst this payment may be well intended, it will be yet another program administered by the government. It reminds me of those insulation batts that burn down houses. It also reminds me of the school halls program, following the global financial crisis, and here we are, in 2011. The Westmar State School had lost its school—it is a small community—because of a fire. I am absolutely frustrated. The P&C are now being asked to put some of their own money into the so-called 'stimulus package' for their local hall. It is going to be a multipurpose hall without walls, apparently. It will have a roof but nothing else. The government is saying, 'We want you to put some of your money in to enclose it.' It is another example of the mismanagement of programs under this government. Not only can they not handle money; they have no idea of how to run a program.

Then there is agriculture. Against the backdrop of the huge global food challenges we face over the next 50 years, we have to increase food production, according to the United Nations, by some 70 per cent, yet the Labor Party is cutting support for agriculture across the board. From the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry we got a one-page press release, demonstrating the total lack of interest in agriculture and the important role regional Australia plays, feeding Australians with clean, green food every day. Farmers across Australia feed 60 million mouths every day with their production—not only Australians but a further 40 million outside Australia are dependent on the food we produce. Yet the government has ignored in this budget the agricultural sector.

Then they say they are going to bring in a carbon tax. If there is something which will hit every household and every business in Australia it is a carbon tax. Far from assisting, as is suggested in the carbon farming initiative—I spoke about this in the House last night—this carbon tax will drive costs up for our agricultural sector. It will put more pressure on the land and, if this does come to pass, farmers are going to have to produce not only what they have produced in the past but also they will have to pay the flow-on effect of a carbon tax in increased electricity prices and increases in transport costs. The only way farmers can deal with that is to put more stock on the land, putting more pressure on the land, and perhaps not having rotational crops in their arable lands, so that they will have to work the land harder. The net impact of a carbon tax will mean that in some cases farmers will be less competitive if not uncompetitive in the global market. (Time expired)

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

As I rise to speak on this year's appropriation legislation, I would preface everything I say by the fact that my No. 1 concern for the electorate of Calare in the 2011-12 budget is securing funding for essential infrastructure—infrastructure which would help progress rural and regional Australia and ensure its prosperity in the future. A Bells Line expressway or just a new serious track over the mountains, a new Lake Rowlands dam and medical school for Charles Sturt University: they were the issues at the top of Calare's priority list. There was not one new funding announcement in the federal budget for Calare. Treasurer Wayne Swan claimed that this budget delivers for regional Australian like no other budget. That is a little hard to equate with a $500 million cut from regional programs. Whatever the new delivery is, it is not in Calare.

Labor declared that this was a traditional Labor budget, and they were right—another big deficit, more borrowing and debt and more taxes. Quite obviously, what Labor is offering Calare is a bigger deficit, more borrowings and higher debt. And the borrowings now? This is a great advancement! Over 12 months it has gone from $100 million a day to $135 million a day. I would guess the Treasurer can be very pleased with himself on that line. Regional Australia has been robbed in this budget. There is not one cent of new money for roads and rail. It appears regional development will be contingent on the looming mining tax, a mining tax that would hurt one of the biggest industries in my part of the world that it relies on and the people who work in it rely on. In fact, the flow-through is right through the community. The mining sector has kept Calare's economy strong and it has kept Australia's economy strong. There is a large proportion of the electorate who are employed directly and indirectly by that sector. A tax which threatens these jobs also threatens the entire region. As I say, it flows right through, right down to coffee shops, dress shops, whatever. Take Orange, for example, with the expansion of Newcrest Cadia mines, coalmines such as Centennial Coal, Coalpac near Lithgow and North Parkes mine at the western end of the electorate. The mines invest enormous amounts into the communities. They involve themselves at the community level. They employ local people and keep our businesses thriving. Introduction of a mining tax has the ability to damage entire communities in our part of the world.

The other giant hole in Labor's budget is the Gillard-Brown carbon tax. As we heard the member for Maranoa say, instead of ending months of uncertainty around the controversial tax, this government failed to include detail on how the tax will impact on our cost of living and jobs and cannot or will not answer questions in that regard in the House. Let me tell you that a carbon tax will without a doubt seriously hurt my region's business operations. A few weeks ago I had the good fortune to visit the Electrolux factory, which employs over 600 people in Orange. I had not visited it for a couple of years and the tour provided me with a classic example of how the carbon tax can affect not just the obvious industries but the retailing and the whitegoods industry as well. It produces a range of quality fridges and freezers, which are sold both domestically and internationally. Currently the main competition is Korean. Electrolux has worked out that even a very modest carbon tax will add about $10 to a fridge. Now, $10 may not seem much on an $800 fridge but it is not $10 on the cost of a fridge that is the issue. Currently they are running something like $70 or $80 over and above the cost of the Korean competition. This makes them $80 or $90 instead of $70 or $80 over the cost of the competition, which does make a huge difference. It is adding about 15 per cent more to the cost overrun they have across the competition. It is a better article and they are able to deal with that, but they are not able to deal with another 15 per cent differential in that cost. It is a huge issue, especially when it involves 602 jobs in Orange.

Lastly, this budget was an opportunity for Labor to invest in regions such as Calare. As my colleague Warren Truss, the member for Wide Bay, noted, what the bush got was lip-service and hollow rhetoric but nothing much in the way of benefits. It certainly got a $500 cut in regional programs. Vital infrastructure, particularly roads and rail, are heavily relied upon in our neck of the woods. The inland rail link was mentioned briefly. However, there was no new money there. The only announcements about that were old hat, and there will be nothing in it for three years anyway. That is only for the paperwork and beginning of planning stages of the project in three years. The devil is really in the detail. All we have seen in the 2011 budget is a series of rehashed and revisited promises. The budget did not reveal anything we do not already know and it certainly did not deliver for Calare.

Calls for a decent road or a decent track over the Blue Mountains and water security are two big infrastructure projects we have to have. When I say water security I am not talking agriculture, I am talking urban; I am talking domestic and manufacturing water. Everyone west of the mountains knows the absolute importance of fixing up the access through the Blue Mountains. As far as water security is concerned, the long-term fix to ensure the central west does not again get into the position it was in a year or so ago is to have a new Lake Rowlands dam.

Charles Sturt University put forward a proposal requiring $98 million to put in a medical school particularly targeted to bring in people who want to practise in regional and country Australia. It will be somewhat different to what the University of Newcastle does, but the object is to bring in people who will still have to pass the same exams as the most brilliant student has to pass. We all know that training country students is the best way to retain people to practise in our part of the world, and the dental school is a fine example of how to proceed in that direction. The Vice-Chancellor of Charles Sturt University rightfully said:

Rural Australians will be disappointed by the government’s failure to put forward critical plans to address severe shortages of GPs in rural Australia.

This government had the opportunity to do just that. We all know that we are bringing in many overseas doctors. Something like 50 per cent or more of doctors in rural Australia are overseas doctors, and the only way we are going to address that is to train our own. That has to be accepted; it has to be addressed. It is a huge disappointment.

Funding for these projects, along with many others in regional Australia, failed to get a mention. That is ridiculous, especially when we know that the government is spending $50 billion to roll out optic fibre across the nation, much of which could be obsolete within a decade. That kind of money could fund so many things. It could fund so much infrastructure that would be there forever—road and rail through the Blue Mountains or inland. If you think about what $50 billion could fund, it is enormous. I worked out once that the last time Labor ran up a debt, which was $96 billion—and admittedly it took 14 years that time—it took the coalition 10 years to pay it back. This time they have run up around $110 billion in about 2½ years. The interest on the money last time was over $100 billion. How much infrastructure was in that? Infrastructure is needed in Northern Australia. I do not want it all, but we do need it in regional Australia.

Agriculture was also largely neglected in this budget. Along with mining it is one of the leading industries, certainly in Calare, and it is also the industry that I am largely responsible for. The government plans to direct an extra 6,000 skilled migrants into regional areas on a short-term basis from 2012. It is too little too late. The NFF has said that there are approximately 80,000 skilled positions to fill in the agriculture sector alone. Regional Australia is in desperate need of these workers, yet agriculture and horticulture have been specifically excluded from the raft of apprenticeships being funded. The farm sector drives over $150 billion a year in economic production and the industry supports 1.6 million Australian jobs, yet Labor has taken another swipe at agriculture, slashing nearly $33 million from its budget. The agriculture budget contains more missed opportunities than dollars. It was a nonevent, and the minister could have managed it from a beach in Bali. Coming into the budget, I suppose we should be thankful, Madam Acting Deputy Speaker, that they did not put more time into it or he would have taken more money out of it.

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

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

I probably should be. Coming into the budget, biosecurity was the one area that the government really needed to focus its energies and concentrate its policy on. However, despite forcing AQIS and Biosecurity to retreat from cutting research and development, Minister Ludwig has again ignored the Beale review—his own government's review, which was put into place back in 2008—and failed to increase their budget. It is a fact that inspections per unit of imports into this country continue to decrease.

Labor has also managed to cut $33½ million to the cooperative research centres, meaning that the CRC for National Plant Biosecurity and the Invasive Animals CRC are unlikely to be refunded. I have seen them lately, and they are extraordinarily worried about the funding situation they are in. Our worst fears look increasingly likely as a result of this budget. The government continues to ignore glaring failures in proactively protecting Australia's shores from pests and diseases.

The government claimed during the 2010 election campaign that they had a renewed focus on the regions, but the budget does not deliver for the people or industries of our regions. Biosecurity is such a huge issue for us. The federal government ignored myrtle rust, which is really guava rust, and ignored the fact that New South Wales wanted to deal with it. It ignored the fact that Queensland wanted to deal with the Asian honey bee. The minister and the department pretty much walked away from it. We now have myrtle rust not just hooking into nurseries; it is hooking into eucalyptus. Some four to five eucalypt species are now suffering, and it is up into Queensland. It could have been dealt with, but the bureaucrats and the ministry did not want to do so. This is a really serious issue. Biosecurity is a time bomb waiting to blow up. I implore the minister and the government to take it far more seriously.

Last year I said that the budget was an opportunity for Labor to invest in our regions. Once again, that has been ignored. My electorate and the farmers of Australia have been left to pick up the pieces. And now we are going to have to pay back a net budget deficit of well over $100 billion once again.

Warren Entsch (Leichhardt, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise in this place today to speak on Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2011-2012 and the other appropriation bills. A short while ago I was quite excited to see that our Acting Prime Minister and Treasurer had decided to spend three days of his Easter holiday in Cairns on a fact-finding mission. I thought, 'Wow, this is a great opportunity for him to have a look at what is clearly one of the economically depressed regions of our country.' Forty-odd per cent of our economy relies on tourism, and we have had everything from floods and pestilence to cyclones—all the disasters you have seen in the media. Some people have decided, just on the basis of what they have seen in the news media, to cancel holidays they had booked to Cairns, even though the actual event might have occurred somewhere in the south-east corner of Queensland, which is probably closer to Melbourne than to Cairns. The impact on our businesses has been quite profound.

This is at the end of a couple of years of very, very difficult times in our region. We certainly got no benefit out of the stimulus package, given that governments were hell-bent on making sure that the primary contracts for any of the work that was done were provided to southern based contractors, leaving our own local builders and contractors to pick up the crumbs and putting them into very significant economic difficulties.

But I thought, 'This is a great opportunity.' The Treasurer swanned into town, where he stayed in a five-star hotel on his fact-finding mission—and I do not suggest that people should not do that. Afterwards, he left. On budget night I listened to his speech and I really got excited. I thought there was going to be something for our city from this government. Right at the beginning of his speech, he acknowledged that we have a patchwork economy and that it is growing unevenly across the nation. We talk about 'patchwork', but in my region there are gaping black holes. The patches to fill in those holes have not even been manufactured yet!

The Treasurer talked about the natural disasters devastating families, cities and towns—and at the height of Yasi and at the start of the floods he could not have been more accurate. I thought this guy has seriously listened. Then he talked about the high dollar and, for the first and only time in his entire budget speech, he mentioned tourism, plus many manufacturing industries and especially small business—again, how true that is. In the last two years in my region, over 400 small businesses have folded and there are a hell of a lot more at the precipice; they are ready to go. He acknowledged that not every region prospers. He did not mention my region specifically but I thought that acknowledgement suggested that he was going to do something about it.

He also said that not every health service was as good as it could be, particularly for the mentally ill. Again, I got excited because at the last election he had promised a headspace facility in Cairns. I thought, 'We're going to get that announcement today.' But I was very disappointed. As I sat there and listened to him go through his rhetoric—go through his speech—he never mentioned tourism again. He did say that Cyclone Yasi was going to cost the economy about $9 billion in lost output and reduced real GDP. But then he decided to talk about solutions. He was going to put 50,000 single parents back into the work queues. He was going to get the long-term unemployed and, of course, people with disabilities back to work. I thought to myself, 'This is not quite right'—and he is getting further into the speech. The problem we have up in Cairns is close to 14 per cent unemployment. So we are going to get these guys back into a job; but they are not long-termers. These people lost their jobs last week or the week before. So what is the point of training long-term unemployed people for jobs that do not exist? So I thought maybe we were being sold a bit of pup here.

Then he started talking about infrastructure, and I thought 'wow'. Four years ago the government announced $150 million for an overpass on Ray Jones Drive. They had announced it three times over the four years prior to that announcement by Minister Albanese when he was up our way recently. He also confirmed the government's commitment to the region by announcing that a southern based contractor would be doing the work. He made that announcement about a week before the last standing civil constructer, who had employed up to 600 people in Cairns, went into liquidation. They had not even been considered.

Then I thought, 'What is he going to announce now?' He said, 'We're going to build the National Broadband Network and invest $36 billion in vital roads, railways and ports, like the Moreton Bay Rail Link in Queensland, the Gateway project in Western Australia, the Western Ring Road upgrade in Victoria and, with the additional funds, duplicate the Pacific Highway.' I thought, 'Anything he's going to say in that speech is not worth a cupful of cold water,' because he did not even mention the Bruce Highway and the fact that in the last 12 months it has been closed close to 200 times because of floods and other issues. There was no commitment there. He did not re-announce the fact that he was still going to build a $150 million overpass on Ray Jones Drive; it has not started yet. I came away feeling very, very disillusioned. I thought to myself: 400 businesses have closed. The CEC Group, with over 34 years of operation, has just shut down. Other businesses are Glenwood Homes, with over 20 years of operation; Winfield's Electrical, with 58 years of operation; CMC Constructions; the Hedley Group; Cocoa Cola; Northpower Electrical; and Smithfield Electrics And today I heard that CityLife magazine announced yesterday that it is intending to close as well. The list goes on and on. I have to tell you, Madam Deputy Speaker, it is very, very depressing.

Every day people are coming into the office about this. We have had meeting after meeting to try to get our local builders and suppliers involved in the rebuild after Yasi. It is almost impossible to get the government to listen to us. Most of the contracts continue to go to their mates in the southern part of the state, leaving only the subcontractors in our areas to pick up the bits and pieces, which are really not quite enough to keep them alive. We had unemployment of close to 14 per cent. It has dropped recently, but the reason it has dropped recently is because people are leaving town. That is the main reason. People are leaving town or going into part-time employment because full-time employment is not there. So I am pleading with the Treasurer: for goodness sake, whatever you do, do not start training the long-term unemployed or those with disabilities or the single mums. Give the people who lost their jobs today and yesterday an opportunity to get their job first.

I recently had a look at what one of our Independents, Mr Windsor, got out of the budget: BAE Flying Systems, $120 million; $20 million for a new medical training facility; $10 million for a Sports Dome in Tamworth; $120 million allocated for the redevelopment of the Tamworth Hospital; and $31.6 million for a regional cancer centre.

We have had a community up there that has been raising money now for a number of years to set up a cancer facility. On my side of politics we had committed to build a wellbeing centre for this organisation—not a cent out of this government to support that, and I think that is very, very disappointing when you stop and think about the amount of money and commitment that has been put in by the community to establish this themselves. Yet this government can go down to an Independent and give $31 million to his electorate. We were only looking for $12 million. The members for COUCH that set up this organisation would have to feel very much cheated.

We did get $12 million for the continued redevelopment of our public hospital on a site that has to be evacuated every time there is a storm. It is not capable of withstanding storm surges or cyclones so they evacuate the whole hospital and the community is without a hospital. They gave $12 million. I see there is $120 million for the Tamworth Hospital, plus another $20 million for funding for new medical training facilities. In Cairns we were looking to set up the Australian National Institute of Tropical Health and Medicine. The JCU is a wonderful institution and it would have been a great addendum to it as a national institute. But of course they did not see fit to put any money into that either.

You have to be very cynical and very sceptical when you talk about commitments by this government in relation to what they are able to do. I go through the election commitments. As I said, there is the $150 million for stage 1 of the Bruce Highway—nothing has happened; $40 million for performing arts—not a cracker has been spent. They got a coordinator in for fly in, fly out jobs for Cairns, but there have been absolutely no direct results from that at this point in time. You have got Cazalys—they are still spending the money, $3 million, on that, and there was another one for remote housing, $4.5 million, which is still to be delivered, and the list goes on There was $9.37 million for the Daintree Rainforest Observatory—it still has not been done. There was a commitment to Headspace, but it still has not been done. There was $3.5 million for development of the rugby league, which still has not been delivered—not a cracker. You have to ask yourself: when are they going to start being serious?

I say to the Treasurer that he needs to start being serious. He needs to match his rhetoric with action. Cairns in the far northern region is in desperate need of support. We have people up there who, from 30 June, will be paying an increased Medicare levy, who are expected to support people in the area affected by Cyclone Yasi. Nobody in my region and north of my region can access any support. They cannot access any of the loans or any of the grants because it is just impossible for them to do so. First of all, their buildings may not have been blown away but their businesses certainly were. But because they might have had a dollar in their credit card or they had some level of insurance or they had gone out and got a second job to feed their families, they were automatically disqualified. It is an absolute disgrace that these people continue to desperately need this help and there is nothing available for them. Alan Jones was up recently in our region and started to highlight some of these plights, and I desperately hope that he continues to raise these issues on a national level.

Peninsula Development Road was shut down through this event, and none of the businesses up there are entitled to support. Mulley's Market and Fuel, at Coen,and the Exchange Hotel up there have had very little custom since December. The roads have been closed. Again, they are not entitled to support, as are none of the roadhouses up there. Also, the Bloomfield River causeway got washed away. It only opened up a week or so ago, and the Lions Den Hotel on that road, which is totally reliant on traffic coming through, is not entitled to a cracker out of this, as are all the other businesses reliant on that. You have people like Peter and Rosie Johnson, who have a little roadhouse up there, who have been doing it really, really tough. It is just so unfair—and there is nothing at all in this budget.

If we want to start fixing the problems, I can start giving a few ideas for the Treasurer to consider. First of all, he can extend the entitlements of the Cyclone Yasi natural disaster area to include businesses affected in the event in Cairns, the Daintree coast, Cooktown and Cape York and review the eligibility criteria so that businesses can access the support. That will make a huge difference. He can also commit to immediately start on the Bruce Highway, not reannounce it in another 12 months, and change his view to allow somebody local, one of our local contractors, to do the job rather than have the job done by southern based contractors.

A third thing he could do is make a commitment to establish the seed funding for the sports, performing arts and cultural initiative that will see the development of a tropical campus for the Australian Institute of Sport in Far North Queensland. That will get shovel-ready projects started immediately, get jobs and give opportunities there.

The government could also commit to the first stage of the Australian National Institute of Tropical Health and Medicine. They could commit to an all-weather bridge over the Bloomfield crossing. A lagoon for Port Douglas would be wonderful to assist them in revitalising that community, and do not forget the $22 million required to rebuild the sea walls in the outer arm of Torres Strait. And, if they really want to start talking about economic opportunities, they can get rid of that insidious wild rivers legislation that is going to lock up any opportunity for future development in Cape York, along with the proposed blanket World Heritage listing in the area.

These are some initiatives that they can consider. These things can be done immediately. They will give opportunities and give hope to our region rather than the absolute, total, blatant disregard that we have seen in our community now for far too long. I call on the Prime Minister and I call on the Treasurer to get up there and start to make things happen rather than continue to talk about it.

Peter Slipper (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The time allocated to the honourable Chief Opposition Whip has now well and truly expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.

Gai Brodtmann (Canberra, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Main Committee do now adjourn.

Russell Matheson (Macarthur, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Today I would like to pay tribute to former Campbelltown mayor and state Liberal MP Mr Greg Percival OBE, who passed away on 9 May 2011. I would also like to pay my respects to Greg's wife, Diana; his three children, Virginia, Drew and Susan; and their families, who he loved very much. Since his passing, Greg Percival has been remembered by the Macarthur community as a local treasure, a true statesman, a civic legend and a man of integrity.

Greg was a great visionary who played a vital role in the development of Campbelltown and the Macarthur region. To quote last week's edition of the Campbelltown-Macarthur Advertiser:

THERE is barely a square metre of Campbelltown in which Greg Percival … did not have a major say.

From the location of our council chambers and Wests Tigers' home ground, to the creation of Campbelltown's sister city relationship with Koshigaya, Mr Percival was usually at the engine room.

His political heyday stretched from the 1950s to the 1980s but even in retirement he never lost his local passion.

In recent times, for example, he backed the successful fight to stop Glenfield's Hurlstone Agricultural High School farm paddocks being sold to developers—

by the state Labor government.

Greg's political achievements speak for themselves: 31 years as a councillor, two terms as mayor and two as deputy mayor. He was a state member of parliament from 1977 to 1978 and from 1986 to 1988, an executive member of the local government association and the Australia Council of Local Government in the 1960s and 1970s, where he was elected president. Greg devoted a lot of his own time as member of several boards and commissions across New South Wales, including the Sydney Water Board, the NSW planning and environment commission, the Australian council of intergovernmental relations and the Australian constitutional review and convention.

Locally, he was a trustee of the Ingleburn Returned Services League and chairman of the Macarthur Country Tourist Association. He was a life member of the Ingleburn Bowling Club and Ingleburn tennis club, president of the Hume area scout association and patron of Campbelltown Rotary, Ingleburn chamber of commerce and the Royal Australian Navy's Fairmile Association. Greg was instrumental in the establishment of and the continued support for the Campbelltown-Koshigaya Sister Cities Association and visited Japan on numerous occasions. He was also awarded the Officer of the Order of the British Empire, OBE, in 1976—a justified tribute in recognition of his contribution to his community.

Greg was Campbelltown's longest serving councillor and always stood up for what he believed was right. He never backed away from a fight. It was always an honour to stand beside Greg in the trenches fighting for our community. In his political career, Greg was tough yet passionate and very charming. He was known for his great sense of humour and pride in his community. He was a quiet achiever and everything he did was for others, not for his own political gain. Even in retirement, Greg was well informed about the local community and was often keen to bend my ear about the future of my electorate. I was always very fond of Greg as a person and I am grateful for all the advice he gave me. Even a few months ago when I had lunch with Greg and his wife, Diana, at Macquarie Links golf course, he was keen to bend to my ear about the future of Campbelltown and its surrounds. I always enjoyed spending time with him and listening to his stories about his time on council.

I was pleased to see Diana at the Appin Bicentennial Festival last weekend, maintaining the Percival family's strong historical and personal connection to the local community. Greg was ahead of his time when it came to his vision for Macarthur. The significant contributions he made to the city of Campbelltown are something that not only his family but the entire community can certainly be proud of. I believe it would have been appropriate to honour Greg Percival with a state funeral, recognising his status amongst the Macarthur community. I hope all those who choose a life in the political arena, whether at a local, state or federal level, make the same contribution to their communities and are held in the same high esteem as this great man.

At the request of Greg's family, I was honoured to say a few words at his funeral and pay tribute to a great man in the company of the member for Fowler, who also spoke. On behalf of the Macarthur community, I would like to publicly acknowledge Greg for the great contribution he made to our community and thank him for his vision which has helped make my electorate what it is today. Greg, this is the only battle I remember you losing. You will always be loved and respected. You will always be remembered. Rest in peace, my good friend.

Amanda Rishworth (Kingston, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am pleased to speak about a very important event that happened in my electorate last week. It was a pleasure to join Senator Kim Carr, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research, as well as the state Minister for Industry and Trade, Tom Koutsantonis, in my electorate at SMR Automotive in Lonsdale. The reason everyone got together was to launch the third round of successful companies to receive money through the SA Innovation and Investment Fund, set up by both the state and the federal government in response to the collapse and the closure of Mitsubishi in 2008.

The closure of Mitsubishi, the manufacturing plant near my electorate, was a significant blow to jobs and manufacturing in the local area. However, as result of this fund, through the proactive investment by the federal and state governments, we have seen a blossoming of manufacturing businesses in my local area. The money from the SA Innovation and Investment Fund has helped to allow these innovative manufacturing businesses to expand. Three manufacturing businesses in my local community are set in this round to benefit from close to $2½ million. The important funds will provide local industry with a much-needed boost to commit an expansion with a particular focus in this round of projects on the renewable energy sector's manufacturing and engineering to create jobs in the local area. Lonsdale-based manufacturing companies Redarc Electronics, Robin Johnson Engineering and SMR Automotive Australia will be able to use their funding to expand and diversify, creating new jobs for locals in southern Adelaide. Talking to these businesses, you hear about some of the really innovative local manufacturing cutting-edge technology that they are not only taking up but developing, putting southern Adelaide at the forefront of advanced manufacturing. This is the future for manufacturing in Australia. We often hear that manufacturing is not expanding but I do believe that manufacturing has a bright future in this country and that it is companies such as these that will take manufacturing to the next level with innovative cutting-edge technology.

I will talk about SMR Automotive, one of the recipients announced last Thursday. This company develops, produces and distributes exterior mirrors, blind spot detection systems and a wide range of automotive components. The company has 22 per cent of the global market share in production of exterior mirrors for passenger cars, commercial vehicles and heavy trucks. It is one of the leading experts for camera based sensing systems in the automotive industry. One of the particular products it has developed—I do not want to give any intellectual property away but, as they said at the launch, it is very difficult just from the description to be able to actually replicate this. They have been able to manufacture very high quality plastic exterior mirrors for cars, and they are the first to do it in the world at this quality and standard. This reduces the weight of the car. Every component in a car adds to the burden that the user has on fuel, so there is a real focus on moving away from heavy vehicles to lighter ones. This innovative idea will reduce the total weight of the car. SMR did not develop this on their own; they have excellent strategic partnerships with a number of research institutions such as the University of Wollongong, the University of South Australia and Flinders University, all contributing in a really exciting initiative to take that idea and turn it into a commercial proposition that will supply the world. That is a real success story.

In addition we had Redarc Electronics with over 30 years experience in research, design and development, and manufacture of a range of electronic voltage converters and associated products. I have been off to visit them and that has been very interesting. They are expanding, putting more and more employees on. I think they said they had around 50 or 60 employees now, a really exciting proposition.

Robin Johnson Engineering will expand the Lonsdale Park facility to establish a high-volume, innovative turnkey manufacturing plant to produce transportable switch rooms, smart electricals and advanced technology. (Time expired)

Alby Schultz (Hume, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the appalling treatment of regional students and their families by Labor over the last year and a half. The coalition has been fighting tooth and nail to reverse a disgraceful decision by the then Minister for Education and now Prime Minister to cut assistance for rural students under the Independent Youth Allowance Scheme. Regrettably, I was on leave from the House at the beginning of this year, which prevented me from speaking on the importance of the work done by the Liberal led coalition members and senators in the coalition, particularly the member for Forrest, in trying to talk this government back into common sense and decency on this issue.

The Social Security Amendment (Income Support for Regional Students) Bill 2010, introduced by the Abbott led coalition, aimed at reinstating $370 million worth of financial assistance stripped from the rural students by Labor when Julia Gillard was Minister for Education. As a rural member of parliament at both state and federal level for the past 23 years, I am totally dismayed by the government's disgraceful attempts to advise the Governor-General to scrap the bill proposed by the Abbott led coalition. The government is trying to block the coalition's moves at every turn to get back the funding rural students desperately need. Students who cannot access youth allowance in the inner regions are going to be the big losers if the government persists with these appalling tactics. At the beginning of this year I gathered 500 signatures of hardworking families and students from across the Hume electorate in support of the coalition's petition to reinstate the financial support rural students desperately need to help them get through their tertiary education. During the period that I was running the petition and gathering signatures I was being told stories such as the one from a family in Goulburn whose son was adversely affected by the changes introduced in July last year:

With the current situation our son is not eligible for any financial assistance at all. As we live in Goulburn and he is studying in Canberra he will need to live there, as his course convener has told him he will need to be there five days a week. Rent is quite expensive in the ACT …

I know that; my rent has just gone up $60 a night. They continued:

Unless he works for a further 30 hours a week for four months longer he does not qualify for youth allowance. He has earned more than $13,010 in the financial year so we cannot claim him to be dependent on us. He will turn 20 years old in May and feels he should not have to wait any longer to commence his course of study. We agree with this.

The present legislation is discouraging the youth of Australia from seeking further education, and placing extra financial burdens on families. Students and families planned their tertiary education, deferment, financial savings and choice of university all in good faith, reliant on the government's criteria prior to the 1 July 2010 changes. The government scrapped the criteria during the very period that students and families were halfway through their attempt to meet the work and earning-capacity criteria.

This decision is an astounding breach of faith, yet typical of a government which people know they can no longer trust or take at their word. As I have said for a long time: do not look at what Labor says; look at what they do. Because of this government ineptitude, we now run the risk of having regional students turn away from continuing their student careers at university. This would be a tragedy not only for rural and regional Australia but for all Australians.

Yvette D'Ath (Petrie, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to talk about the nine Building the Education Revolution openings that I have done in schools in my local electorate since the start of April. It has been a very busy six weeks for these schools. The construction work for many of them was to be completed over Christmas, but some of those works were delayed because of the heavy rains and floods in Queensland. Others have spent the first term basically settling into their new facilities: putting the books into the new library, setting up the resource centre, putting in the finishes to the hall and landscaping around it. It is great that so many schools have now got these facilities up and operational.

Just last Sunday Grace Lutheran Primary School had an opening for their new library, the refurbishment of their classrooms and their new playground, but it is inaccurate to say that it was just in relation to those buildings. The school chose to use their BER funding and their National School Pride funding in conjunction with a block grant authority to rebuild the school basically from the ground up. It is incredible. Every classroom is new; there is a new tuckshop, a new library, new computer facilities and a new playground. It is just incredible and it is great to see what has been done. They chose to do the opening as part of their open day to showcase their school to the broader community. It was also their 40th anniversary, and Grace pioneers—people who were instrumental in starting the school 40 years ago—came back for the opening.

We also opened Norris Road State School's hall. They had a hall; we have extended the hall and put on multipurpose rooms and a new kitchen. This has made the hall much more versatile. We know that the hall is used by a lot of community groups, and this will allow those groups to use the hall for many more purposes. They have a completely refurbished library and new resource centre with an outdoor learning area. It is incredible to see the space they have now. But what is so important for the school is that they have a dedicated area for their computers as well. Deception Bay North State School has a brand-new hall and resource centre, incredible facilities. This school has already, in just one term, connected with the community. It has Indigenous programs running in the evening and dance classes. It has Mission Australia operating full time within one of the break-out rooms in the hall, helping and supporting the families of that school, which is just incredible. Aspley Special School has a brand-new hall. Redcliffe Special School has a new hall and resource centre. These kids used to sit on asphalt underneath a brick building, and they now have amazing facilities indoors, where they can do their assemblies, play sport and do so many other things.

Hercules Road State School has a new multipurpose hall to play sport in. Importantly, after-school care is now happening for the first time at this school because of these facilities. There is a brand-new library, which meant the old library could become the new admin block, so the staff have more space, and the old admin block has become the new special education unit. We forget that, because of the creation of a new building, everything expands and there are whole new places that they can use in the school.

St Joseph's Catholic Primary School has a brand-new multipurpose hall and also a refurbished library. Deception Bay Flexible Learning Centre is doing amazing things with those of our kids who have been disengaged from the main school system. A lot of them are young parents, and they have a parenting program going in. They have a great creche inside the flexible learning centre where the parents can leave their babies, and they can go and get their education. The work that this school is doing is incredible.

At Deception Bay State High School, we have just opened their brand-new language centre—their Japanese language centre. What is great about this is that this high school is partnering with primary schools, and primary school kids are coming in and learning Japanese in this new language centre, which includes a kitchen where they are preparing Japanese food and everything else. The work that has been done here is just incredible.

In the time I have left, I congratulate the principals, the P&Cs and the P&Fs for the great work that they did planning this and their ongoing work for fundraising. Builders, architects and project managers have done a fantastic job on these projects. They deserve to be acknowledged and thanked for their great work. Every school is thrilled with these facilities.

Andrew Laming (Bowman, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Regional Health Services and Indigenous Health) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The stunning Southern Moreton Bay Islands are truly a series of jewels in Moreton Bay, and it is a unique honour for me to represent these populations, which are on some of the few subtropical islands in the world where residents can commute over water every day to a major capital city. Of course, that brings with it extraordinary challenges with having to catch water taxis and vehicle barges, sometimes more than once a day. Particularly in the context of non-subsidised transport for those who do not have concession cards, it represents a significant added burden on the cost of living for those residents. So obviously this engages the mind of everyone who represents that part of the world, at all three levels of government. It obviously throws our minds back to the 1970s, when these islands were, with very little research and thinking, subdivided without any undertaking for infrastructure charges to be extracted from those who developed and sold off the land. Today we are reaping the consequences of those short-sighted decisions of the 1970s. So, without casting any blame, there is a need for a solution, and most would understand that the revenue model of local government is such that those sorts of challenges simply cannot be overcome by being passed to council alone; it will require state and federal government to work together.

Of course, islanders also face a unique predicament in addition to that wonderful quality of life. People say that, if you move to an island, you choose to take on a certain level of isolation and, with it, fewer services. But there comes a point where Australian citizens should be able to say, 'I can reasonably access a doctor; I can reasonably access food and essentials on that island without either undue risks or enormous expense to obtain them.' Seniors, predominantly, who find themselves on the island and young families who find that there are not adequate facilities for their children are completely right to be asking for solutions to those challenges. Right now the key problem is parking. Anyone on those islands will tell you that the plans being considered by Redland City Council to charge for parking present an extraordinary financial challenge to families that are feeling the greatest pressure of all. You have only to visit South-East Queensland to know about those cost-of-living pressures. The challenge is faced by the council to come up with solutions through a consultancy with GHD, but the solution is really the job of the state and federal governments. I call on the council to engage those two levels of government to work towards a sustainable solution. Parking for 2,400 cars will never be easy along a foreshore in Redland Bay. The option of multistory parking is extremely expensive and it is difficult to justify that revenue model.

From the 'Our Parking Spot' group, I want to acknowledge Stuart Sommerlan, Ellen Ulrich, Gay James, Clair Molloy, Val Marsden, Lorraine Taylor, Joanna and Lindsay Hackett and Gayle Nemeth—the Aussie whip-maker—who have worked together to staff a tent embassy 24 hours a days, seven days a week outside Redland City Council. This is a fantastic example of people power. This small island community—in many cases, out of sight, out of mind—of South-East Queensland residents were able to effectively stake out the council until it committed to doing the transport studies that the 'Our Parking Spot' group called for and to providing the car parks. Council cannot do it alone—I emphasise that. But it is so important for council to not just pay lip-service and just talk about consultation but engage. There are many other groups on the island as well who are asking for the very same thing, such as Lee Shipley and his colleagues who are looking at new and novel ferry and water taxi solutions around Moreton Bay.

The islanders are here to stay. The islands are jewels in Moreton Bay. We have a chance to optimise so many things about services to those islands. It will take a little forethought and some future planning, but for now it is the Redland City Council that must rise to the challenge. Six thousand signatures from locals, most of them mainlanders, have said, 'Though we do not live on the islands we can understand the needs.' We know it is an ageing population. We know there are small kids who must finish school and transition to a trade and a career. We know from St Vincent de Paul studies that this area faces significant socioeconomic challenges. As the federal member, I will not lose sight of that. We will work. We know there is no easy and simple solutions. I sympathise with the council in that regard.

At yesterday's general meeting, I know the mayor passed a mayoral minute confirming that parking charges will not spread throughout the length and breadth of Redland Bay but that they still are looking at options around Weinam Creek. I put my support fully behind the residents of the islands who are asking for nothing more than an affordable solution. If that ultimately means incorporating travel on the bay into South-East Queensland's TransLink arrangements so that travelling on water is simply another zone of public transport then that will be a very important advance. Access to parking for all islanders both secure and non-secure is also important.

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

Having lived in Western Sydney nearly all my life, it has been amazing to see how the place has changed. The pace of development has been incredible. Paddocks have been transformed into housing estates in what it feels like the blink of an eye. While bricks and mortar have spread rapidly in Western Sydney, residents in my neck of the woods also recognise the value of maintaining green space within the built space. Reflecting this, state governments and councils, to their credit, have been keen to establish more parkland out our way, and the Western Sydney parkland stands as a terrific example of this. But we need people to help maintain and protect these green spaces.

I recently attended a graduation ceremony for one of the National Green Jobs Corps projects in my area, and I met 14 young people who were not only impressive but inspiring. Most of them were early school leavers, who used the opportunity provided by the program to acquire skills and pursue options they never thought they would have. The National Green Jobs Corps is a 26-week training and work experience program, delivering 10,000 places over two years for eligible Australians aged from 17 to 24 and costing around $80 million. Participants undertake work experience and skills development on environmental projects, with 130 hours of this training leading to a nationally recognised qualification in horticulture or conservation and land management, helping them get ready for deployment in emerging green and climate change industries. The projects are focused on conservation, protection and rejuvenation of natural environment and cultural heritage. There are nine job and training providers nationally and over 120 projects across Australia, including water testing, bush regeneration, planting, surveying, track repairs and construction. The project recently completed in our area was titled Fixing the Hawkesbury: The Three R's—Restoration, Rivers and Revegetation, with the participants working on various sites around the Hawkesbury and Whalan areas. They undertook activities including the protection of a rare orchid and Aboriginal sites, which included engaging with schoolchildren in developing interpretive materials; restoration and protection of creek banks, waterways and fish habitats; monitoring water quality and flow with University of Western Sydney staff, Streamwatch and local volunteers; woody weed control; collecting seed; developing plant stock; and walking track and signage construction.

There is a saying that sometimes the journey is more important than the destination, and I think that is very true. Many of the young people involved in this particular project, with the discipline and dedication required to complete the project, will be empowered to embark on another journey with different dimensions: those of a skilled student, responsible adult and contributing citizen. I promised that I would refer to their achievements in our nation's parliament, and today I enthusiastically fulfil my commitment to them. Congratulations go to Aaron Albert, David Benington, Chris Borg, Bradley Bush, Chris Cameron, Shalom Fepoleai, Joseph Piggot, Sean Richmond, Luke Thompson and Tiffany Williams, who all received statements of attainment from the Certificate II in Conservation and Land Management. Daniel Cacation, Edison Lasuma and James Wood all completed the full Certificate II in Conservation and Land Management.

One of the successful graduates recounted to me how he got involved in the program. He said: 'The reason I wanted to go into the program was simple. I was at a job provider's premises. I saw a brochure that was green. I turned it over. It talked about this program, and I knew this was what I wanted to do.' So he followed it up, he stuck with the program and—from memory—he is going to be engaged in horticulture in a major Western Sydney council, Hawkesbury City Council. I remember the enthusiasm on his face and that of his mates and the fact that he said: 'I didn't want to go into a warehouse; it wasn't for me. I didn't want to go into logistics or transport. I wanted to do something with my hands, but outside and feeling like I was making a contribution to the environment.'

This is what I loved about the time I spent with the graduates: seeing the confidence and the excitement in their eyes as a result of completing the program and being connected with the community and the environment. I want to take the opportunity to congratulate them, to remark on the impression they left on me and to celebrate their achievements. They deserve recognition for their hard work and their contributions to their local community. The environmental restoration and regeneration works they undertook will serve as a long-lasting testament to their community and their personal success.

Question agreed to.

M ain Committee adjourned at 13:03 .

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, in writing, on 21 March 2011:

(1) How many kilometres of fibre access network does Telstra presently own.

(2) Under the proposed Telstra-NBN Co. Limited agreement, how much of the existing fibre access network will be:

(a) retained and operated by Telstra;

(b) transferred to NBN Co. Limited's ownership and control; and

(c) destroyed.

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

The Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question:

(1) The government does not maintain this information. The details are held by private operators.

(2) (a) (b) (c) This information is subject of confidential negotiations and is yet to be finalised.

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, in writing, on 21 March 2011:

In respect of the new proposed arrangements for the Universal Service Obligation (USO),

(a) what sum of money will customers be charged for a voice telephone service, and

(b) will the amount of money charged for a voice telephone service be the same in those parts of the country where the USO is to be provided over the (i) existing Telstra copper network (that is, rural and remote areas), and (ii) new fibre to the home network.

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

The Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question:

(a) Retail price controls currently apply to certain fixed line services provided by Telstra, including to standard telephone services supplied by Telstra in fulfilment of its USO obligations as the Primary Universal Service Provider (PUSP). The current Telstra retail price controls expire on 30 June 2012. The Government has indicated that it will undertake a comprehensive review of pricing policy in 2011.

(b) Refer response to question (a) above.

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, in writing, on 21 March 2011:

In respect of NBN Co Limited's business case, what assumptions has the company made about the

(a) Proportion of homes which are rented as opposed to owned; and

(b) Likely connection rate of the National Broadband Network in:

(i) Rental homes, and

(ii) Owner-occupied homes.

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

The Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question:

(a) The NBN Co Corporate Plan 2011-2013 and business case assumptions do not distinguish between premises which are rented or owned.

(b) (i) and (ii) The NBN Co Corporate Plan 2011-2013 and business case assumptions relating to likely connection rates are informed by trends relating to fixed line services, rather than rental or ownership of residential premises. Quality of broadband access is an increasingly important criteria for selection of a residence and NBN Co expects owners will value the benefits of an installation of a fibre service and ensure connection to avoid compromising a property's attractiveness to future tenants or buyers.

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, in writing, on 21 March 2011:

In respect of potential street cabinets and fibre splitters to be constructed by NBN Co Limited as part of its network rollout

(a) will the architecture of the National Broadband Network require external street cabinets to be installed to house fibre splitters;

(b) what is the typical number of households to be served from an individual fibre splitter; and

(c) how many street cabinets containing fibre splitters will be required to be installed around Australia.

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

The Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question:

(a) Yes, the architecture of the National Broadband Network will require installation of external street cabinets referred to as Fibre Distribution Hubs.

(b) The number of end users to be served from an individual fibre splitter is consistent with Gigabit Passive Optical Network (GPON) capability. NBN Co has developed engineering rules that result in a GPON being shared by a maximum of 32 end users. NBN Co expects the practical average across the fibre footprint to be around 28 end users per GPON. Refer to Question HQIW178 (a).

(c) NBN Co Limited anticipates that 55,000 external street cabinets or Fibre Distribution Hubs will be required to be installed around Australia.

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, in writing, on 21 March 2011:

In respect of the new arrangements that are proposed for the Universal Service Obligation,

(a) is it a fact that customers outside the 93rd percentile will continue to receive the 'standard telephone service' (their entitlement under the universal service arrangement) over Telstra's copper network; if so, does this mean that the Telstra copper network will continue to operate in many rural and remote areas of the country (the 'residual rural network'),

(b) given that today the rural and remote part of the network is cross-subsidised by the metropolitan network, what are the implications of removing this cross subsidy for the cost of operating the residual rural network, and

(c) how will the (i) per customer cost of the residual rural network compare with that of today's national copper network, and (ii) cost of operation of the residual rural network be met.

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

The Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question:

(a) The Government's 20 June 2010 policy statement1 outlined a new institutional, regulatory and funding framework for the delivery of USO and other public interest services. This includes the establishment from 1 July 2012, of a new entity, provisionally called USO Co, which will take on responsibility for delivery of universal service outcomes and other telecommunications public interest services. As part of USO Co arrangements, customers outside NBN Co's fibre footprint that have access to Telstra's copper network will continue to be able to receive a standard telephone service over that network if they wish.

(b) Changes to Telstra's net costs of meeting the USO over its copper network outside NBN fibre areas is one of the considerations that are part of the contractual negotiations between it and the Commonwealth on the delivery of the USO.(c)    (i) Compared with the current costs of Telstra's copper network, it is anticipated that the per customer cost of Telstra's copper network will continue to vary over time subject to a number of factors including the network footprint and the number of services in operation. (ii) Under the proposed USO Agreement, Telstra will receive payments from USO Co that will go towards meeting the net costs of meeting the USO. As is currently the case, Telstra will also obtain payments from its customers for provision of USO services.

1 www.dbcde.gov.au/broadband/national_broadband_network/nbn_policy_statements#uso

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, in writing, on 21 March 2011:

(1) When was the decision made by the Government, announced on 7 April 2009, to replace its fibre to the node policy with a fibre to the home policy.

(2) In arriving at the decision in part (1), what advice (a) did the Government receive on the applications which could not be delivered over a 12 Mbps network but could be delivered over a 100 Mbps network, (b) was sought and received from people with experience in the sales and marketing of telecommunications and broadband services, and (c) did the Government receive on the revenues which could be captured from the delivery of any applications which could not be captured from applications delivered over a 12 Mbps network; and what were those applications, what would customers pay for them, and how many customers would take them up.

(3) Prior to the Government making the decision in part (1), what specific commitments were obtained from the Commonwealth's various departments and agencies to deliver additional services and applications for the 100 Mbps network (as distinct from those previously planned for delivering the 12 Mbps fibre to the node network).

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

The Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question:

(1) 7 April 2009.

(2) (a), (b) Over the course of the National Broadband Network (NBN) Request for Proposals (RFP) process and in developing its fibre to the premises (FTTP) policy, the Government received extensive advice on a broad range of issues relating to the capacity, marketing and viability of broadband networks in delivering broadband applications. The Government extensively tested the market through the NBN RFP process. It drew on advice from the Panel of Experts, specialist economic, commercial and technical advisers appointed to assist the NBN Taskforce and the Panel (Frontier Economics, KPMG and Gibson Quai AAS) who have extensive expertise in the telecommunications market, the ACCC, relevant government agencies, advice contained in research reports and provided through public consultation processes.

(c) Preliminary cost estimates were developed using a range of available information and assumptions were analysed, as part of the Government's decision making process. Further financial modeling was conducted in the course of the NBN Implementation Study.

(3) No specific commitments were obtained from Commonwealth departments and agencies in relation to the delivery of additional services and applications for the 100 Mbps National Broadband Network.

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, in writing, on 21 March 2011:

In respect of the decision made by the Government, announced on 7 April 2009, to replace its fibre to the node policy with a fibre to the home policy, when it was claimed that the Government 'acted on the advice of an expert panel, containing within it the Secretary of the Treasury, expert advice also from the ACCC about this thing being the right way to go', is it a fact that on 18 May 2009 a member of the expert panel, Prof Rod Tucker, said 'I just want to make one thing clear: the panel of experts was never asked to and didn't make any judgement call on the issue of investment for a fibre to the home network.'; if so, is Prof Tucker's statement accurate; if so what advice did the Government base its decision upon.

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

The Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question:

The Panel of Experts was appointed by the Government in April 2008 to assess proposals received by the Commonwealth in response to the Request for Proposals (RFP) to rollout and operate a National Broadband Network for Australia and provide a report to the Minister. Following an extensive assessment process, the Panel of Experts advised the Government that none of the national proposals offered value for money. Instead, the Panel of Experts encouraged the government to invest in fibre technology, supplemented by next-generation wireless and satellite technologies, however, it did not consider costings for such a network. Preliminary costing was carried out by government agencies, drawing on advice from a range of sources including technical advisers who have extensive expertise in the telecommunications market. Detailed costing was undertaken in the course of the NBN Implementation Study.

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, in writing, on 24 March 2011:

In light of the recent decision by Australia Post to close Turramurra Post Office in the electorate of Bradfield, what assurance can the Minister provide that Australia Post has no plans to close any further Post Offices in the Bradfield electorate.

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

The Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question:

(1) Australia Post constantly monitors its network of more than 4,000 outlets for changes to customer numbers, local community/business needs and leasing agreements to ensure the network matches demand.

(2) There are no definitive plans at this stage to close any outlets in the electorate of Bradfield. Australia Post understands the importance of ensuring that communities have access to local postal services and commits to keeping customers and all other stakeholders fully informed when it is considering any changes.