Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Speaker has received letters from the honourable the Leader of the Nationals and the honourable member for Chifley proposing that definite matters of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion today. As required by standing order 46(d) he has selected the matter which, in his opinion, is the most urgent and important; that is, that proposed by the honourable the Leader of the Nationals, namely:

The failure of the Budget to provide economic security for regional Australians.

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—

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

The Treasurer did get one thing right this week: this is a true-to-form Labor budget. It is hollow, it is shifty, it is vindictive and it is not to be believed. There is a fudged surplus—in fact, some have branded this budget the 'fudge-it budget'—there are more broken promises, there is nothing to drive productivity, and there is nothing to repay debt or to secure jobs. This budget is really built around a carbon tax and additional compensation for the burden that is going to be placed on Australian families and the burden that is going to hit Australian businesses right across the country in just 51 days.

Labor has learnt absolutely nothing from the lessons handed out to it by the voters in New South Wales and Queensland in their recent elections. The people of Australia are sick of governments that waste their money, they are sick of governments that spend what they do not have, and they are certainly sick of governments that fail to tell the truth. This budget just delivers more bad news for Australians. It does nothing in particular for regional Australia. There is a feeble, contrived $1.5 billion surplus, and it certainly fails to inspire or encourage struggling communities and families in regional Australia. It offers no hope for small businesses battling in a difficult economic environment. Bringing spending forward and pushing expenditure into out years just to invent a one-off surplus does not give you any more money. Businesses balancing their books and struggling to meet the costs of keeping their employees on staff, and families budgeting for their household needs, are painfully aware of that.

This slippery budget surplus is simply not worth the paper it is written on. For instance, the $1.1 billion that is being paid early to local government of itself almost wipes out the surplus. The $1.8 billion being paid to the states early for infrastructure projects more than wipes out the surplus. The $1.4 billion being paid to the states early for disaster relief also almost wipes out the surplus single-handed. The $1.5 billion compensation for the carbon tax, being paid early, also wipes out the surplus. Then, of course, there are many other measures like this where money is shifted from one year to another just to deliver a surplus standing on a lonely island in a sea of debt. Simply no-one will believe this kind of attempt to master the true bottom line after four Labor budgets have simply amassed a cumulative deficit of $174 billion.

Of course, this is not the first time that Labor have promised a budget surplus. They did that in 2008-09 at their first budget, but it was not some tiny $1.5 billion surplus then. On that budget they promised a surplus of $22 billion.

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

How'd they go?

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

How did they manage? A very good question. They actually ended up with a $27 billion deficit. They were out by $49 billion. If they are only out by $49 billion this time, it will be a $48 billion deficit that we will end up with at the end of this year. This $1.5 billion means absolutely nothing. The reality is that it is only about two weeks of borrowing at the rate of this government out there in the marketplace. It only takes a 0.4 per cent change in expenditure and the budget surplus is gone. Labor cannot get their hands off the honey pot. It will only be days or weeks before they announce a new program which shoots the alleged surplus to pieces. In 2010-11, the year we have our closest memories of, we were promised a $12 billion budget deficit. That was bad enough, but it soon became $22 billion, $37 billion and, last night, $44 billion—and we still have a few months to go. The number just keeps on going up and up and up.

One of the most important concerns for people living in regional Australia is what this budget has done to road spending. There is absolutely no new spending on roads or rail in 2012-13. In fact, if you look at the overall expenditure on roads, it plummets from $6.2 billion in 2011-12 to just $2.6 billion in 2012-13. There is $2.3 billion that has been brought forward or deferred but, after all Labor's rhetoric about big projects, nation building and all the rest of it, this will be a road budget that is lower than the road budget in the last year of the Howard government. If you look at the forward estimates, they show a lower figure for road funding in 2015-16 than in the last budget of the Howard government. There is less for roads in 2015-16 than the Howard government delivered almost a decade earlier. This has naturally been condemned by those people who care about roads. The Minister for Infrastructure and Transport was happy to quote the NRMA yesterday. He did not quote their press release issued on budget night:

NSW motorists will be shocked by a Federal Budget that slashes spending on the state’s roads by almost half to an alarmingly low $1.2 billion.

The government halved the road funding for New South Wales. Yet we have a minister talking all the time about how Labor is going to fund the Pacific Highway, as well as his dishonest claims that, somehow or other, the New South Wales government is to blame for the fact that the promised 2016 completion date will not be met. The member for Lyne acknowledged quite some time ago that that target is not going to be met. The Prime Minister repeatedly says it will, but this budget simply blows the whistle on that. Even if you believe the rhetoric of the minister that the New South Wales government was to provide $3.5 billion, there is not $3.5 billion in this budget from the federal government. It is about $1 billion short and the rest of it is going to come sometime later, so that guarantees that the 2016 date will not be met.

That is not the only dishonest statement of the infrastructure minister on this issue. Let me quote a higher authority, the Prime Minister, who said yesterday:

The deal on roads is always 50/50. That is what the Minister for Transport has made clear and that is what the NSW government should step up to.

That is simply wrong. The minister for infrastructure has said there is no deal with an 80-20 split, but the reality is that there is. There is a current agreement signed by both governments which has, effectively, an 80-20 split. If you look at the funding for the Pacific Highway, when the Labor state government was in power in New South Wales the split was actually 86 per cent to the Commonwealth and only 14 per cent to New South Wales. It is only since the election of the state coalition government and a $468 million infusion made by that state government that the figures got to 80-20. So, talk about there being some kind of a deal on 50-50 is simply dishonest, and the Prime Minister must know that.

In question time yesterday the minister for infrastructure said that he was upset with the New South Wales Labor government because they cut their share of the funding from $800 million to $500 million. As a result of that he had taken $50 million off New South Wales. He said:

… because New South Wales Labor were not delivering on their Pacific Highway promises, I took action against them.

But, if you read his letter to the then New South Wales minister, he did not take $48 million off them because they had withdrawn their funds. He took $48 million off them because they had not met the deadline for signing the agreement. He said:

… the $48 million has been retracted in the update MOU schedule.

That is because they had not met the required date for signing the agreement. But this penalty, this tough action, by the minister only lasted two paragraphs in his own letter. If you read a little bit further down in the same letter he says:

… I have taken a decision to direct an additional $48 million to provide for further duplication works on the Pacific Highway …

So, he took the $48 million off them for signing up late and then gave them another $48 million for upgrading the highway. This is simply a dishonest approach. His answer to the question yesterday was simply not truthful and that is clearly the case on the basis of the letter that he signed. Once more he did not seek a single extra dollar from the New South Wales Labor government for the $48 million that he provided. The reality is that this is a double standard. When Labor were in power in New South Wales it was quite okay for the Commonwealth to pay 80 per cent and, indeed, on three major projects the Commonwealth provided 100 per cent of the costs. But, as soon as a coalition government got elected, the minister expected the rules to be changed. This is typical of Labor's dishonesty, and everywhere you go in relation to road funding the story is very similar.

Earlier this week, when the budget was announced, the minister tried to pretend that he was spending another $388 million on the Bruce Highway between Cooroy and Curra. Frankly, the people living near the Bruce Highway are shocked because the budget has completely shunned the Bruce Highway. The $388 million he is talking about has been announced many times already. The project is almost finished; it is not new money at all. What is really alarming about this particular announcement is that there is no money for the next stage of the project, which guarantees that the commitment to complete the Cooroy-to-Curra upgrade by 2020 can no longer be met. The RACQ said it:

… condemned the dearth of funding.

The Bruce Hwy accounts for one-in-six deaths on our national highways and to see that really it's just being treated with spot funding and black spots and a few dollars here and there is a very disappointing result …

That is Labor's approach to road funding in regional Australia. There is a lot of rhetoric and a lot of noise but in reality they do not deliver.

On top of all of that, if that is not a big enough insult, this budget also includes a $166 million hit to the road user charge. Labor is going to collect $700 million over four years from extra taxes on the road transport industry. This comes after the ATC's latest calculations on road user costs. Everyone in the industry has acknowledged that the calculations are dodgy, that they are inaccurate and that they have made an inaccurate assessment of the number of trucks. This is the biggest increase in the road user charge in history. It comes on top of the carbon tax and all the other costs being imposed on the industry. This government is keen to advocate safe roads with truckies, but then it slugs them with an extra $700 million worth of tax.

Then there is the passenger movement charge. One industry facing the most difficult circumstances in Australia at the present time is the tourist industry. They can ill afford an extra $600 million in passenger movement charge. On top of that the government is now intending to send bills to the airports for having the Australian Federal Police there. Next time, if you are charged and being investigated for murder, you will get a bill before they even start the investigation!

What sort of accounting practices do this government have? Don't they know that the tourism industry is in serious difficulty? Don't they know that this is an industry that needs help? With the carbon tax coming, which makes tourism in Australia less competitive with the rest of the world, the industry can ill afford to be thumped with these extra, unnecessary taxes. This is an example of how this government is just so out of touch with reality. In fact, according to ASIC, in the last quarter 2,500 businesses have become insolvent. That is up 17 per cent, and 23 per cent of those are in Queensland, the tourism state. So this is a heartless measure in these circumstances. Indeed, business right across regional Australia is suffering. The ABS tells us that 800,000 businesses have disappeared since Labor came to office and that small business closures were up 48 per cent last year. What is even worse, there was a 95 per cent reduction in the number of new start-ups. People have simply lost hope with this government and they have been given absolutely no heart by what is in this budget.

A classic example of what Labor think about regional Australia is that last year, with a whole stack of press releases, they announced a promoting regional living program. In this budget they have axed it. After all the press releases and all the launches, it has been axed. That is typical of what Labor think of regional Australia. (Time expired)

Simon Crean (Hotham, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Regional Australia, Regional Development and Local Government) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

After that pathetic performance you can see why regional Australia has deserted the National Party. They knew when they were in government they had become a branch office for the Liberal Party, but if that is the best they can come up with in response to this budget no wonder they continue to be rejected.

No government has made a greater commitment to engage regional Australia, to help it diversify its economic base or to challenge them to be their best than this government. No government in the history of this country has made a greater effort on all of those fronts. You only have to look at not this year's budget but last year's budget, which made the biggest ever commitment to regional Australian history of this country: $4.3 billion of new money committed over the forward estimates—the largest ever injection of funding for regional Australia. And this year, on top of that, we have got $475 million for regional hospitals; $80 million to encourage dentists to go to the regions; $35 million for doctors to go to the regions; and we have announced the three-year rollout of the National Broadband Network, which covers 238 regional centres and will enable those hospitals and medical facilities, along with the doctors and dentists, to apply e-health service options as well as to be creative in the e-education space.

Mr Truss interjecting—

This would not have been done if you were there because you were never committed to giving the capacity to the country to invest in fibre to the home that provides this fast-speed broadband network.

In addition to that, the budget has provided the important schoolkids bonus, which, disgracefully and hypocritically, the opposition opposed yesterday in this place. Apart from insulting families as to whether they could manage their own budgets they hypocritically opposed it, when how many times do you recall the Howard government paying one-off bonuses—which we then called bribes, I might say. But they have the blatant hypocrisy to come into this place where we have converted a tax rebate, which was not accessed fully, to ensure that people get the money in their pockets when they are sending kids to school at the beginning of first term and third term, and they oppose it. And they say that they want to support families in regions? What utter hypocrisy.

In addition to that, the budget has provided significant increases in the family tax benefit A from next year. Further, with the National Disability Insurance Scheme there are opportunities for regions to access the initial rollout. These are very important opportunities for regions because we know this is a major problem in the regions. In relation to aged-care facilities, the aged-care package provides $3.7 billion and, importantly, has continued the zero interest loan. We know that has been so successful in encouraging regional centres to build much-needed facilities and we have continued it. The other important investment that you have got to make as a nation is in skills, and there is not only $1½ billion in terms of remote regions and jobs but also the significant increase in the skills budget.

That is what we have done in two budgets—and they come into the House and seek to carry a motion that says that we have failed to provide economic security for regional Australians. We reject that completely. What we have done is gone out to the regions and said: 'We understand the complex nature of this economy, we understand that it is going through fundamental transition and we understand that it is facing competitive pressures because of the high Australian dollar. But we want to help you counter the increase in costs associated with the dollar—if you like, the lack of competitiveness—and we want to encourage new ways to drive competitiveness.' That is why we are investing in infrastructure. It is why we are investing in skills. It is why we are investing in the schools and in the regions: so that we can drive competitiveness in the knowledge that the resources boom is driving the dollar higher.

In addition to all of those things that I have announced, let us look at the Regional Development Australia Fund. That is a billion dollars that we have committed to make available to the regions over the course of the next three years. Already the first round has been rolled out: $150 million, which leveraged three times that amount in investments either from state governments, local governments, the private sector or the not-for-profits. The second round, which will be announced shortly, is another $200 million. And the third and fourth and fifth rounds are now secured because we have passed the minerals resource rent tax. This is a very interesting proposition for those who cry crocodile tears on that side. They will oppose the next three rounds because they have committed, if they win office, to abolish the tax—and so, under them, those next three rounds would disappear. Don't come in here and talk about your complaints about assisting regional Australia when you have opposed the very mechanism by which we fund increasing economic and social development in the regions. We have also strengthened the Regional Development Australia Fund network. I have negotiated agreements with my state counterparts including those from different political persuasions, and the member for Gippsland would know the agreement that we have reached with the Liberal coalition government in Victoria in relation to the Latrobe Valley and the Gippsland region to look for economic diversification. I applaud the government down there for joining with us because they understand that we are serious. They do not listen to the empty rhetoric they hear from this Leader of the National Party who could only talk about surplus and roads—forget about the wealth of information and commitment that we have made. We have recognised the importance of doing this to ensure that the regions that are the patches in this patchwork economy can make the transition. We know that they cannot do it on their own. We know that what they require is support from government, and we are doing our best to ensure that we make the programs available and we work with state governments and local governments to leverage that which we have made available.

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

There's not a cent on the table!

Simon Crean (Hotham, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Regional Australia, Regional Development and Local Government) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No money on the table? I have just said to you that there is $150 million in the first round and leveraged three times that amount. If we can get the leveraging factor up, we will turn the billion dollars we are talking about in excess of $3 billion in the regions. Don't you think the regions want that? Don't you think they deserve it? Don't you think they are entitled to it? Well, why don't you support the mechanism by which we are going to do it. We will fight every inch of the way to the next election to demonstrate our commitment to the regions because they have not had that commitment before. The members that sit on this side of the House, who are just as committed and who work with us actively to ensure that these agendas are being developed, know the importance of it and they are out there fighting for their regions.

Let me go to the question of surpluses and interest rates. We have done all these things in last year's budget and this year's budget and produced surplus budgets over the course of the next four years in the forward estimates. Why do we need to produce a surplus? Because if the government is doing the right thing in terms of fiscal policy, what that does is give room to the Reserve Bank to move properly on monetary policy. We saw an example of it last week when they reduced interest rates by half a per cent. Don't you think that helps those businesses in the regions that you are talking about? Don't you think it helps families in terms of their cost of living pressures? So we are committed to delivering surpluses because we understand the interaction with the other instruments of economic policy of this country. We acknowledge the independence of the Reserve Bank, yes, but we know that the Reserve Bank looks to what we do on fiscal policy in making the decisions that it makes.

If anyone is in any doubt about the effectiveness of our economic strategy, have a look at the employment figures today. I did not hear anyone over there talking about the great demise in unemployment because we saw unemployment come down. We now have an unemployment rate in this country with a four in front of it. There is not a developed country in the world that has an unemployment rate with a four in front of it. Australia alone stands out there as a beacon of hope for what you can do with sound economic policy, and other countries look to us and ask how we did it. You come in here and try to trash everything that is done; globally we are recognised for the great economic management that has been undertaken.

But if you accept that the argument about getting the surplus right is important because it puts downward pressure on interest rates, then I will be very interested tonight, along with all of my colleagues, to hear what the Leader of the Opposition has to say about his surplus outcome. We already know that the commitments he has made will take the budget not to surplus but to a huge black hole. He has already committed to a $70 billion black hole—$70 billion! If what we have got to do is produce a surplus to get pressure downwards on interest rates, what do you think the $70 billion blowout in the budget is going to do? What do you think the Reserve Bank's reaction is going to be to that?

So let us have a look tonight as to how the Leader of the Opposition presents his budget. I have been in his position myself. I have actually delivered two budget speeches in reply and in both of them I have presented alternate budgets. I showed how you can cost and fund each one. That is what we need from him tonight. None of this empty rhetoric, forget the slogans: show us where the money is; show us how you are going to fund your black hole; and show us how you are going to produce a surplus when you have been opposing everything that we have done in this place as we move forward.

I heard the Leader of the National Party talk about us wiping out the surplus. I will tell you what is going to wipe out the surplus, and that would be the election of an Abbott government. That would completely wipe the surplus out of this country and we would have economic chaos in the country.

Let me also make this point, Mr Deputy Speaker Scott, in terms of commitment to the regions. We have heard the great claim about their being the party that represents regional Australia. Let us look at the history. Each time the coalition wins office it tears away the regional development programs and structures and it takes Labor governments each time to restore them. It happened in 1975 when the Fraser government abolished the Commonwealth Department of Urban and Regional Development established by the Whitlam government, a government that my father was the Treasurer in. It happened again in 1996 when the Howard government's first decision was to abolish the Department of Housing and Regional Development, and I can remember the then Leader of the National Party, John Anderson, saying, 'There is no constitutional role for the Commonwealth in regional development.' I will tell you what: if the National Party does not stand for regional development, what the hell do you stand for? But there you were, giving it away and letting the Liberal Party trash the department that is supposed to deliver the very programs and mechanisms that you say you are interested in. Let us again understand what we are debating here. This is a party that comes in with empty rhetoric, claiming that we have not provided security for regional Australia. In all of the circumstances, for all the global recession, for all of the difficulties, for all of the downturn in Europe, for all of the difficulties with markets, we have stood proud as the only developed economy in the world to have avoided the global recession. We stand proud today as the only developed country in the world with an unemployment with a four in front of it. We stand proud on the basis that since we have come to office we have created now almost 800,000 new jobs.

We know that whilst there are going to be pressures on jobs because of things like the high dollar, our task is to help regions diversify their economic base and build on their strengths. They are the structures that we have put in place and the programs that we have put in place to support them. I know you support the programs, because you all come around to my drop-in sessions and ask how you can access the programs. So I know you have people sitting over there who want to get access to the programs. All I say to you is: vote for them; do not follow blindly the Leader of the Opposition, who wants you to oppose everything. Stand up for regional Australia—because we will.

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

As a member of this parliament representing a regional electorate I stand up to support the MPI that the Leader of the National Party has raised today. It is a matter of absolute public importance—the damage being caused by this government. I am sad to say that the Minister for Regional Australia, Regional Development and Local Government, who just spoke before me is, sadly, responsible for much of this damage.

I will address a couple of the remarks that the minister made. He did remind the House that he was at one time the Leader of the Opposition—and we do remember that period fondly. I remember the budgets that Peter Costello delivered when the minister was the Leader of the Opposition. The budgets of 2002-03 and 2003-04 delivered surpluses of $7 billion each. They actually delivered surplus budgets. They did not have a false concocted plan, which this budget claims, to deliver surplus budgets; they were surplus budgets.

Before the minister tries to claim that the economic situation at that time was completely rosy, I also remind him that in September 2001 there was a seismic event that changed the economic structures of our world and put a lot of pressure on our budgets. Of course, Peter Costello and John Howard were able to manage that time, manage the budget, continue to deliver surpluses, continue to cut tax and continue to deliver to regional Australia. On the other hand, what we have seen since 2007 and since the election of this minority government with the support of a couple of regional Independents, it must be said, are budgets which have delivered a $54 billion deficit, a $47 billion deficit and, of course, in this financial year, a $44 billion deficit. That was after it was proposed in last year's budget that there would only be a $22 billion deficit. So we do not have much faith, it must be said, in the claims of this government and this minister that there will be a surplus budget delivered next September when we find out the final results—a time, I suspect, when we will not see the current Treasurer be able to crow over these results, because there will not be a surplus delivered.

The other issue that the minister raised was jobs. We are all pleased to see Australians in work. We are all pleased to see Australians getting jobs. While we acknowledge today that it was not full-time jobs which went up—in fact, they went down; it was casual and part-time jobs—it is good and important for people to be in work. That is in start contrast to what that minister used to say about casual and part-time jobs. In fact, the ACTU, the owners and operators of the Australian Labor Party, have currently got a case going looking into temporary employment. So you have got the minister trying to claim credit for the jobs results at the same time as his paymaster, the ACTU, is saying that they are not real jobs—and we know that for a fact, because the Minister for Family and Community Services in 2002 said on Meet the press that a casual job was not a real job. I remember it quite clearly, and so will the former minister sitting alongside me. The minister at that time said that casual jobs are not real jobs.

So today we have them claiming, 'What a great success! We have got all these new people in casual and part-time jobs,' but they used to say that they were not real jobs. So you see the hypocrisy of the Australian Labor Party right there before you—and those who are supporting this government and the continual damage that they are doing to our country should hang their head in shame.

The issue which of course is the elephant in the room—and again I refer to those who have backed and supported the introduction of the carbon tax even though it was promised at the last election that it would not be delivered—is the impact that the carbon tax will have on regional Australia. I will refer to an article that appeared today in the Southern Times in the McLaren Vale area. The Onkaparinga Council, which is the council responsible for that area, has released its budget and, interestingly, it is increasing its rates.

Mr Windsor interjecting—

The member for New England may laugh at the people of McLaren Vale, but they are going to have to deal with a 6.25 per cent increase in rates. And guess what? The carbon tax will be blamed for the increase in rates. The Onkaparinga Council, which looks after McLaren Vale—an important regional area in our country, producing the world's finest wine, and I think everyone would agree with that—is quite clearly now being put under additional pressure. That is why this MPI that was proposed by the Leader of the National Party is so important for us to debate here in this place—not quite as important as hearing the Prime Minister's explanation about the Labor Party funding the member for Dobell's interesting activities. This is actually a very important issue for us to be debating.

Tonight we will hear an alternative Prime Minister put forward a plan for Australia. That is what we will hear. We will hear from someone who is experienced in government and who has the judgment to make the right decisions and lead Australia down the right path. He knows—

Dr Mike Kelly interjecting—

The minister at the table, who represents a regional area, should be ashamed about what he is doing to his area. You should be ashamed about the increased costs you will put on people with your carbon tax—the carbon tax that you promised the people of Queanbeyan and the people of Batemans Bay that you would not deliver, Minister. We will see in a little over six weeks time the introduction of the carbon tax which will destroy so many of the opportunities for the people who live in Eden-Monaro. Hopefully at the next election we will see the election of Mr Peter Hendy, who will take the seat of Eden-Monaro on the back of a carbon tax—on the back of the tax you said would not be introduced, Minister; on the back of a carbon tax you promised would never be introduced. Long be it over your head, Minister.

Dr Mike Kelly interjecting—

This is a bad budget for regional Australia. There is the elephant in the room of the carbon tax—and I am sure the member for Newcastle will stand up following my contribution and recommit her support to that carbon tax, because the people of Newcastle love it! They just love it! They just want it so desperately! The great coal producers of Newcastle desperately want this carbon tax! They are marching in the streets, asking, 'Please, bring on a carbon tax for us: the one that was promised there would not be "under a government I lead". We want it.' And so do the people of New England! They are waiting for their opportunity as well to make their voice known, to take their democratic right to express their view about a promise that was given to them at the last election which was a complete and utter fib. We know that for a fact, because it is about to be introduced very, very shortly.

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

I was elected on it; I'm proud of it.

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

Really? You were elected on a carbon tax? Well, we will see if you get re-elected on the carbon tax, shall we?

We have seen this week another budget being delivered with bigger deficits, more debt, a higher credit limit for the Australian credit card by a government that just does not understand the people of Victor Harbour, does not understand the people of Strathalbyn, does not understand the people of Mount Barker or the people of McLaren Vale. It will not explain to the people of McLaren Vale why its rates are going up by 6.35 per cent. It is the carbon tax which is doing it. That is the elephant in the room of this budget. That will do so much damage to the regional communities, to the industries which are struggling under the pressures of the structural changes we are seeing in our economy—through the change in the dollar exchange rate and the change we have seen through the challenges in the retail environment.

We are not seeing any of these plans answered in this budget. Instead, what we see is more waste, more wasteful spending, more cash splashes. We know how successful the last cash splash was, particularly for dead people, for animals, people living overseas and in jail! They did very well out of the last cash splash and I am sure this government will again deliver more cash splash, more sugar hits to try to boost its electoral prospects. But the fact of the matter is that the Australian people have seen through it. They have seen through this government and they have seen through the fibs about carbon taxes. They have seen through the years of inaction on roads like Pennant Hills Road, which my colleague has so vigorously campaigned for over such a long period of time. They have seen through the years of not seeing the additional interchange at Mount Barker being delivered, even though their state mates have opened up far more land for housing. There is no additional infrastructure; typical of the Labor Party. There is no plan, just open up the land, do the deal with the developers; no plan for infrastructure. There is no funding in this budget to build an additional interchange. It is a promise we made at the last election and it is a commitment that I know the Leader of the of the National Party will support at the next election as well.

This is a bad budget. This carbon tax has got to go. We will get rid of it. What you will hear tonight from the alternative Prime Minister of Australia is a real economic plan to make our country stronger, which will lift the regions and give them the best hope of taking advantage of the unique opportunity we have in this century.

Sharon Grierson (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is a real pleasure to rise and speak on this matter of public importance, because the economic security of regional Australia has always been a priority for Labor governments, and nothing shows that more than the current budgets, which of course sits on the shoulders of four previous budgets which have reflected massive investments into regional Australia.

Before I speak particularly about my region and the benefits flowing to that region I just say to you as a member of parliament you do not always get the opportunity to go to remote Australia. Just recently as part of the ATSIA committee I went there, having not been for about five years. I must say that to go to a place like Utopia and have a meeting in their BER facility is absolutely wonderful. To go to a place like Halls Creek and see a massive, wonderful community centre, built by the federal government in a partnership agreement with the Western Australian government, who will pay for the services inside that centre, is satisfying. To see these quality resources and facilities that remote Australia have never seen before is very uplifting and it reminds us all what a fortunate country we are and certainly how we have the wealth to spread right throughout this country.

In terms of this budget, though, any suggestion that it neglects regional Australia needs an absolute reality check. Families and businesses are the heart and soul of our regions and they are the heart and soul of this budget. Across my own region, Newcastle and the Hunter, 61,000 businesses may be eligible for lost carry-back tax relief, as well as being able to immediately deduct the cost of any new business asset costing less than $6,500 for as many assets as they purchase. Just imagine what that can mean to a small business and to our region.

In addition, businesses will be able to write off assets that cost more than $6,500 in a single pool and will be able to immediately deduct the first $5,000 of new or used motor vehicles purchased from 1 July this year. What a wonderful opportunity for business to say, 'Yes, we've been cautious. Yes, there is uncertainty in the global economy. But we want to keep our regional economies strong. We are going to take those investment steps. We are going to invest in our business.'

Almost 41,000 local families in my region are expected to receive the schoolkids bonus—$410 for each primary school student and $820 for each secondary student. I am a former educator and school principal. I know very well how much costs have increased in this technological age. I know how much kids need to gain the most from their education and I know the pressure on parents to give their child the best. The schoolkids bonus will be a wonderful thing right across every region in Australia.

In addition, 48,000 families in the Hunter region will receive an increase in family tax benefit part A from 1 July 2013. Not only is there that assistance, but we have actually assisted many young people in this budget—students, single parents and the unemployed, who will receive a supplementary allowance: $210 for singles or $175 for a person who is a member of a couple. That is to help with those essential bills, those cost-of-living pressures that that side of the House have been telling us about and the public have been telling us about. I am really excited that tripling the tax-free threshold to $18,200 in this budget means approximately 212,000 working people in the Hunter region will get a tax cut beginning on 1 July. That is typical of regional Australia, where incomes are not always as high, and those are the people that are going to benefit most.

Secondly, any suggestion that federal Labor is ignoring infrastructure investments in regional Australia defies the reality of over four years of significant investment. I am very fortunate in my region that we have been given the opportunity to have some wonderful region-to-region links and capital city-to-region links built into our area. The $1.6 billion Hunter Expressway is progressing well. When you fly over my electorate and my region you will see this infrastructure. It is a wonderful, blissful scar on our environment! The $1 billion coal chain improvements continue. The Newcastle northern freight corridor improvements have commenced. These are projects that have been outstanding for years.

In this budget we saw a $3.6 billion pledge from the federal government to complete the duplication of the Pacific Highway. Every electorate from my electorate north to the Queensland border is a regional electorate. For them, tourism growth and smooth freight interactions are very much part and parcel of the Pacific Highway. The safety record on that highway is not well known. The Premier of New South Wales went to the New South Wales election promising this was a priority for him. I can only say to him: it is your turn to put in. We have put our pledge on the table. Let us get the Pacific Highway finished.

In this budget we saw funding for another important link—the F3 to the M2. Yes, that is in Sydney, but I can tell that you that regional Australians do not always want to go into capital cities when they are moving around the country. They want smooth bypasses; that is what benefits them. We set aside $150 million for the project; let us see the New South Wales state government put in.

We have not neglected community infrastructure either. There would be no member of this parliament who has not received some bonuses, some special investments into community infrastructure. It is terribly important to regional Australia. In the past, during the 10 years of the Howard government, we begged for regional community infrastructure in seats such as mine. We all remember the regional rorts. My seat was not a priority because it is a Labor seat. Money was only going to National and coalition seats.

A government member: Wentworth!

Yes, that is a good example. I say judge us on what we have done. The BER went to every community around Australia. Our regional community programs have gone to every region around Australia. It has been more important to build productivity in this nation by investing in every part of Australia. That is what we do, and that is what we are proud of.

We have seen investment in research reflected again in this budget because we know it is also part of economic security. That has been wonderful. For my electorate new institutes in research that have never been there before are being completed, are underway right now or are investing into our communities. I am sorry the member for New England has left the chamber. There has been investment in regional universities, and our policy has opened universities up to students from lower socioeconomic areas. I saw the figures today for some New South Wales universities. My university, the University of Newcastle, and the member for New England's University, the University of New England, had a 20-plus per cent increase in the number of offers to students from regional Australia, from low socioeconomic backgrounds. That is building the capacity of our regions and it is something we should be very proud of.

The budget also shows the future projections for the NBN. Within the next three years the NBN will be rolled out to 110,200 households and businesses in the Hunter region. That is outstanding. What a productivity lift, what an economic boost to our region. I noticed that today in the papers the member for Paterson is complaining about not getting enough roll out of NBN to his electorate. But remember, the greatest threat to regional Australia lies with an Abbott-led coalition government. They would scrap the NBN. They would scrap the Clean Energy Future package. They would scrap the MRRT. And the budget mentions that too. There will be over $6 billion available through the MRRT for critical infrastructure in mining regions. Well, come on down, that is where we live! By the end of this year we are planning on exporting 200 million tonnes of coal from the Hunter Valley through the Port of Newcastle. The biggest threat remains an Abbott coalition government. These investments are important.

Starting from this month, something like 90 per cent of my electorate will receive household assistance packages from the Clean Energy Future package, with an impost of less than 1c in the dollar. That side opposite forget that they introduced the 'never ever' GST, which was 10c in the dollar. My goodness, they have short memories! Federal Labor has got us through a global financial crisis. It has turned a mining boom into the wealth of the nation by spreading it throughout the whole nation. It has achieved a AAA credit rating from all international ratings agencies for the first time ever in this country, reaffirmed this week. The benefits to regional Australia are indisputable. They are a source of great pride to me and my colleagues. I congratulate the Treasurer on the 2012-13 budget, his fifth budget. (Time expired)

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

As a rural and regional member of this parliament I am pleased to speak on this significant matter of public importance. What concerns me is that this Labor government is treating rural and regional Australia, and the Australians who live there, with contempt. The Labor government, particularly in Western Australia, is treating us like a cash cow. The evidence is in this budget with the mining tax—over 65 per cent out of Western Australia—and the carbon tax. My electorate of Forrest and the greater south-west of Western Australia are going to be contributing hundreds of millions of dollars through the carbon tax. That is what the government is going to rip out of some of the biggest employers in my part of the world. Businesses such as Wespine, Wesfarmers Kleenheat Gas, the Water Corporation, Simcoa and Iluka are all on the government's carbon tax incomplete hit list that was announced just last week. I have warned many companies elsewhere in my electorate that the responsibility and the liability for the carbon tax lies with them. If their names are not on this list, they need take no comfort because they are liable and responsible when this tax commences in July. They are major employers like Alcoa, Alinta, Worsley Alumina, the Dampier to Bunbury natural gas pipeline, Verve Energy, Synergy. That is hundreds of millions of dollars coming out of the south-west of Western Australia and this really concerns me.

Regional Australians and regional communities are hardworking. They are fiercely independent and they are resilient. They make the best of whatever life throws at them and they show pretty good humour because they have a number of daily challenges simply because they live and work in rural and regional Australia. You have seen them crack a joke at a drought or a flood or a fire or a storm despite having to live through it and the devastating effects. They deal with the blight of weeds and feral animal invasions and they stay positive.

But regional Australia now has to deal with the blight of the Gillard government. Even these stalwart Australians have lost their smiles. You only have to come to my electorate to see it. Regional Australia, along with members like myself, are absolutely appalled at the ignorance of and the contempt they receive from this government. This is the government that will take its total interest bearing liabilities to $293 billion. No wonder they have tried to hide this by raising the credit card limit in this nation to $300 billion. This government's debt will take generations to repay, particularly if this economy continues to be managed by the Labor government. There is no hope for this country under a Labor government. On the basis of the truly aspirational surpluses claimed in the budget forward estimates, the debt will take decades to pay off with an interest bill of $8 billion in 2015-16.

After every Australian pays interest on their own homes, farms and businesses, they have to pay another $350 in taxes just to foot the government's interest bill. Tax paying Australian parents will have to cover the $350 of interest for each year for each child they have. That is the equivalent of the so-called kids bonus. These same kids that are referred to by this government are the ones who will ultimately have to pay off Labor's debt splurge. They are going to have to pay. Regional and rural people know that mining and industry and agriculture make up around 60 per cent of our export trade and underpin our entire economy. But where does that this government think that comes from? It is from rural and regional Australia. Yet we are imposing a carbon tax and a mining tax on rural and regional Australians, on small businesses and on every single individual and family. Every time it is coming out of every electricity point. Every time you turn on anything that requires electricity to do anything, you are going to be contributing to the carbon tax.

The government is depending on the regions to continue to provide the wealth but is desperately missing in action. As we saw the other night in the Treasurer's presentation, this is the tax which must not be named, the carbon tax. It is a massive hit on rural and regional communities, taking hundreds of millions of dollars out of my electorate alone and the south-west of Western Australia. In that light it is no wonder that the Treasurer could not even bring himself to name it on Tuesday night. We could not hear the words 'carbon tax'. It is a new tax on every power point in every house and every business in Australia. It will rip millions of dollars out of the regions.

Common sense tells Australians, who have great common sense, that they will all pay more under the carbon tax. Common sense also tells them that taxing businesses and industry in Australia—not in other countries because our competitors will not have this same tax—is going to drive industry and business and jobs offshore. It will not cut carbon emissions but will simply redistribute wealth.

The carbon tax will have an immediate and a devastating later direct impact on transport. Anybody who lives in regional and rural Australia knows that we rely on transport for everything and mostly it comes on the back of a truck. Practically everything that is delivered in this nation comes on the back of a truck. The carbon tax is going to apply to road transport from 2014, so you will get a reduction in the diesel fuel rebate of 6.858c on heavy vehicles delivering vital goods to and from regional Australia. That is expected to cost the industry and its customers $510 million. Guess what? That is most of us in regional and rural Australia. In 2014-15, it will be $510 million alone on top of the recent 2.4c a litre rise in the diesel fuel excise.

This means higher costs and greater impacts in regional areas. What is it about rural and regional Australia that this government does not understand? I think perhaps there are not enough members who live and work there and understand the impact of carbon taxes and mining taxes because that is where they operate, in rural and regional Australia. In 2007, Australian trucks transported 277 million tonnes of food and animals around the country, and the proposed tax is going to add cost to every tonne and every item. Whether it is mining, marine or rail service, they will start paying the tax this year. But someone should really point out to the Prime Minister that mining, oil and gas production and fishing take place in regional areas. As someone from a rural and regional area, I would really like to hear this Prime Minister talk about farmers in Australia because I do not know that I have heard that; someone else may have. Clearly, we have got a Prime Minister who does not understand where food and fibre comes from in this country. So where does the government think Western Australia's wheat, gas and iron ore come from? All this really means is that the carbon tax will not just apply to 400 or 500 businesses; it will initially apply to 60,000 businesses because they face increased air, rail and maritime transport costs. By 2014, when the tax is applied to trucks on roads that number will jump to 100,000 businesses and millions of Australian families. Where will customers be hit the most by this? Where will Australians be hit the most by this? This tax will have a compounding impact on regional, rural and remote Australia. No-one should be in any doubt about this.

We have seen the cuts that the government has made to biosecurity—an absolute national disgrace. Agricultural production drives $155 billion a year in economic production in this country. It generates about 1.6 million Australian jobs and $32 billion in farm exports a year. Around the world we see that Australian produced food is regarded as safe, clean and green. It is essential that we retain that reputation. The quarantine budget has been slashed by more than $58 million since 2009. On top of carbon taxes, mining taxes, this budget is a greater attack on rural and regional Australia— (Time expired)

Stephen Jones (Throsby, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

After sitting through question time and then listening to the contributions from those on that side of the House on this matter of public importance, I will be heading back home to dust off my old CD collection. I am looking for a particular album from 2004 by an independent rock band known as Modest Mouse. I can see the member for Mayo over there giving me a smile. He is obviously a fan of their work, and particularly a fan of their 2004 album 'Good news for people who hate bad news'. That says it all about the mob over there: good news for people who hate bad news. They are the people who spend their entire time here trawling for misery.

Today we have had some fantastic news from the Australian Bureau of Statistics, which is that for the first time in living memory the unemployment rate has dropped below five per cent. And what do we hear from those on the other side? Nothing but bad news. They are never happier than when they are unhappy. They are never happier than when they are out there talking down the economy. In the same month that the Reserve Bank drops interest rates by a full 50 basis points, they are out there telling people that the sky is going to fall in. They are not out there telling people that they are paying less on their mortgage payments now than they were at any time under the Howard government. In fact, people are paying $3,000 per annum less than they were at any time under the Howard government. They are not telling people that.

Those opposite come in here and, in one breath, talk about how hard small businesses are doing it out there and, in the next breath, they are out there bagging our proposition to cut company tax. They are supposed to be the party of small business, yet there they are voting against company tax cuts. It is really hard to believe. The people on that side of the House absolutely hate good news. Whenever there is some good news, they try to come into this place and say, 'Look over there'—anything for a distraction. We saw the Treasurer stand here, in the House, on Tuesday of this week and hand down a budget which many commentators throughout the world said was nothing less than remarkable. Here you have a major developed economy such as Australia and its national government is able to hand down a budget that is seeing the fastest fiscal consolidation that we have ever seen a government put in place and also deliver a surplus over the financial year 2012-13. It is absolutely remarkable. Even that does not bring a smile to the faces of those on the other side of the House.

Nothing ceases to amaze me about those opposite. They have come in here and moved a matter of public importance that is supposed to be draw attention to some concerns about economic security for regional Australians. This is from the same mob who stood there and voted against the $300 million Steel Transformation Plan—a package that was put together to assist regional communities like my own and like those of the member for Newcastle and the member for Cunningham. These electorates rely on the steel industry and the manufacturing industry, which are doing it tough because of the high Australian dollar. Yet that mob over there would poke a stick in the eyes of all those steel workers and everyone else who relies on businesses in those regions by voting against the $300 million steel transformation package.

Against that background, I should not have been surprised when I saw members of the coalition parties come into this place yesterday and twist and turn and then ultimately vote against one of the excellent budget initiatives—the schoolkids bonus. This is an important initiative. Within a few weeks it will deliver $410 per household per child in primary school and $820 per household per child in secondary school, and this mob over there voted against it. I represent a regional electorate, and I have done some figures on what the schoolkids bonus will mean to my region. It will mean an annual injection of $27 million into households in my region. It will assist those households with their education expenses. Of course, that money will be spent within the region, boosting the local economy, assisting small businesses as well as assisting all of those households to help see them through tough economic times. So you really do wonder about the hypocrisy and the idiocy of many of those on the other side when they stand there and pretend to champion the interests of regional Australia when they say one thing in their electorates and then come in here and vote against the interests of regional Australia.

If you want to look at one of the things that we on this side of the House are doing that will have a great benefit—it is probably having the greatest benefit—for regional Australia over the next decade and, in fact, over the next 30 or 40 years, it is the rollout of the National Broadband Network. Yet those on the other side of the House play a double game. When they are back in their electorates they are winding up their local mayors—I have a Liberal Party local mayor in my area who is writing letters to the paper almost on a daily basis, saying, 'We want the NBN rolled out in suburbs in the shire.' Yet when her very close colleagues come down here to Canberra they are voting against the NBN and bagging it with every breath. They know what is good for the region when they are in the region and they stick their hands up for it and want to claim it, but when they come down here they vote against it. It is nothing short of hypocrisy.

If you want to look at a party that is committed to the interests of regional Australia, Deputy Speaker, and to putting in place lasting, long-term reforms which will assist regional communities, look at what it is doing for economic infrastructure, and by that I mean rail, roads and ports. There is nothing better, as a local member representing a regional area, than being able to point to this government's record in investing in economic infrastructure in the regions: $36 billion is being spent to modernise our rail, our road and our public transport infrastructure throughout regional Australia, something that all Australians and every member on this side of the House is very proud of indeed.

Let us have a look at the road infrastructure spend. We have almost doubled the road infrastructure spend, which is probably why we will not see the Leader of the Nationals ask a question of the minister for infrastructure on this—because he is ashamed. He knows that his regions are getting a better deal out of the Labor government than they ever got out of a coalition government when it comes to spending on roads in regional Australia. We have spent $28 billion over six years, doubling the investment in our national road-build effort.

But it does not stop at roads. Nothing short of remarkable is the fact that federal Labor has lifted rail spending tenfold to over $9 billion over six years in order to rebuild our nation's rail network. In fact, we have nearly rebuilt one-third of the nation's rail infrastructure network—a remarkable task—and we have already committed $7.3 billion to modernise and extend infrastructure in every mainland capital city when it comes to urban public transport. This is more than the total amount that has been spent by any national government at any time since Federation; a truly remarkable contribution and a legacy that will be enjoyed by generations to come, but not celebrated by those on the other side. Nearly 3,800 kilometres of freight rail track is being rebuilt, or one-third of the interstate rail network, but all we hear from those on the other side is carping and whingeing.

There are threats to regional Australia, but we never hear any solutions from those on the other side of the House. It is true that regions like my own are doing it tough because we have relied on manufacturing over many years to support jobs, livelihoods and regional investment. But this government is putting in place things like regional innovation funds to support new investment in that region. A $27 million injection of new money is going into every household in Throsby and the Illawarra and Southern Highlands regions through the schoolkids bonus while those on the other side of the House are voting against it. If you want to look at what a party thinks about regional Australia, look at its record and look at what it is actually doing, not what it stands in here day in and day out whingeing about. (Time expired)

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

I rise this evening to support the Leader of the Nationals in this matter of public importance: the failure of the budget to provide economic security for regional Australians. If I may, before I address the topic in general I might address some of the comments that have been made by the government benches in this debate.

The minister for regional Australia started off, and his contribution was quite extraordinary. Never before has there been a minister for regional Australia who can put together so many words and say so little. He spoke about the input through Regional Development Australia. It might be quite appropriate that the member for Newcastle followed because she has been a great beneficiary of the regional Australia program with the $7 million she got for the art gallery. It was just a shame that the residents of Newcastle did not want the thing, and spent days chained to the fig trees out the front complaining about the redevelopment. That is as far as the regional development of this government goes.

Regional Development Australia has been a huge disappointment. I spoke to a director in the last week who expressed his frustration at the time that he has allocated to regional Australia for such a poor result. In my part of the world there are some very good people who are involved in those committees, people who have given up a lot of their time. For someone who represents a third of New South Wales, which I would have thought was a regional electorate, to have missed the last two rounds of regional development funding—to my knowledge there was only one allocation made west of the range—this has been a huge disappointment. There have been a lot of meetings and discussions but no real action.

The member for Newcastle also mentioned how much she enjoyed sitting in the BER hall when she was in regional Australia. I suggest she go to Windeyer, in New South Wales, because they have a brand new classroom under the BER. It is lovely; it is just a shame it was opened a month before the school shut down. Perhaps we could go to Louth—they have a new classroom under the BER, which is lovely because they now have a classroom for each child in the school. Never before have we seen such a lost opportunity. The theme of this discussion of a matter of public importance is the economic direction of regional Australia and, to describe the mood at the moment, it is one of frustration and disappointment. The people have seen the large amounts of funding that were allocated, but unfortunately they have seen it go to projects that really have not benefitted the people in the area. While we are on the BER, which was to be a stimulus package to help tradespeople, right across my electorate we have people who are still owed vast amounts of money. Indeed, in this place on Monday there was a builder from the town of Moree who is owed $642,000 through the mismanagement of the BER. He will be lucky if his business survives. This is what is underpinning. You cannot gauge the success of what a government is doing by just measuring things in dollar terms.

Government is about leadership, and what this country is lacking at the moment is government giving the people that it governs the confidence to actually get on and do things. That is what is happening in regional Australia. The people do not have the confidence to expand their business, buy the property next door, buy a new house or whatever. They do not have confidence in the future. As we have heard the members from the other side say that they are the ones who represent regional Australia, I would like them to go to the streets of Dubbo, Mudgee, Moree, Narrabri, Condobolin, Cobar—any of those places—and listen to what the people out there on the streets have to say.

I will say one other thing, and that is this budget—

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

Say something!

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

I am glad you prompted me, Member for New England, because you are coming into focus. This budget is underpinned by the carbon tax. It was the elephant in the room when the Treasurer made his speech here on Tuesday night; it hardly got a mention. I was on ABC Radio on Wednesday morning in Tamworth. I followed the member for New England, and I could not believe my ears. He was telling me that the carbon tax is going to be the saviour of the beef industry—that the carbon tax is going to help abattoirs. He has been grumbling away over here about the negativity coming from members about regional Australia. I suggest he goes up to his electorate and listens to the negativity that is going on there.

In an attempt to save his seat, the member for New England has stuck to this government like a limpet—mind you, like a limpet stuck to the side of the Titanic. We are seeing legislation come into this place, supported by the crossbenchers, that is a direct affront to the people of regional Australia. We are talking about the wonderful opportunities for farmers under the carbon tax—the fund that was being set up, which was the great idea of the member for New England, the Carbon Farming Initiative! I had a farmer in the other day who understood that there was money to be made from the Carbon Farming Initiative. But there is a catch: you actually have to sign up to the Carbon Farming Initiative. So farmers out there who have been succeeding, who are at the top of their game, actually have to sign up to the Carbon Farming Initiative and have someone from the government come along and suggest how they run their operations.

So we have Big Brother creeping into everything we do. That is the issue that we have seen in this place for the last five years. Every piece of legislation that has come through, every idea that has come from that side, is about restricting growth, about taking away incentive. Everything is about regulation and greenness. We have a Murray-Darling Basin Plan that has been cast through the eyes of 10 years of drought, and now we are seeing that the people who are going to face the attack are the people who are actually producing something. This budget is a mix of sugar hits and taking money away from people who actually produce things. It provides the lowest amount of spending for roads in at least 10 years.

It is interesting to note that the $8 billion that will be paid in interest by this government in the next 12 months would build two Melbourne to Brisbane rail lines. That is just the interest bill. If there is one great frustration in regional Australia, it is knowing that in five years we have gone from being a country that had money in the bank, that was in charge of its own destiny, to having to increase the debt level of this government to debts of up to $300 billion. For anyone out there to say anything else is not in tune with the people of regional Australia. I have just spent six weeks living in the front of my car, touring my electorate, and people who have voted Labor all their lives have come up to me in absolute despair and disgust, saying, 'When can we have an election? We have had enough.' That is what is underpinning this budget. This budget reinforces that mindset in the people of regional Australia.

The member for New England has been going crook about the negativity in this debate. I can tell you that the negativity in regional Australia at the moment is palpable, and that is because of the mismanagement by the members of the government benches. The sooner we can put an end to this, the better.

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

This will be my quickest speech in this place because I want to give the Independents an opportunity to make a contribution. This is an MPI allegedly about economic security in rural and regional Australia, so I will very quickly make five points. The best way to give people economic security is to give them a job, and the unemployment rate in the Hunter region is 3.5 per cent—a level I would never have dreamed of 10 years ago. The second is to invest in education and skills, and this government's record in that area is without challenge. The third is to keep interest rates low, to take the pressure off families. Our budgetary strategy is about just that. The fourth is to support families with family budgets when they need that assistance most, and this budget does that writ large. The fifth is to build physical infrastructure so our local economies in the regions can expand, and earlier speakers on this side have indicated that we are investing record amounts of money in physical infrastructure—projects such as, in my electorate, the $1.7 billion Hunter Expressway and the $1.2 billion third rail track to take coal to the port. These are allowing our economies to expand.

We could do so much more if the opposition would just get out of the way on the mining tax issue and allow us to return some of that mining tax to the regions. They have been an embarrassment today. The member for Parkes was a late inclusion into the debate because they suddenly realised that the Leader of the National Party did not have one member of the National Party backing him up. Then the member for Parkes bravely came along. All they can do is scaremonger and talk about carbon. We will get on with expanding the economy, growing jobs and giving people economic security in rural and regional Australia.

Bob Katter (Kennedy, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This matter of public importance is about economic security in regional Australia. You must be judged upon your outcomes. The Liberal-National Party government in New South Wales moved immediately to sell electricity. The National Party put up a hell of a fight in Western Australia over this issue, because, if you privatise the electricity industry, then, in those areas where there are fewer people concentrated, the lines—and I was a minister for mines and energy in the Queensland government—have got to be stretched over a longer area, and in country areas the cost will go up 40 or 50 per cent. The last New South Wales Leader of the National Party screamed and yelled in the middle of the election campaign and said, 'We'll never roll over and accept the privatisation of electricity in New South Wales.' The current National Party Leader in New South Wales rolled straight over. The Leader of the National Party in New South Wales said, 'When it is privatised, the cost of electricity in rural New South Wales will go up 40 per cent.' In Western Australia, the National Party said: 'When it is privatised, the price of electricity will go up in rural Western Australia by 40 per cent.' I would say is probably closer to 60 per cent in Queensland, because our population is more sparsely distributed.

Judge people on their outcomes. The LNP in Queensland talked about economic security. They have only been there six weeks and they are closing down the fishing industry. They made an announcement that they are buying out what is left of the fishing industry. The LNP closed most of it down. They are back in power in the state and now they are going to close down what is left of it. And they come in here and talk about economic security! There is no economic security for those towns like Innisfail or Bundaberg. Where is the member for Bundaberg? Where is he squealing while his industry is about to be closed down around him?

Whilst the coalition are in here talking about economic security, the LNP minister in Queensland, McArdle—I love the new government; they are giving me a press release every day!—has announced he is not going to have any electricity flowing into north-west Queensland. Well, that just means we cannot have any mines in north-west Queensland. The greatest resource outside of Olympic Dam—no, bigger than Olympic Dam—is the Galilee Basin coalfields. It needs railways, which are being sold off by the current LNP government, and it needs electricity. The LNP government have just announced that they are not going to put an electricity line into the Galilee Basin or the coalfields, and the coalition have got the enormous hide to stand up in this place and say they are for economic security for rural areas! Under agreement, I hand over to my colleague.

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

It is very pleasing to hear the member for Kennedy back in the building. I am not sure my ears are so pleased, though! This matter of public importance is about economic security in regional Australia. During the discussions in relation to the formation of the government, both Mr Abbott and Ms Gillard agreed that regional Australia had been neglected. That was a great admission on their behalf. They were prepared to admit that the parties and governments that they both belong to had been party to the neglect of regional Australia. Those were their words, not mine. Part of the arrangements that were put in place, particularly with the member for Lyne and me, were to try and improve the lot of regional Australia.

There are a lot of things in the current budget for regional Australia, not the least of which are some of the spatial budgeting initiatives to try and get a handle on government spending in various governmental areas. But a whole range of regional packages and infrastructure packages have been set up, including the Education Investment Fund, of half a billion dollars, and the Health and Hospitals Fund, where $1.8 billion was assigned to country Australia. That was not to ignore city Australia, but to redress the imbalance that both leaders agreed had occurred—for political reasons. Loyalty is not rewarded in Australia as it should be, probably, and the subservient country members, on all sides, are outnumbered by the city based politicians of their parties. So there was a degree of neglect that had occurred, and a range of packages were set up. As of the budget the other night, 130 health services had gained support through the Health and Hospitals Fund, and the member for Riverina's hospital was one of them. And a whole range of country universities and TAFEs will get support through the Education Investment Fund.

Given the limited time, I would just like to say that there is a lot of talk about the carbon tax, emissions trading schemes, renewable energy et cetera and how the price of power is supposedly going to go through the roof. The day the sky does not fall in is going to be a fascinating day in politics for me! The member for Parkes referred to some comments I had made in relation to the beef industry. We are working with various people in the meat-processing area at the moment. There is a clean energy fund. There are a number of initiatives in the carbon-pricing arrangements where companies and individuals can seek assistance. In the meat industry, a lot of the abattoirs and networks are very old. They have enormous effluent issues, water issues, et cetera. In recent months, with a number of companies, we have been looking at various technologies internationally. If you listen to the NFF, the National Party and a number of others, they will say that it will just destroy the beef industry—in fact, the reverse could occur. I would urge those who work in the meat industry and those who manage, run and invest in the meat industry to have a look at these packages and at what can be done to turn what you believe is a potential negative—and what is being bleated at you as a potential negative—into a real positive in terms of your unit cost of production, fertiliser development and a whole range of things that can come out of the various effluents that are used.

That applies not only to the meat industry; it can apply to parts of the dairy industry. The piggery people are onto it already. They are actually doing it. There are enormous potential positives in relation to renewable energy resources in country Australia. I thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, for the little time that I have had.

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

Order! The discussion is now concluded.