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

I rise to support Appropriation Bill (No.1) 2012-13. The 2012-13 budget will deliver much-needed cost-of-living relief to thousands of households in my electorate of Reid. This budget is all about making sure all Australians share in the benefits of the mining boom and a strong economy, not just the fortunate few. The budget will spread the benefits of the mining boom to help everyday Australians with cost-of-living increases.

In my electorate of Reid, the budget will deliver a new cash payment to 6,850 families with kids in school. Parents will receive $410 for each child in primary school and $820 for each child in high school as part of the new schoolkids bonus. The budget will increase family payments by up to $600 for more than 10,000 families in my electorate. Starting in July next year, this extra support will be made to families currently receiving family tax benefit part A payments. The budget will provide extra money to help pay the bills to 11,000 young people—single parents and the unemployed—currently receiving allowances in my electorate of Reid. Singles will receive a $210 lump sum payment, while couples will receive $350.

We are also returning the budget to surplus on time as promised. Returning to surplus gives the Reserve Bank maximum flexibility to cut interest rates again. Interest rates are now lower than at any time under the Howard government and a family on a $300,000 mortgage is now paying around $3,000 a year less in repayments. The federal Labor government is also delivering reforms which promote a stronger community and a fairer society. These are big reforms such as the National Disability Insurance Scheme, a great new investment in dental health and the fantastic aged-care package.

In relation to the schoolkids bonus, I take this opportunity to expose the opposition's real intentions on this matter—that is, the opposition has confirmed that they will oppose the government's new schoolkids bonus. What does this mean? It means an Abbott government would take away the new schoolkids bonus from the 6,850 families of the 12,050 schoolchildren in my electorate of Reid. An Abbott government would also take away the automatic cash payment of $410 for each child in primary school and $820 for each child in high school. This would amount to more than $7 million being taken from my electorate.

The government's new schoolkids bonus replaces the education tax refund. Under the education tax refund scheme, some 5,150 families in my electorate failed to get the full amount, including 1,100 families who made no ETR claim at all for the 2010-11 tax year. Our new payment will ensure that families are getting every cent they deserve upfront—when they need it. It makes it easier for families because there is no paperwork and no need to keep receipts, just a twice-yearly cash payment for every child at school. The opposition would like to deny families this money to pay for the cost of essentials, such as school books and uniforms, because they seem to think families cannot be trusted to spend this extra money on their kids.

I will now look in some detail at what this budget does to help small businesses, because there are about 22,000 in my electorate. Small businesses have approached me for more information. It is no accident that most small business operators voted Labor in 2007 because they had suffered from years of neglect under the Howard government, which favoured the big end of town—as the opposition still do. The budget will help small business to invest by allowing companies to carry back tax losses to get a refund against tax paid in the previous year, providing a tax benefit of up to $300,000 per year. From 1 July this year, the budget will deliver tax breaks for small business, such as increasing the instant asset write-off threshold to $6,500. The government will provide $8.3 million over four years to establish an Australian Small Business Commissioner to provide advocacy for and representation of small business interests and concerns to the Australian government. Funding will also be provided for a national information and referral service to allow small business owners to get access to information and advice and referral to external services such as dispute resolution. This measure will also extend to 2015-16 the existing Small Business Support Line, which provides advice to small businesses on issues such as obtaining finance, cash flow management, retail leasing, personal stress and hardship counselling, and promotion and marketing.

The government will provide $27.5 billion over four years to continue the Small Business Advisory Services program and make it an ongoing program. The SBAS program will help small business to improve sustainability, productivity and growth through providing access to low-cost business advisory services and activities to enhance business management skills. Grants will be provided through a competitive merit based process to third-party service organisations to provide small businesses with access to general face-to-face business advisory services including information and referral services. The government's Small Business Advisory Committee will be expanded to strengthen its work on cutting red tape for small business.

Australia's 2.7 million small businesses will be given a direct voice to the Australian government through the appointment today of the first national Small Business Commissioner. Labor understands how vital the small business sector is to the Australian economy, employing almost five million Australians and making up a third of the economy. The small business sector has been calling for better advocacy, advice and information at the federal level, and our government has taken notice. This new commissioner will provide small businesses with a voice to highlight their issues to the Australian government. The commissioner will also provide a one-stop shop for small business services and information. Furthermore, the commissioner will ensure the interests of small business remain at the forefront of government policy-making.

Australia's more than two million small businesses are made up of hardworking men and women who are putting in long hours to build better futures for their families. By acting as a one-stop shop for small business people the commission will be representing their concerns and interests directly to the government. Small-business owners will have access to information and advice, which I have alluded to, and have access to external services such as a dispute resolution service. The commission will also work with the minister for small business to ensure government agencies take into account the needs of small businesses, including ways in which we can better manage the regulation of small business. The commissioner will report directly to the minister, who will liaise directly with cabinet colleagues about issues important to small businesses. The commissioner will also be able to take up individual cases with relevant government agencies. The commissioner's office will work with state and territory small business commissioners to ensure services to small businesses are simple and easy to access and minimise duplication across jurisdictions. The office will also simplify advice to small businesses, including advice on dispute resolution, making the advice more readily available online and via the hotline.

Labor has always taken the needs of small business seriously. We appointed the first ever small business minister, as I have alluded to, and we made that portfolio a cabinet appointment earlier this month. This announcement was in response to the Australian government's review of small business dispute resolution programs and options, which reported in 2011. I say again that Labor understands and supports the aspirations of working people who want to run a decent small business, and that is why we are also increasing the small business instant tax write-off from $1,000 to $6,500 and introducing a $5,000 tax break for motor vehicles. Both of those measures are opposed by the opposition.

The budget also provides for improvements in infrastructure, both large and small. While the government is already providing $840 million to improve the main northern rail freight corridor from Strathfield in my electorate to Broadmeadow to remove bottlenecks and enhance freight capacity, availability, reliability and journey time, it is also providing much-needed funding for local roads. Funding from the Roads to Recovery program is largely provided to local government authorities to assist them to maintain and upgrade their local roads. The Treasurer announced that the 2012-13 federal budget provides a further $350 million per annum from 2014-15 to 2018-19. The portion of this roads funding allocated to councils in my electorate of Reid for the next financial year is $668,630, and the amount for 2014-15 to 2018-19 is $3,984,000. I strongly welcome the government's commitment to maintaining funding of this important program for local roads in my electorate, and so do my constituents.

The government has stated quite clearly that it is building a new Australian economy based on highly skilled workers, high-technology, fast broadband and clean energy. We are ensuring Australians possess the skills they need to get the jobs of tomorrow by reforming our vocational education and training system and building on our record investment in skills and training. In this budget, $18.1 million will be invested to establish three Australian skills centres of excellence, in partnership with industry and training organisations, to give Australian workers access to cutting-edge education to prepare for roles in emerging industries. There will also be a $35 million boost to the National Workforce Development Fund to help ensure more mature-age workers can reskill or upskill in areas of skill shortage. Employers will continue to work in partnership with the government to ensure training is targeted at skills demanded by industry. A further $19.4 million will provide training to newly qualified tradespeople to help them establish their own businesses. Business and finance training will also be funded for those completing their apprenticeship skills that are critical for running a successful small business.

The Australian Skills Quality Authority will receive $4.2 million over four years to support high-quality training through the national regulator. More than $6 million will be invested for the continuing development and expansion of the My Skills website to be launched later this year. This one-stop shop will help people wanting to reskill and keep track of their training over the course of their working life. Labor's continuing record investment in skills and training is driving fundamental economic reform in this country. You can see it with the confidence expressed through the OECD. Labor is giving more Australians than ever before the chance to access high-skilled, high-paid jobs of tomorrow.

My main concern is to get the best for my electorate. That is what we are all elected to do in this place. In addition to the measures I have already outlined, 1,309 local families in my electorate of Reid are benefiting from Australia's first Paid Parental Leave scheme delivered by Labor, a program I am very proud to be associated with. One thousand four hundred and twenty-three local families benefited from the baby bonus last year and many of these families received $500 more of their payment upfront to help pay for initial costs. Six thousand one hundred and seventy-one local families are now benefiting from Labor's increase in the childcare rebate from 30 per cent to 50 per cent of parents' out-of-pocket costs and the increase in the maximum payment of $7,500 per child per year. These families now have the option of claiming their childcare rebate payment fortnightly rather than having to wait to the end of the year, so it is easier to make ends meet. Eighteen thousand eight hundred local pensioners are now benefiting from Labor's historic pension reforms, including the biggest increase to the pension in 100 years. Single pensioners on the maximum rate are receiving an extra $154 a fortnight and couples on the maximum rate are receiving an extra $156 a fortnight combined.

With this budget the Labor government has delivered four years of surplus, despite big revenue losses, while also finding room to deliver reforms which make for a stronger community and a fairer society. We are delivering a surplus with targeted and responsible savings, while protecting the front-line services Australians rely on, as well as helping families with cost-of-living pressures. We have set in train the first historic steps towards the National Disability Insurance Scheme. We are reforming aged care to help senior Australians stay in their own homes. We have made a new big investment in dental health to deliver a blitz on waiting lists. The Labor government has made big investments in our health system with 76 major projects in regional Australia.

This is all part of Labor's commitment to manage the economy responsibly in the interests of working Australians and not just for a fortunate few, which the coalition seem more intent on representing. I commend this bill to the House.

Ken O'Dowd (Flynn, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2012-2013 and related bills. I oppose these bills. I rise to speak on certain aspects of the budget that affect industry, small business and jobs in my electorate of Flynn. How will this budget return confidence to the businesses and individuals which are so sadly lacking in Flynn and in the rest of Australia?

The budget cannot be trusted. The surplus cannot be counted upon. Can we have faith in the budget papers? The answer is no. The budget is based on 3.25 per cent GDP growth in the first year, up from three per cent. Why I query that is that commodity prices are down—coal prices are down, iron ore prices are down, and aluminium prices are down very much due to a glut in the world aluminium market. The strong Australian dollar is not helping our exports. The interest bill alone is already about $8 billion a year. The debt ceiling has been raised from $250 billion to $300 billion. Why is this happening if we are going into a surplus budget? I would like that explained.

Australian companies are moving offshore. Overseas companies are investing in other parts of the world. The carbon tax and the MRRT will have negative effects on this budget. The car industry in Australia is in trouble, as is the steel industry, and big and small retailers are in trouble. Sadly, in the aluminium industry we heard the announcement yesterday of the closure of the Kurri Kurri smelter. These are issues that will affect the budget very much and that is why I do not think a budget surplus can be achieved.

As I have said many times before, my electorate of Flynn is the carbon capital of Australia. Boy, everyone in my electorate knows what a carbon tax will do to their jobs, to their industries and to their businesses. Flynn is home to two aluminium refineries and one aluminium smelter, Australia's largest cement works, three coal-fired power stations, 20-plus coal mines—and still going up, if they can get their fundamentals right—and three major LNG plant developments, which are costing about $65 billion to construct. There are several new coal loading facilities going in at Gladstone. Our small to medium business sector is vibrant but, as is the case in all areas of Australia, there are streams where some sectors are doing well, others sectors are doing okay and other sectors are performing badly. Also in our electorate we have dairy, citrus, beef, pork and cropping, and many other industries.

The carbon tax is the worst possible policy to bring in right now. The timing could not be worse, and $23 a tonne is too high when you compare it with other nations. Also, that $23 a tonne will grow in the next three years. The timing just could not be worse. We have got to remain competitive. We are on the world stage with a lot of our exports. Australia is also lagging behind in terms of productivity. The carbon tax is anti growth. And I believe you cannot talk about an MRRT on its own, because companies have also got to face the carbon tax, the renewable energy tax, state royalties, staff superannuation increases, payroll tax, a GST on goods they purchase, workers' compensation and community projects, which actually should be funded by the governments, but as the governments are all broke the mining companies and resource companies get behind the communities in every way they can and do spend a lot of money on projects like parks, gardens and hospitals. They actually bring doctors into these towns, which helps their company employees but it also helps towns like Emerald, Blackwater and Biloela.

I believe the budget did not address royalties for regions in any way, shape or form. In fact, when it comes to roads in my area, Panorama Creek at Rolleston, which blocks the inland highway up the centre of Queensland from north to south, was not addressed. The Yeppen flood plain, on the Bruce Highway at Rockhampton, cut the state in half again in 2010, and there is no funding for that. Fortunately, money has come out of the 2011-12 budget for the Gin Gin roadworks and Calliope crossroad projects. Hospitals and aged-care facilities—apart from Rockhampton and Bundaberg, to the north and south of Gladstone—did receive good funding. There was none for Gladstone. You must remember that Gladstone is the hub of all this new industry, yet it missed out. There are many small towns in my electorate that have low-key hospitals, but all of them have aged-care facilities and there was no funding for those. They are crying out for extra rooms in most facilities in my area. The superclinic at Emerald has been on the backburner for a long time now, at least four years, and there was no mention of that.

With regard to the people of Flynn, full pensioners did okay. They are going to get some of the costs of the new carbon tax refunded. But self-funded retirees are going to miss out completely, as are workers. Workers in Flynn, who are generally high-paid workers—but they do work very hard for their money—are going to have certain benefits taken off them. I do not think this is fair to those workers. They work hard, they do shiftwork, they work around the clock, and it puts a lot of pressure on their families. Generally speaking, I am so proud of the workers in my electorate that I think they deserve every bit they get. They are on a higher-than-average income, I would imagine; they are well paid, but they do pay a lot of tax to the Australian government. They will be stripped of Medicare and pharmaceutical benefits et cetera.

I want to talk a little bit about superannuation in the budget. The amount you can contribute on a yearly basis has been cut from $50,000 to $25,000. Now, this is a travesty, an injustice. The thing about putting money into one's superannuation fund is that it does not really happen very much until a person reaches the age where he has got rid of family commitments—the kids have come out of school or university and he has paid off the house. Then, finally, when he gets to the age of 50 or 55, he has a little bit of money left over to put in his superannuation fund, because he wants to get ready to retire in 10 to 15 or 20 years time. Cutting the maximum superannuation contribution from $50,000 back to $25,000 does not leave you much to retire on. Keep in mind that, since 2004 or 2005, superannuation funds have not been returning very good profits at all. In fact, my superannuation fund returned 1.7 per cent last year, which is pretty ordinary; the year before that, it returned a positive 15 per cent; but, the year before that, it returned minus 28 per cent. So you could say that, over the last three years, my superannuation fund and the superannuation funds of most people I have talked to have gone backwards at a rate of knots.

That is why, if we want people to be able to afford their own retirement, we have to encourage them, by way of incentives, to keep their fund active and profitable. And we cannot keep changing the rules for superannuation; otherwise, people will lose confidence in the super funds and they will elect to invest their money elsewhere. I want to know where 'elsewhere' is, because I would be very interested in that! But, as I said, at the moment super funds are not returning good results. Even the hit we took last week gave another knock to the super funds. It gets over one hurdle and there is another. On small business, there was no reduction in taxation from 30 per cent to 29 per cent, which small business was promised. I know those opposite said that we did not support that. What we did not support was a mining tax. The reduction in tax from 30 per cent to 29 per cent for small business was put into that one package. The coalition did not support the mining tax but we did support the drop in tax for small companies from 30 to 29 per cent. It is still very hard for small business to borrow money from banks. I do not think the banks at the moment are confident of Australia's future. When it comes to a small business borrowing from banks—as you know, any business generally always has to borrow to get going—now they must have a cash flow backed by assets. It is not that easy. A lot of people with assets but no cash flow go to banks and they get knocked back.

When you see companies like Retravision and Reed Constructions—a big construction company in New South Wales and Queensland—go into receivership owing their workers and contractors a lot of money—over $100 million—then things are not right. I know that some small businesses are badly run but we are not helping them with 16,000 new regulations being introduced in the 43rd Parliament. As the previous speaker mentioned, we should have a war on red tape. I do not think that has been addressed properly. There has been a lot of hearsay but it has not been addressed properly at this stage.

Big business faces a high Australian dollar, the carbon tax, the MRRT, uncertain global markets, high wages, poor productivity and increased input costs. Investments overseas are becoming more attractive to big industries. I know Vale and those big companies have set up shop in places like Mozambique. Our coal-fired power stations—there are three of them in Central Queensland—are under the hammer if the Greens get their way. Cement Australia cannot compete with a Chinese competitor coming in and our aluminium industry faces huge stockpiles around the world. The European and Chinese economies are very uncertain. We had a big hiccup last week in China. It is still very unstable. If things go really bad in Europe that will flow back to China and then flow on to Australia. Our exports to that part of the world will surely suffer.

In conclusion, the very fact that I have raised concerns about a fair share for Flynn shows why a royalties for regions scheme is very important. We need people to come to those regions and work. A man or a woman will not bring their spouse to these country towns unless we have certain facilities for them. This is not happening. If a woman wants to come to Emerald or Blackwater, she needs proper care if she or her family gets sick. They want to see good schools, good hospitals and good roads. These are the issues that face my electorate and I do not think a lot of them were addressed in the budget. That is why I oppose it.

Janelle Saffin (Page, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in support of Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2012-2013 and related legislation before the House and to the budget. The areas that I will concentrate on are health—one of the big issues, as always, in my area and with some much needed services and funding—and some of the capital expenditure on schools, roads and the regions, and the NDIS.

I will start with health. The Friday before the budget was a great day in the Northern Rivers region because I was able to announce that there would be $60 million in fully budgeted federal funding towards a decent start on the long awaited stage 3 of redevelopment of Lismore Base Hospital. It is a project that the community has lobbied for for a long time. I have been leading that lobbying. Really, some of these things should have happened at state level and they had not—other things had happened but not that. Under the Health and Hospitals Fund, $475 million was prioritised to the region. The Lismore Base Hospital redevelopment went forward as a project and got through on its merit and we were able to get $60 million. It means that the emergency department will be able to get started. There are a few other areas, but the emergency department is very important. I feel good at being able to announce it. It was a pleasure to host the federal Minister for Health, Tanya Plibersek. She was with me at the Lismore Base Hospital. As well as thanking her I also thanked the previous health minister, Nicola Roxon, who recognised my efforts to keep this vital health infrastructure project on track.

I have got many health services in my seat of Page but Lismore Base Hospital is a key referral hospital. From that perspective it can be seen as a national priority. So the redevelopment is a great win for the community, health planners, doctors, nurses, support staff and even our local newspaper, the Northern Star, who worked on that campaign as well. They all worked with me and with the community towards securing this funding breakthrough.

I was also proud that, as a result of my strong lobbying for other things in the community, some additional money was granted, with $2.5 million in federal funding going to St Vincents Private Hospital in Lismore, a hospital that for a long time has sat alongside our public hospitals delivering complementary services. That money will go towards building two new operating theatres for general, neurological and ophthalmic surgery and relocating and refurbishing an existing endoscopy suite. The hospital also put in some money—it was a half-half situation.

There was a trifecta of health announcements, with $4.3 million in federal funding to build a new community health centre in Yamba. That will offer outpatient clinics and facilities, and mental health and dental services. I want to pay special tribute in this place—I have done so publicly—to Yamba based health advocate Jim Agnew OAM. He has for many years led the community campaign for this much needed facility, which will be a base for community nurses working in the Lower Clarence. Since my election in 2007 I have had many meetings with Jim. I strongly lobbied both health ministers—firstly Minister Roxon and then Minister Plibersek—in order to keep the project on the radar for federal support. It had huge support locally. Bless Jim: he had even drawn up his own plans. I used to say, 'Jim, really, we need to leave that to the health experts,' but he drew up his own plans as well. I have to say he has done well. He has learned a lot about health over the years. He previously lobbied for the ambulance station. That was something he had turned his mind to. That went on for years and when we got it he turned his mind to the community health centre, and we worked together tirelessly on that.

Minister Plibersek, our health minister, was in my electorate, so to make the most of the visit I took her to Grafton Base Hospital, where the redevelopment is going on. A lot of it is done but there is still some underway. Twenty-nine million dollars is going into that project, $4 million of which came from the previous state government. After that, the health minister officially opened the $5 million Grafton GP superclinic. Both of those projects were major election commitments of mine, so it was very pleasing and exciting, and it was just wonderful for the local community.

In speaking on health, I also want to talk about the dental announcements that were in the budget. I was so pleased to see the money that was announced, the way it has been divvied up and the number of areas it is covering. First of all, there was $345.9 million for the public dental waiting list. According to the national dental advisory council, that will address the current 400,000 people on waiting lists around the country. Then there was the $10.5 million for oral health promotion, to develop a national oral health promotion plan, and funding of $35.7 million for expansion of the Voluntary Dental Graduate Year Program. That is a really good program, because that will offer up to 100 places per annum to increase the dental workforce to be able to deliver more dental services through a national scheme. Also, there is the funding available for the rural and remote infrastructure and relocation grants for dentists. That is an important project, because we have seen that work with local GP clinics in our areas. We have seen it all over Australia. There is no reason why that should not operate as well for dental practices. So it is good that that is in there. Then there was funding of $450,000 for non-government organisations to coordinate further pro bono work by dentists. There are a lot of dentists who are providing that wonderful work pro bono, but it does require administration. There is always a cost with administration, just to organise it and make sure it flows properly. So that money there to facilitate that is really helpful. It just means that that project can continue and those dentists who provide that pro bono work will be able to do that without that extra cost.

It is good to see these things happening, particularly in my region. I see them in other regions in Australia, but obviously for me as the member for Page it is great to see them happening in my electorate. They are things that we work for and that I worked for—and worked with the community for, because when I work on these projects I do not do it single-handedly; I do it with the community in a sense of community. It just demonstrates that it is a real need and has that widespread support. That is really important, as everybody knows. As every member in this place knows, when we are lobbying it is really important to show that that support is always there.

I want to talk a little bit now about the investment in the schools through the BER project. In the Page electorate, there has been an investment in schools as capital investment in new libraries, classrooms and halls. Quite a large number of the schools were able to get what I call some of those extras. They were very clever in the way that they were able to design and build those new buildings, being able to incorporate other uses into halls, extra rooms, walkways and all sorts of things. It has been really pleasing as I go around to the opening ceremonies and also the recognition ceremonies to see how creatively some of them were done. Also, I have been involved in quite a lot of them as they were being done and have been giving some assistance.

Last Friday I was at two: one in Nymboida in the Clarence Valley and the other at St Joseph's Primary School, two different schools of different sizes. Nymboida is a small country school and a beautiful school. They even have their own chooks, their own eggs and things like that, so it is a delightful school. I saw what a difference it made by having a new room, a library, an interactive whiteboard and things like that. When I am in the schools I always ask the children what they think. The children tell you very honestly and openly exactly what they think of everything, so it is always good to get their feedback. They rattle off a whole a lot of things: 'It is better to be in,' 'We can put our books down,' 'We've got more books,' 'We've got the interactive whiteboard,' and 'It's just a nice building to be in.' It is better for the teachers.

I was also at St Joseph's Primary School in South Grafton and opened that. Often, when I open them in the Catholic schools, the bishop is there to do a blessing. I just want to read a little bit here. The Diocese of Lismore—that is the diocese that handles the buildings; it is the diocese that covers the area across the North Coast and organised the BER project across the North Coast—also produced a report. It is a great report, and they highlight how everything worked and cover each project in each school. The then Director of Catholic Schools was Dr Anne Wenham. With the report she sent a letter to the Prime Minister. It said:

Dear Ms Gillard

…    …   …

It is my pleasure to enclose a copy of the Diocese of Lismore Building the Education Revolution 2009-2012 Report.

She went on to say that:

… this Report is an important record of the response of parish school communities to the opportunities presented through the Building the Education Revolution program.

This unprecedented funding of schools throughout Australia was a strategic and much appreciated investment in schools as well as a significant support for the local economy through employment opportunities.

That is exactly what is was designed to be. It was stimulus money. It was to get the money out there into the community for the local economy and for employment, and it was an investment in our schools which will last way beyond the GFC. It worked, and I talk about that when I am in the schools. I say that that is what it was designed to do and that is what it did. It is so pleasing to get around the schools and see the result.

In the report there is a covering statement from the Bishop of Lismore, Geoffrey Jarrett, and I will quote a few things from it. He starts off with:

Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ,—

Then Bishop Geoffrey goes on to say—

From the outset I stipulated that BER funds be applied in a considered and equitable manner;

He talked about the common good for each decision and said:

A management system was then developed that was robust yet flexible with clear policy in key operating areas.

He also said:

The Commonwealth Government can be assured that the BER funds provided to the Diocese of Lismore have been put to good use.

I can attest to that, having seen the investment and also read a lot of the documentation. He went on to say:

… the Building the Education Revolution program has succeeded in providing Australian families with much needed school facilities and stimulating business activity in local areas.

He further said:

To all involved "congratulations on a job well done!"

I say the same to everybody who has been involved in the BER program in all the schools. I know there was a lot of commentary about it, particularly in the Australian newspaper. I was involved behind the scenes, and when I went to the schools I saw that everybody was happy with having that investment in their school.

Sometimes I read about issues with the BER, but they are things that happened with building projects. I have never seen a building project where you did not have to get the builder, the plumber or somebody else back to do something. That happens when you do things at home. You had to differentiate between what was happening when some people were talking about issues in schools. I saw some of that. It was a great project.

I only have 20 seconds left, so I mention the NDIS and the statement that Minister Crean put out for stronger regions and a stronger nation. I am pleased to see some of the funds flowing to the regions and, as the minister says, with some of that mining boom coming to the regions.

George Christensen (Dawson, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Strangely, I find myself agreeing with the Treasurer and his comment about this budget. This is, indeed, a very Labor budget. With an elaborate system of smoke and mirrors this Labor government has managed to create an illusion of a wafer-thin budget surplus—for a couple of hours, at least. But do not underestimate the Australian people. They know full well that Labor has cooked the books here. Costs have been shuffled out of next year, shuffled into this year and shuffled into the following year. In some cases, such as the NBN, they have shuffled clean off the deck. There has been more shuffling going on than with the three-card-trick hustler in Vegas. What the Australian people cottoned onto very quickly is that splashing money around in a blatant attempt to buy votes and to compensate for the carbon tax actually achieves nothing at all. They understand that cooking the books does not actually make anything better.

I am no fan of cooking the books, but a guy as big as me is a fan of baking pies, and I know a fair bit about pies. No matter how you slice a pie, I know you are still going to run out of pie at some stage. The concept of creating a bigger pie so there is more to go around is lost on this government. For four years the government has tried to make a bigger pie by borrowing more pie from overseas, but sooner or later it has to be paid back. Already the interest is eating into our pie, and what this government has done is to commit the Australian people and their children to years of financial pain, as it will be they who have to pay it all back. If you dish out pie so you can collect pie just to dish out more pie, as this government is doing with the carbon tax, all you are actually doing is circulating the same pieces of pie, and every time it changes hands another piece of it falls on the floor. Labor is incapable of making the pie bigger, but it is truly world class when it comes to wasting it.

Let us not forget the Greens' influence. If there is one thing that the Greens hate, it is anyone with a bigger slice of the pie. They do not care how they got the big piece. They do not care if they baked it themselves, worked long and hard, mortgaged their house to buy the oven and gave almost half their pie to the government; they still end up with a big piece, and the Greens absolutely hate it. Now it seems the Australian Labor Party hate it too. They want to take the big piece of pie from that hard worker and give it to everyone else, not because they want everyone else to have more pie but because they just do not want anyone to have a big piece of pie. That is not socialism; that is just pie envy.

Taking the incentive away from the bakers of this country, most of whom are in regional Australia, is a recipe for a smaller pie. My constituents in Dawson can vouch for that, because they are the bakers. The Mackay region and the adjacent mining region around Mackay are the bakery of this economy—of this pie. But Labor is shredding their hope for the future. Labor is stealing their reward for hard work. Labor is robbing them of the opportunity to create wealth for the nation. Families in the Mackay region are paying the high price of creating that wealth. They pay exorbitant rent. They pay more for their fuel. They pay more for their groceries. They work long hours at shift work, often living away from home and the family. They have access to fewer services—health services, recreational services and things that capital city MPs in this place take for granted. Yet they are penalised because they have that bigger slice of the pie.

What these people expect to see in the budget is funding for infrastructure and for those services that others take for granted—facilities like the Mackay Showgrounds, which have begun a long, arduous and expensive redevelopment into what we hope will become a regional entertainment precinct. It is being done with funds raised through the community and some funding from the Queensland government. In regional centres like Mackay, the showground is a critical piece of infrastructure because it is where the community comes together. It is where events like the major Queensland Mining and Engineering Exhibition connect people and organisations that help drive our economy. But we did not see specific funding for the showgrounds in this budget. The people of my region do not deserve to be ignored and forgotten, as with the long-lost Labor promise of a GP superclinic. Labor promised it and Labor has not delivered it for the Mackay region. It is 20 months since the promise was made, and we have not heard a peep about funding for Mackay's GP superclinic.

But I would like to talk briefly on another project that I and concerned locals will no doubt have to fight hard to see delivered. The Blacks Beach spit is an area of coastal land with important environmental qualities that will be destroyed if it is allowed to be developed. As a councillor on the Mackay Regional Council, I lobbied for the council to purchase the Blacks Beach spit to ensure that that area was protected. It is time for this Labor-Greens government to return some of the funds to the economy's engine room, the Mackay region, so it can make a genuine, real investment in the environment. So the Mackay community actually did not get much in this budget, especially when you compare it to the electorates of Lyne, New England and Denison. It is funny, that! It seems that to get any investment in our community of Mackay it takes the whole effort of the community. In that vein I would like to commend the team of people who helped fight for a headspace youth mental health centre for Mackay, a facility so badly needed in a town where social disadvantage adds further fuel to a suicide rate that is just so unacceptable. Mackay was promised a headspace, with the funding to happen sometime in 2013, and I want to put the government on notice here that I want to see those funds starting to flow from the first day in January. I fought very hard for this centre, so did our daily newspaper, the Daily Mercury, and so did Sandi Winner, then from the Mental Illness Fellowship of North Queensland. There was also a collaboration of other local mental health workers, GPs and youth organisations.

What the people of Mackay find especially perplexing, though, is this government's reluctance to invest money back into other parts of the economy that are actually producing the money for the nation. Continued ignorance of this economic fundamental absolutely will result in a shrinking economy and a smaller pie for everyone. There is no point sending truckloads of money from Central Queensland and North Queensland to Canberra if there is no road for the trucks. This budget's neglect of the Bruce Highway is an absolute insult to Central Queenslanders and North Queenslanders who drive, or try to drive, on that highway on a daily basis. They know that congestion around Mackay is absolutely out of control. They know that they have never seen so many potholes before in their lives. They know that they had to pay a flood levy out of their own pockets to get repairs done on that road.

During the recent Queensland election, the new premier, Campbell Newman, actually committed $1 billion to the state controlled but federally funded Bruce Highway. And what did Labor put in the budget for the Bruce Highway? What new thing did they put in this budget for the Bruce Highway? I can tell you: it was nothing. There was no new money for the Bruce.

We did not need less investment in infrastructure, we needed more. We need funding for the duplication of local access streets into Mackay's industrial hub of Paget. A huge increase in heavy traffic servicing the resource sector has had such an impact on roads like Connors Road, Paradise Street and Milton Street, which are the main roads into the industrial centre, that the lacework of potholes actually joined up and the bitumen disappeared.

Former Mackay Regional Council mayor, Col Meng, put a duplication of this road on his wish list to state and federal governments, and I am inclined to believe that such infrastructure is absolutely essential. I think we should be doing that for Connors Road, Milton Street and Paradise Street. And as much as this Labor government thinks it is spreading the wealth of the mining boom around by throwing money at people for no return, it is actually missing the point. Some of that wealth needs to be reinvested in future wealth and to creating that bigger pie.

Just as importantly, if you want to talk about a two-speed economy, why are you not investing wealth poached from the mining sector into the sectors that actually are struggling? For instance, tourism in my electorate in the Whitsundays is on its knees. After weathering this barrage of natural disasters and associated damage to its image the industry actually faces now a high Australian dollar, and that drives tourists overseas. But in addition, this budget increases the passenger movement charge from $47 to $55 per passenger and it reduces Tourism Australia's budget by 6.2 per cent—or, in real terms, $8 million. It passed on the $118.1 million in costs related to the Australian Federal Police security in airports, which will actually go on to increase ticket costs. And on top of that, in just 39 days from today, I think, our tourism industry will be slugged with a carbon tax. I note that Cruise Whitsundays, which is an operator in my electorate, estimates additional costs of $770,000 over just three years as a direct result of the carbon tax and what it will do to marine diesel.

Tourism is an export industry, and I note that the government has moved to compensate other export industries for the carbon tax. So why not the tourism industry? Why does the Labor-Greens government hate tourism? Why does it not extend the regional investment and innovation fund to the Whitsundays, or areas like Cairns, where tourism is vital to the local economy and employment? That fund currently operates in the Illawarra, the south-east of South Australia and in Tasmania—all good Labor heartlands. But why not the Whitsundays or Cairns, where tourism is weathering the perfect storm and people are actually losing jobs? From my perspective, I am actually not convinced the fund is the best means of assisting industry, but that is the Labor way. That is how Labor deals with regional downturns, so if they are doing it in the Illawarra then they can do it for the Whitsundays and Cairns. I prefer to advocate for a different method of help. One of the ideas that have been put to me is a domestic holiday tax break to encourage Australians to holiday at home. Costs would be incurred as a result of keeping money in Australia, which helps. Profits would be made as a result of keeping money in Australia, and that helps to offset the cost.

But helping industry and encouraging growth, development and contribution are not in Labor's repertoire. Labor's modus operandi is industrial terrorism. While most Australians understand that our economic prosperity is underpinned by mining, Labor and the Greens have focused on undermining. Prime Minister Julia Gillard and the Greens have undermined our future. They have undermined mining itself. They undermine the resources sector with the mining tax. They have undermined exporters with the carbon tax. They have undermined investment and productivity with red and green tape. We saw with the Abbot Point multi-cargo facility—which carried the hopes and dreams of so many North Queenslanders, families and residents of Bowen—that they stalled it for 17 months, with the application gathering dust on the Federal environment minister's desk. The extreme Greens, whose mission in life is to stop anyone from making money, enlisted the help of a herd of extreme left-wing organisations and rabid environmental groups, using deceitful tactics to prevent any kind of development they could. Their mission was to kill the very industry that creates the money that this government funds them with. It does fund them through the tax-deductibility status that a lot of them have. These are groups that were supporting and bankrolling a campaign to bring Abbot Point to its knees. It seems to me that this government is adept at shooting itself in the foot by aligning itself with these people, as it has in this parliament. It is time we reviewed the register of tax-deductibility for these extreme environmental groups and struck off any organisation whose operations are not in the best interests of the Australian people.

This government continually says one thing and does something so completely different. It says it wants to protect the environment and invest in renewables. If that is the case, why is this government—especially the Greens—not backing a national ethanol mandate? They want us to use renewables, but they cannot afford to be seen to be adopting coalition policy like direct action. Ethanol is a known and proven technology. A national ethanol mandate would secure the future of the proposed ethanol plant in the Burdekin and also the operating plant we have in Sarina. Australia currently produces less than 50 per cent of the oil that it consumes, and dependency on exports is expected to reach 80 per cent by 2030. While I acknowledge the retention of the ethanol excise rebate, the problem is that there is no stability in terms of demand. It will no doubt come back to the state government to maintain diversity for sugar by bringing in a state-based mandate. I think an incremental introduction could be achieved by introducing a regional mandate from Bundaberg north.

One area north of my electorate is Townsville. The government is determined to trash the Labor brand in that area. Townsville is actually home to the 3rd Brigade and the 11th Brigade at Lavarack Barracks, as well as 10 FSB and the RAAF base at Garbutt. On their behalf, I have a message for the Prime Minister. North Queensland is immensely proud of its Defence Force, as is the rest of the nation. Men and women in the armed forces devote their life to this country. They earn our respect and they always have, yet we have had almost $5½ billion cut from defence while our soldiers are overseas serving. It was disgraceful. The Prime Minister and the defence minister were in Townsville on the weekend. There was a welcome home parade, but they could not bring themselves to attend it, even though they were down the road waiting in a hangar for a plan to take off that afternoon. They could have attended it. The Prime Minister and this government have done nothing for our servicemen and servicewomen in the past. This Labor government is almost worse than the Taliban for the ADF, and the cuts are testament to that fact. (Time expired)

Deborah O'Neill (Robertson, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on Appropriations Bill (No. 1) 2012-2013 and related bills. As the member representing the electorate of Robertson on the Central Coast, I fully support this legislation and the budget it supports. It is a Labor budget that reveals Labor values. It is all about spreading the benefit of the boom to all corners of our country—to families and to small businesses in particular. It will return us to surplus and allow the Reserve Bank all the room needed to cut interest rates if they need to. This is a critical budget for Australia and it is a great thing that we have a Labor government right now making sure we continue the excellent work that was undertaken during the global financial crisis. I say that it is a Labor budget that reveals Labor values. There is considerable literature about what happens to people's values responses when they hit a crisis situation. It is very clear to the Australian public now that when the GFC hit Australia Labor reverted to our values. We kept Australia working. We kept Australians learning. In this budget, we have made sure that, while we have been extremely fiscally responsible and cut $33 billion to enable us to come back to that surplus, we have stayed true to the things that we believe in. We have continued to support jobs. We have continued to support and enable economic growth because we believe in Australia's capacity to innovate and be successful in industry and business in this sort of climate. We believe in families, we believe in education and we believe in health. All these things are in the budget and we are funding to support growth and the necessary development in those areas.

One of the things that is very troubling at this time in politics in Australia is the incredible gap between what really happens here in Canberra and what gets reported in the gossip-scandal cycle. Of course, we should shine a light on all elements of the parliament. But when we look at the budget, when we shine the light carefully on that, we see what the real things are that this Labor government is doing for Australia. There are so many good things to flow into the life of our community, to the families in my seat and to the families in the seats of the other members here in this chamber, to those who employ so many people, our small businesses, and to young people, who need education, support in to work and training. There is money in our budget to support the aged and infirm who need care and healing. All of these things are within the budget and vitally important to communities such as mine.

Our Labor budget is a budget in globally uncertain economic times. It delivers essential infrastructure and services as well as help for families and households who need it because we understand the real lives of ordinary Australians. This is a budget that brings the benefits of the mining boom to the doorstep of the Central Coast. The resources sector is not a pillar of the Central Coast economy but, thanks to the Labor government, we in Robertson will reap the benefits of our nation's mining wealth. There will be benefits for locals from Kariong, Springfield and Erina who will access the wealth of this mining boom through Family Tax Benefit Part A payments which will see an increase of $600 for more than 10,000 families in the seat of Robertson alone. Benefits from the mining boom include a supplementary allowance for more than 9,100 young people, single parents and unemployed people in Robertson.

This is real money for real people, delivered by a Labor government that accepts the responsibility of moving all Australians forward together and not leaving some behind. We understand that people who need a hand to pay for essential services like electricity, gas and water will benefit from money that is flowing to them from this budget not only because they need it to help them manage their lives but also because it is a sense of belief in their capacity. It is looking after those who might have fallen on hard times until they are able to pick themselves up and move on. Singles are going to receive a supplementary allowance of $210, while couples will receive $350.

In addition, we are investing in our kids. The schoolkids bonus, which I can hardly believe the opposition voted against, will provide assistance to about 1.3 million Australian families, with about 2.2 million Australian children ready to be advantaged by this. This bonus, which we absolutely believe parents will be well and truly able to spend in their own child's interests, will pay for things such as uniforms, school shoes, textbooks, stationery and camps. As a former teacher, I can tell you what a relief it will be to teachers across this nation. The parents of children who once upon a time would have been coming to school looking for a little bit extra to be able to go on an excursion because their parents were so disadvantaged that they were unable to have the money in the bank to help their kids will now be able to allocate funds to ensure that their children do not miss out on the vital learning that happens when you take a school group of kids on an excursion.

This is not a small amount of money, and it is a significant investment in parents, who are going to have $410 a year for each child in primary school and $820 a year for each child in secondary school. Because the payment is made up-front and is automatic, it is quite different from the education tax refund. Parents do not need to keep receipts anymore. They will have this guaranteed payment up-front so that they can have the money and plan for spending it appropriately on their kids. Already, in schools in my electorate, principals are speaking with one another about how they might be able to provide some financial guidance to parents about the things that are on the horizon. Kids who once upon a time could never have thought of going on an overseas excursion with their class—to the Western Front, for example, to go and see where our soldiers died; an enrichment learning opportunity to understand their history and the history of the world—can begin to think that maybe it is possible for them. For the first time, this is going to happen for many, many young people.

Parents will receive the full amount every time. So families will not miss out if they lose receipts, as has happened in the past. Importantly, this bonus, which will come to families as of 20 June this year, will continue in the new year, being paid in two amounts: at the beginning of the year, in term 1, and then again in the middle of the year, in term 3, which is usually when I find that the school shoes start to wear and the books start to look a little ratty, and when, if they have been working very hard, they need replacement texts to go on with. There are also changes of courses that happen for students in the middle of the year.

I also think that the amount of $820 to help parents with bringing up a teenager is a really significant help in communicating to the kids the value of education—to say to them, 'The government believes in you; they believe in you so much that they are going to give us $820 to help you get through school.' If the kids are anything like my teenagers and the teenagers I have spent so much of my life teaching, I am pretty sure that they will be watching to make sure that they get their fair share of that $820 and directing the way in which it might go.

As for other important efforts that have been made in this budget to make sure that all Australians move forward together, I turn now to the real infrastructure that we are supporting. We are really committed to making sure that communities such as mine are able to go on with developing things in the community. So, in my local area, key projects such as the Macmasters Beach surf club upgrade, the $2 million Ettalong Beach foreshore redevelopment project, the Umina surf club upgrade, and the refurbishment of the Coast Community Centre in Gosford, known to locals as Coast Shelter, were all funded in this budget. These are projects that I have worked hard alongside the community to deliver, and they have a commitment from this government that those funds will be paid. That will change the lives of all of the members of the community who interact with those services and places of gathering in the seat of Robertson.

Through this budget, delivering on the commitments to my local community and extending them, community infrastructure support funds will be given to Gosford council in the amount of $1.808 million from the Gillard government through the Roads to Recovery program. This is an important grant for the council to assist with the maintenance and upgrade of local roads through the Roads to Recovery program. There is also the $5.5 million allocated to progressing the Gosford passing loops as part of the Northern Sydney Freight Corridor upgrade. Also, as we know, the delivery of a dedicated line for rail freight north of Sydney will certainly help improve the reliability of the passenger rail networks for Central Coast commuters. It is frustrating enough that workers travelling from the Central Coast to Sydney spend dozens of hours a week on trains supposedly running on time; they certainly do not need the added inconvenience of a freight train breaking down and causing delays on the passenger line. In relation to infrastructure, perhaps the most significant point in the budget for the Central Coast is the $150 million contribution by the Gillard government towards the F3-M2 missing link, as well as the offer to the NSW state government of $25 million to establish a special purpose vehicle which would bring financing of the F3-M2 project to the market. This project is long overdue, especially for the suffering Central Coast road users who travel to Sydney's west or beyond on a regular basis, either to places of employment or to do their business.

The allocation by the government puts the ball squarely back in the court of Barry O'Farrell in the New South Wales state government. Barry O'Farrell and his Central Coast Liberal representatives have been extremely coy on this issue. If they are going to walk away from the federal government's money then they need to stand up and say that to the local community. They need to look the community in the eye and explain why, currently, they refuse to support the F3-M2 missing link. This is not just a project for road commuters; it is a project that will improve the productivity of the Central Coast business community and make the Central Coast so much more accessible to people who want to come for holidays. Any local business who moves goods or supplies in and out of Sydney or through Sydney to the south of the state has a huge stake in seeing this project delivered. Every time you see a truck bound for the Central Coast stuck in gridlock on Pennant Hills Road, all you see is productivity essentially washing down the drain.

While the New South Wales Liberal government dithers on this issue, the Labor government is continuing to invest in business innovation. Over the coming years more than $1.2 billion in grants will be available for industry through clean technology programs for manufacturers to improve their efficiency and competitiveness. I am very pleased to inform the House that businesses in Robertson have received more than $3.8 million from Auslndustry since 2007. And, since 2007, Labor has supported 51 programs promoting business innovation in Robertson, totalling $1.87 million. A further five manufacturing programs have received assistance totalling more than $1.2 million. We had the most amazing innovation summit just last week, with my local community delighted that the NBN is rolling out in our area. That, again, is another transformer of the community—a sound, productive investment by this Labor government.

More than 15,600 small businesses exist on the Central Coast. We put $27.5 million into business advisory services, and our local business advisory service will stay alive and active. We are also providing a $6,500 instant asset write-off for eligible small businesses to help with cash flow and promote investment in pieces of equipment that are essential to the success of small business and to improving their productivity. We have also put in a loss carry-back scheme. In 2012-13 companies will be able to carry back tax losses of up to $1 million so that they get a refund against the tax they have previously paid. From 2013-14 companies will be able to carry back tax losses for two years, and that will provide a tax benefit of up to $300,000. This will certainly help companies to finance the investment, training and restructuring that is needed to improve their competitiveness, and this will certainly support productivity and promote employment.

At the core of this Labor budget is a budget for people, including support in the form of increased and improved health services, such as the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program. In my electorate, 18.9 per cent of people are over the age of 60, and they stand to benefit from that. Labor will also deliver a $500 million blitz on dental care. The COAG agreements have seen $21 million go to the GP helpline. I have got a $28 million regional cancer clinic and a $21.5 million investment in bringing back the rehab unit.

This budget is a proud Labor budget. It is a budget that will make a difference to the people of the Central Coast. I commend the bill to the House. (Time expired)

Judi Moylan (Pearce, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This budget can only be described as an opportunity lost. Rather than promoting growth and providing opportunity, it has delivered savage cuts and broken promises. It has failed to do much to improve productivity. Incredibly, the deficit has soared to $44 billion for this year, and $200 million will be cut from job service programs just when the economic outlook is so uncertain. Families are struggling with the rising costs of living and business confidence is at an all-time low. There are no coherent strategies to deliver economic growth and no agenda to tackle the structural problems that remove barriers to workforce participation. In workplace relations, the pendulum has now swung too far, with unions back in the driver's seat. Our national airline was crippled by protracted disputes going unresolved until the extraordinary shutdown of the airline propelled the government to take control. BHP has experienced 3,200 industrial episodes in the Bowen Basin alone and the union works on a threatening, stop-start process, where it begins an action and then calls it off.

Historically, unions have been pivotal to improving the lot of workers, but we must be wary of allowing the pendulum to swing too far. Our collective concerns should rest primarily with the right of workers to a fair wage and decent and safe working conditions. We cannot allow our enterprises to be held to ransom and we cannot continue to sanction action which sees a doubling of the number of lost working days due to industrial disputes, as the ABS reported for the period of 2010-11.

In these troubled financial times, we need people with clear heads and fair minds that can end the adversarial mindset between industry and unions. I noted the OECD's qualified confidence in the direction of Australia's financial management, which was reported in today's Australian. However, there are also warnings. There is an acknowledgement that Australia will rely mainly on the mining sector to meet its growth forecast. Personally, while as a member from Western Australia I certainly recognise the mining sector's contribution, I believe we should be working harder to diversify our economy and concentrate on lifting our productivity. Lifting productivity requires a long-term strategy. The US economist Paul Krugman said:

Productivity isn’t everything, but in the long run it is almost everything. A country’s ability to improve its standard of living over time depends almost entirely on its ability to raise its output per worker.

The key elements to lifting productivity are health and education. The average level of human capital, which refers to the skills and knowledge of individual workers and their ability to use them, is a critical element of productivity. Some earlier studies comparing Australia's low productivity to that of the United States suggest that it is due to the fact that the average level of schooling in the working age population in Australia is about half a year lower than that of the US. The conclusion is that, had Australia achieved similar average years of schooling to the United States over this period, Australia's gross domestic product might have been around two to three per cent higher than was recorded.

While recently the government has spent big on overpriced school halls, we missed the opportunity to spend where it really counts. That is on the best teacher education money can buy, including continuing in-service training and the retention of students in the education and training system, with a strong emphasis on science and technology training and education. While I note that we have given massive handouts to businesses, including $275 million to General Motors, $100 million to BlueScope Steel and $64 million to OneSteel, the Defence Science and Technology Organisation, DSTO, funding has again been cut despite an election promise in 2010 that they would receive an extra $138 million in the funding period between 2011-12 and 2012-13. Their budget will in fact be reduced by just over $22 million in that period up to 2013. Although $54 million has gone to encourage studies in maths and science, about $40 million of that will be clawed back in increased HECS fees for students of maths and science. It seems to me that this budget has a lot of pea and thimble tricks incorporated into it. While there has been a token increase the science and technology research, some of the very top science programs and organisations have been scrapped or had their funding scrapped. One of the key ways that we could lift productivity in this country is to remove the barriers to employment for those who are not working and who are currently relying on government pensions, so I was dismayed at the cruel result in the budget on single parents—and it is really cruel. I find it sickening. I heard the Treasurer, in his Press Club speech, talk about the difficult job of raising children and how it is the most important thing that most families do. So why does this government propose to move single parents from a social security pension to a Newstart allowance? They will have to somehow pay rent, food, utilities, fuel and schoolbooks on $265 a week, or $38 a day. I would like everyone in this place to try and live on that.

Such a cruel and unjustified move was not enough to bring the budget into surplus, so the government is also cutting the extra payment designed to help people gain skills or support to study in order to improve their financial prospects and to gain employment. Cutting this benefit will consign single parents raising children to the lowest-paid jobs in society, as they simply cannot afford to upskill or to gain a university degree. Rather than supporting people to gain financial independence, the government is perpetuating the cycle of poverty and reliance on welfare so that it can claim it is delivering a surplus.

It seems strange logic. This is a policy that is unjust beyond belief, and I will not support any legislation that seeks to enshrine these measures in legislation in this place. In the end it is not just single parents who are affected, because we all live together in society and this can only perpetuate cycles of poverty that give rise to many of the social problems we are all affected by today.

As a parent I wholeheartedly agree that raising children is the most important mission that we have, and an incredibly difficult task. So why would the government take $60 a week off 100,000 single parents when their youngest child turns eight, when some of the most challenging years of child rearing lie ahead?

I just listened to the member for Robertson talking about how schools might pool together and use the benefits that the government is now paying to families out in the community; that they might go to the Western Front with this money. I can say to you, Mr Deputy Speaker, that these kids of single parents will not be having any holidays, and they will not be doing any school excursions because their parents will barely be able to keep a roof over their heads, put food on the table and in their mouths and clothe them. That is a fact.

Compounding the problem for those on low incomes in this country, particularly single parents, is the lack of affordable housing. I would draw the attention of this House to the rental affordability snapshot report by Anglicare, because it makes very sobering reading.

The other component to a productive nation, though, is health. Very often this is also linked very strongly to those families who are on low incomes and who are struggling. They are struggling to eat healthy food and they are struggling to go to the doctor for a health check-up. So health is also very important to all of us, and last month I had the extraordinary privilege of being a guest of Novo Nordisk at the European Diabetes Leadership Forum. Australia was invited as a member of the OECD. Novo Nordisk is a world leader in diabetes care, and it employs some 30,000 people in 74 countries around the world, including Australia. Corporate social responsibility is at the foundation of all that it does, and in this respect no stone was left unturned to bring the world's leading researchers and clinicians to address this forum. I do thank the managing director in Australia, Petter Solberg, for affording me the opportunity to participate in this outstanding forum.

The theme of the forum was 'Today, we can change tomorrow'. The outcomes of the forum are the subject of a draft document—the Copenhagen Roadmap. This builds on the United Nations Resolution 61/225 on diabetes, to which Australia was a signatory, as well as a recent political declaration of the 2011 UN high-level meeting on the prevention and control of noncommunicable diseases. The concluding summary of the forum determined that good health equals wealth and that without a strong national policy to put diabetes and associated non-communicable diseases at the forefront, the increasing debt burden threatens to cripple both developed and developing countries.

Diabetes is a silent killer which is a leading cause of major complications such as blindness, limb amputation, cardiovascular disease and renal failure, just to name a few of the complications. This can mean a person must retire prematurely from the workforce. It may mean that another member of the family must leave the workforce to care for them. There is a personal cost attached to the difficulties of people with diabetes as well as a national cost. Undetected and untreated, the malevolent march of diabetes will require a higher cost of intervention. It is important to note that the highest costs associated with diabetes are for the treatment of complications rather than the initial cost of medication that may help to keep a person well.

As obesity is one of the key drivers of diabetes and indeed of non-communicable diseases, I refer members to the excellent paper presented by the OECD called Obesity update 2012. This paper highlights the costs associated with diabetes and the complications that may keep people out of the workforce and ultimately affect our national productivity.

The clinical based evidence presented in the forum once again highlights the urgent need for Australia to restate its commitment to a national diabetes plan and for that plan to be properly resourced so that we can prevent the escalation of diabetes. Unchecked and untreated diabetes threatens individual quality of life, it threatens the financial stability of individuals and families and it becomes an increasing cost burden on the nation.

It is a great concern to me that, although we have had over many years strong bipartisan support for making diabetes a national priority, that seems to have slipped in recent years. One of the programs that we worked hard to fund was the insulin pump program, particularly for children. That has gone through at least one review that I am aware of to make it more accessible. That program seems to have had cuts applied to it in the budget. I met today with the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation's national Chief Executive Officer, Mike Wilson. He tells me that currently they are providing about 15 pumps a month for children with type 1 diabetes. They are very important for people who have brittle diabetes—that is, diabetes that cannot be treated in the normal way. The government is going to severely limit the number of these pumps that can be provided on the subsidised program to about 50 or 60 a year. This in no way will meet the current demand and it certainly is not providing best practice medicine for children in this country who, sadly, live with the serious impact of type 1 diabetes in their lives.

Finally, I would commend the House to read the full report on the Copenhagen Roadmap and to read the OECD report on obesity and diabetes. (Time expired)

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

Amid all of the political noise, rancour, mud-slinging and dirt, we should remind ourselves where we are as a nation. If any of you look at the two books that have been published on this subject at the moment, The Australian Moment by George Megalogenis or The Sweet Spot by Peter Hartcher, it is difficult to believe that Australia is in such strong circumstances, that we are so highly thought of all over the world, that we enjoy the best lifestyle, the most human rights and are some of the happiest people on the planet.

Looking into the Australian parliament, that has descended into a pit of acrimony since the current Leader of the Opposition took over and since we have had the unfortunate circumstances of a hung parliament and a minority government, you would never understand that reality. I actually give those two books to foreign dignitaries, not just as a patriot but as a person who is very proud of the economic reforms that Australia has undertaken and the tolerant lifestyle that we have; the determination of people here to see that people of all backgrounds get on and, as the great Martin Luther King said, judge people by the content of their character, not by the colour of their skin.

Australia is one of only four countries whose economy has grown since 2009. The others are South Korea, Poland and Israel. We have 4.8 per cent unemployment—the lowest unemployment rate in the industrialised world. Our interest rates are lower than at any time under the previous government. As the Treasurer said the other day, people are saving $1,300 a year compared to the interest rates under the last period of the previous government. Our growth rate is projected at 3.1 per cent. Our projected budget surplus is $1.5 billion due to measures that the Treasurer, the Prime Minister and the Expenditure Review Committee took—to cut very severely $44 billion to achieve it.

We have 3.2 per cent economic growth, less than five per cent unemployment and a budget surplus—other countries would kill for these circumstances. When you look at the poor people of Greece or Spain—even our friends in the United States, with eight or nine per cent unemployment—they marvel at Australia. Of course we have been the beneficiaries of the mineral boom. But look at the sordid front page of any of the newspapers—and I have to agree with the Acting Speaker about the Murdoch press—you would never recognise the country that we live in. People overseas, as I say, just marvel at what a great country Australia is.

The OECD report today—that Australia is set to grow at the fastest pace in the developed world and that the combined debt of Australia, state and federal, is the lowest of any member nation of the OECD—says that Australia is expected to grow more strongly than every single major developed advanced economy over the next two years. As the Treasurer announced in question time—I do not think any members of the opposition listened to it—we have 9.6 per cent of debt to GDP, again the lowest in the world. The Italians have 100 per cent and Japan 200 per cent of debt to GDP, yet we have all of these siren calls from the member for North Sydney and the member for Goldstein about the level of debt that Australia has. In 2008 this Labor government, like all governments at the time, was faced with a global financial crisis. The crisis sent the share market crashing and caused 25 per cent unemployment in Spain—it is actually 50 per cent in some places in Spain, especially among young people. In Barcelona, 50 per cent of people under 30 are unemployed. It crippled the United States and caused growth to slow in Japan and South Korea—our strong trading partners.

In short, no corner of the globe was spared from the crisis. Here in Australia, yes, we were left a surplus by the previous government, but armed with the right policy and the will to act, Labor ensured that the Australian people did not feel the adverse effects of the financial meltdown. The member for Lilley has been recognised by Euromoney magazine and virtually all serious financial commentators around the world as having done a splendid job in steering Australia through the GFC, continuing to run tight budgets, keeping the pressure on interest rates down and seeing that Australia continues to proposer through this period. If Australia had not done that, we would have faced a very different and stark economic reality here at home. Where government can help, it should. The budget delivered two weeks ago continues the tradition of ensuring everyone benefits from a strong and prosperous nation.

I note the strong changes in public opinion on the mining tax, and that underlines the fact that everyone wants to benefit from a strong and prosperous nation, not just some of our oligarchs who are fortunate enough to be in charge of large empires that are involved in mining. This government has introduced historic pension reforms, the biggest in 100 years of the pension. We have passed and implemented a historic paid paternal leave scheme without increasing taxation.

I do share the frustration expressed by Minister Shorten, the member for Maribyrnong, on Insiders that the coalition, who now complain about the government not implementing the company tax legislation, said that they were going to oppose it in the Senate with the Greens. Of course we should be cutting the rate of taxation on companies in Australia to the levels of our neighbours in East Asia, but we cannot do that if a bloody-minded coalition wants to vote with the Greens. They are doing similar things with their hypocritical attitude on the so-called Malaysian option that we have. Here we have the coalition in bed with the Greens on opposing returning people to Malaysia who are asylum seekers but who may not qualify. They are again siding with the Greens on keeping the level of company tax up.

On top of that they have got this absurd levy—a 1.7 per cent increase in company tax—that they are going to put through to fund a parental leave scheme that is principally designed to alter the attitude of women towards the Leader of the Opposition. He knows from polling that the female part of the population is critical in their attitude towards him. Even Blind Freddy could see that this scheme of his, funded by this absurd extra levy on business, is designed to affect his image.

Labor has initiated the biggest infrastructure projects this country has ever seen: the National Broadband Network, sending engineers, construction workers and builders to work. We do this to ensure that the student living in the country can take his classes at home, online, without having to travel four hours to the nearest city, and to enable the entrepreneur to reach out to investors across the world with the touch of a button. The investment in school infrastructure was forgotten and neglected under previous Liberal governments. As we expand our population with our immigration program of 180,000 a year, of course we have got to do these kinds of things. I am sure every opposition member who has gone along to a BER opening that they decry so strongly in the House of Representatives has been happy to stand there at the opening. They understand that this is not a waste of money, that this has provided infrastructure that we absolutely need all around the country, because we have more children as a result not only of a natural increase in our population but above all by our strong immigration program, which I support. If the coalition were honest enough to continue their support of the program, they would be consistent and support the expenditure on the new facilities that the government has helped to build via the Building the Education Revolution program. This government has passed historic healthcare reform, including investment in dental health. This year's budget includes the good work of $3.7 billion investment into aged-care reform. I am particularly pleased to see aged-care reform and the impact it will have on benefiting residents in my electorate. We are implementing the first tranche of the National Disability Insurance Scheme—a first for Australia and a reform worthy of any government that has the appellation 'Labor' on it.

In my electorate of Melbourne Ports, extra support has been given to low- and middle-income families. Four thousand local families will see increases in family payments of up to $600; 2,850 local families with kids at school will receive the schoolkids bonus, giving extra support to families who need it the most; and 6,331 young people—single parents and unemployed—who receive allowances will get extra support.

We have seen the Clean Energy Bill aimed at reducing our carbon emissions, historic tax cuts to families and students, a further pension increase and assistance to single parents. The Liberal Party would see all of these increases ripped away. I know they love the term 'clawback'. They applaud it during question time when the minister uses that expression. They get very excited by it. But that is precisely what they would do. Their ridiculing of the schoolkids bonus was shameful in the sense that they said that parents would not use that money responsibly.

Finally, I turn to one area of funding that I am particularly interested in, in my capacity as Chairman of the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade, and that is overseas representation and funding for DFAT. The budget announced the funding of a couple of new embassies and consul-generals in Senegal and China. That is a good development. In the past 20 years, our diplomatic corps has shrunk too much. We need to re-resource DFAT. We have one of the lowest levels of overseas representation in the OECD. I know that the hate media of the Herald Sun, the Courier-Mail and the Daily Telegraph will denigrate this as 'tall poppies' wanting overseas trips. We are a big country; we are a confident country. We should have a proper level of representation overseas, befitting our size and our national interests, which are not simply those of Cabcharge journalists working for News Limited.

Even with the two new embassies that have been put into the budget, we have only 97 missions. The OECD average is 150. We need to seriously look at assisting the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. As my friend Dr Paul Monk has said, while the federal public service grew a whopping 25 per cent between 1996 and 2008, DFAT contracted by 11 per cent. Over the past 20 years, DFAT's diplomatic corps has shrunk by nearly 40 per cent, from 870 in 1989 to 537 in 2009. Although various amounts of money passed through DFAT for various purposes over the past decade, resourcing has shrunk from 0.43 per cent of the budget to 0.25 per cent of federal government spending. The most significant consequence of this reduction, both relative and absolute, is what the present Secretary of DFAT, Dennis Richardson, has described as the near incapacitation of our overseas representation. I think we should do more. The opening of the embassies in Dakar and Chengdu is a good measure. This year's budget ensures that Australia as a whole will benefit from a strong and prosperous economy. The government has a proud record of legislative reform, which I have outlined. All of these reforms have been achieved through the prism of a minority government. This should not be forgotten. Labor has been able to pass every single piece of legislation put to this parliament. (Time expired)

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

Before I call the member for Tangney, I want to assure the member for Melbourne Ports that I acknowledge his references to the media in the early part of his speech and, later, his concern about the role of the media and the importance of that in our democracy.

Dennis Jensen (Tangney, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Treasurer has introduced his fifth budget, which he is proud to say stays true to Labor ideals. The key ingredient of Labor policy is the idea that all of society's ills can be cured politically, but this outlook leaves the budget with no coherent economic strategy to drive growth in the economy, to lift productivity or to create jobs. The government vaunts stimulus as the reason that our economy avoided recession. Any analysis of the degree of economic recession and the amount of stimulus pumped into other nations' economies demonstrates that stimulus was not an important element in staving off recession. Indeed, how could this be the case when the last of the stimulus projects was only finished recently, nearly four years after the onset of the GFC? It was not stimulus that saved our economy but the fundamental strength created by the Howard years—with the improvement of prudential arrangements, prudent financial management and record surpluses—that took the brunt of the Rudd stimulus spending spree. We need to compare our economy with those in our region that we are engaged with, not with OECD economies. Compared with them, our economy is no standout.

The government talks about its predicted surplus being good in terms of the Reserve Bank reducing interest rates. If a $1.5 billion surplus gives even a one-quarter per cent reduction in interest rates, surely the government can see that a $44 billion deficit in the last year and deficits for the past four years have put significant pressure on the economy the other way. The Treasurer is heavy on rhetoric about what he calls 'the big-spending Howard government', but, in all of his budget years, expenditure as a percentage of GDP has been well above that of the last year and the second last year of the Howard government.

In each sector of the economy, the Prime Minister and her cabinet have offered a vision at odds with the core principles of economic freedom. This obsolete vision favours politically well-connected unions at the expense of workers and small competitors. It is a vision that creates inequality by favouring organisations with the best connections over those with the best ideas. It is a vision that inhibits growth by increasing the cost of complying with growing government regulation, instead of leaving business with more money and more freedom to hire staff, create jobs and foster our economy.

This budget confirms that Julia Gillard and Wayne Swan have no plan to build a stronger economy, repay debt or create secure jobs. It is a blueprint for more borrowing, more taxes and record debt, with the world's biggest carbon tax and a record debt ceiling of $300 billion—raising the debt ceiling when you say you are going to get a surplus. Why do you need that? There has been a blow-out in this year's deficit, from $23 billion to $44 billion, meaning more debt left for future generations to repay. By 2015-16, the government will be spending over $8 billion a year, or $22 million a day, on interest payments alone. All of this is despite the fact that in real terms the government are experiencing the fastest growth in revenue since the mid-1980s. It is very hard for the government to ask Australians to live within their means while they refuse to live by their own gospel here in Canberra. This is Labor's legacy: waste and reckless spending. It is a tough argument to make that the spending priorities the Prime Minister is determined to protect are really so critical. In the business world—the real world, that is—few of the government's policies, programs, subsidies and handouts would pass an honest benefit-cost analysis. In this class-war budget, it is also a tough argument for the government to make that the wealthy do not pay their fair share, with the mining tax, the carbon tax, the cancellation of the cut to the company tax rate and a myriad other hits on business to redistribute income to those who seldom deserve it. Let me assure you: those who may be better off are paying more than their fair share. A wealth distribution bent is being manifested in all Gillard government policies: quick-fix tax-grabs to plug budget black holes and pay for idealistic—or, dare I say it, ideological—policies. The minerals resource rent tax, formulated without due consideration, is at the heart of this philosophy. 'Tax the rich to give to the poor,' says this government, 'and all of our problems will suddenly go away.' But, like any fairytale, it is not quite that simple. Mining accounts for nearly two-thirds of the value of Australia's exports of goods, and one-half of Australia's total exports of goods and services. Mining directly employs 224,000 Australians, and there are tens of thousands of additional workers, in manufacturing, mining services, construction and infrastructure, supporting the mining sector. That makes the sector a major driver of growth today, and investment in this sector will add to Australia's economic activity for many years to come. It is interesting: the government keeps hitting the middle and the big end of town with this budget, yet its fundamental success relies on the continued profitability of these taxpayers.

The mining tax is not the cure-all the Treasury is searching for to bring the budget into surplus, and its inequities greatly impact on my home state of Western Australia. Australia has retired the sheep and is now riding on Western Australia's back. Western Australia's role in supporting the entire Australian economy with growth, jobs and investment has gone from important to critical in the federal budget. But, rather than rewarding a booming state carrying our nation, Western Australia's share of GST revenue has deteriorated beyond any worst-case scenario. This year, it will drop to 55c in the dollar—a loss of $662 million overnight, leaving Western Australia with the lowest share of GST of any state, ever.

A GST slap in the face from the federal government means greater pressure is placed, unfairly, on all Western Australians to meet the costs of the national economy. Seventy per cent of all new jobs in the last year were created in Western Australia. In the year to February 2012, the only place where manufacturing employment grew was in Western Australia. Seven thousand manufacturing jobs were created in the last quarter alone. With just over 10 per cent of the nation's population, in the next year Western Australia will contribute 20 per cent of all company tax, around 60 per cent of the minerals resource rent tax and 40 per cent of Australia's total exports.

Fair and equitable federal policy would at least allow the nation's most productive state to receive its fair share of revenue, of Commonwealth infrastructure spending and appropriate funding for key policy issues such as jobs and trades training. But this budget confirms that core Labor policy is to penalise success and subsidise inefficiency. Their decision to cancel a company tax rate cut informs this House that the life of the Gillard government has been placed before the fiscal interests of the nation. Gone are tax cuts, replaced by handouts and enticements towards a Labor brand that is growing more toxic by the day. It is yet another broken promise from the government.

So is the Prime Minister engaging in class warfare? Definitely. Is she ignoring the waste of big government and idealistic social policy? Absolutely. Has she given up on reality? Certainly. To the detriment of all Australians, it is just political reality that now matters to the Gillard government.

The first broken promise of this government, the world's biggest carbon tax, is about to hit families, jobs and investment. The budget papers confirm that, despite falling international prices, Labor's toxic tax will go up to $29 a tonne in just three years. The biggest problem with a carbon tax remains that it makes our most important everyday utilities like power, gas and water more expensive. I know from meeting with families and businesses in Tangney that they do everything that they can to minimise their utility usage to reduce costs and cannot be accused of being wasteful. Labor said it would make heroic cuts to government to reduce the burden on all Australians. Well, all the cuts are being made, but they are being made by families. They are going to have to pay this insidious tax.

The list of problems inherent in this tax is quite literally endless. A threshold of 25,000 tonnes of CO2 equivalent as a cut-off for determining which companies should pay this tax is entirely arbitrary. It distorts the competitive playing field of a free market by heavily taxing one company that is just above threshold while giving a massive competitive advantage to another company that is just below. This act is a disincentive for companies to grow, create jobs and foster the economy. Of the 248 companies determined by the government's Clean Energy Regulator to pay this tax, 93 are mining operations that will suffer hits to their productivity that will flow to the prosperity of our national economy.

Twenty-eight of the carbon tax companies are electricity providers and 39 are gas providers. These companies remain impervious to the carbon tax due to little competition in the energy sector. Any production price rises will be passed straight to households and businesses without a second thought. Australian households are set to suffer a 25 per cent increase in health costs, a 31 per cent increase in education costs, a 39 per cent increase in gas prices, a 59 per cent increase in water and sewerage prices and a 66 per cent increase in electricity prices—all with little or no difference to the amount of carbon in the atmosphere. The coalition will continue to fight this insidious tax in opposition and repeal it in government.

Julia Gillard has also broken her solemn promise, set out in the 2009 defence white paper, to increase defence spending by three per cent in real terms until 2017-18. Labor has cut a further $5.5 billion from Australia's defence budget on top of the $2.5 billion it cut last year. Defence spending has fallen below 1.6 per cent of nominal GDP—the lowest since pre World War II as a percentage of GDP. America is spending less on defence. China is spending more. There could not have been a better time for Australia to step up and be prepared to provide greater assistance to the US in stabilising our region. Labor has mothballed a substantial number of our armoured personnel carriers and tanks. Stage 1 of the troubled Joint Strike Fighter program will be pushed back by another two years, and the new P-8 Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft and Land 400 combat vehicles will be pushed back by a year. This ludicrous compromise of Australia's national defence and security is an affront to our national sovereignty for the sake of a paper surplus that will never see the stamp of the Governor-General.

It is hardly surprising that these horrendous cuts have been subject to widespread criticism from nearly all major think tanks and policy institutes in the country. The federal government has a critical role to play in safeguarding free enterprise so that corruption is punished, success is rewarded and the impositions of government are not skewed against small business people, the innovator or the worker. The Prime Minister refuses to take responsibility for Labor's budget shortfalls and instead continues to introduce policies that have put us on this path of debt and deficit. The coalition rejects this government's broken policies. The Liberal charter outlines our beliefs on this side. We believe 'in government that nurtures and encourages its citizens through incentive, rather than putting limits on people through the punishing disincentives of burdensome taxes and bureaucratic red tape' and that 'businesses and individuals—not government—are the true creators of wealth and employment'. As MPs we must always ask: 'Is this something that needs to be done by government or are we contributing to a wider problem of government growth and private enterprise subversion?'

We have a strong agenda to drive economic growth, productivity and employment. We have done it before and we will do it again. We will cut the waste, reduce the spending, pay down government sector debt and lower taxation to reward hard work and reduce the fiscal drag on the economy. A strong productivity agenda will drive higher labour force participation and reduce red tape. Australians want a government that can deliver an economic strategy to build a stronger Australia, reduce the cost-of-living pressures and create secure jobs. (Time expired)

Ms Catherine King (Ballarat, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Health and Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today in support of Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2012-13 and the other appropriation bills. This is a budget that Labor people can be very, very proud of. It is a budget that assists families with the costs of living; it is a budget that invests in skills and training across the nation; it is a budget that invests in health, in ageing and in vital infrastructure; and it is a budget that will return our budget to surplus. It is a Labor budget. It is what Labor governments do when they are in government. It stands in stark contrast to both the commentary and the actions of the federal Liberal Party, and it stands in stark contrast to the state budgets of the Liberal Party governments who are in Victoria and in New South Wales. This budget is squarely focused on assisting families and low- and middle-income earners. It is a budget that generates wealth, but it is also a budget that is fair. It is a budget that focuses squarely on helping families. It is a budget that focuses squarely on low- and middle-income earners and those that might be left behind in our economy.

I want to focus on a few issues that to me are the crux of this budget and its assistance to families. The schoolkids bonus is one. Across the federal electorate of Ballarat, over 9,950 families are expected to receive $410 a year for each child in primary school and $820 a year for each child in high school. It equates to some $10.5 million going straight into the pockets of families who live in the electorate of Ballarat and who send their children to primary or secondary school. The payment replaces the education tax refund. It was estimated that in my electorate there are some 1,800 families who never claimed the education tax refund but who were entitled to do so. Structuring the schoolkids bonus in this way means that families do not have to keep receipts and do not have to claim; they will get this as an automatic payment. It is very important in my area—$10.5 million is being invested in local families, and that money will come into my economy. What we saw from the Liberal Party was that they opposed the schoolkids bonus. Apart from being a stunningly ridiculous political tactic, it just sends a very clear signal to all of those families in my electorate that the Liberal Party do not understand what is happening with families in the electorate of Ballarat. Their opposition to the schoolkids bonus stands in stark contrast to the federal government's proposal of the schoolkids bonus and the eventual passage of it through this parliament.

The other area which I think is very important for families in my electorate is the family tax benefit part A. The federal budget is focused on spreading the wealth from the mining boom to those families that need it most. We acknowledge that mining is a very vital part of our economy, but we also acknowledge that wealth that has been generated is not being spread evenly. We want to be able to make sure that people in our economy are not left behind, and it is very important that families do not get left behind. As part of our budget we are increasing the family tax benefit part A payments to over 12,000 families in my electorate. That is an increase of over $600 which will start flowing from 1 July next year and will assist families with cost-of-living pressures.

Very importantly, I was very pleased to see in the budget that we are investing $1.1 billion to establish a new supplementary allowance to assist those people who have been hit particularly hard in recent times by the rising costs of living, such as those Australians who are unemployed—and I think many of us in this place acknowledge how difficult it is for people who are on unemployment benefits. Students or single parents who are on income support will now have access to this new supplementary allowance. The allowance is $250 for singles and $350 for couples who will benefit, and that is some 11,000 families in my electorate of Ballarat. That allowance will assist people across my electorate with the costs of electricity, gas and water, to name just a few things.

The other area that I think has been very important and widely well received is aged-care reform. Of course, it comes on the back of our historic increases to the pension. It was a Labor government that for the first time in 100 years increased the base rate of pension, because that is the sort of reform that Labor governments do. It was a historic reform and it has increased the pension by an extra $338 a year for singles and $510 for couples as additional payments.

The foundation for the government's sweeping reforms in aged care is also contained in the budget. To support our region's ageing population a new $3.7 billion funding commitment towards aged-care reform will see more in-home care support so people can live independently longer and will not be forced to sell the family home to pay for a bond in a nursing home. It will make access to aged care simpler from next year and will ensure that older Australians can receive care at home through a dramatic increase in home care packages. We have the circumstance in many cases across the country where people are assessed as eligible for community aged-care packages or dementia aged-care packages but are not able to receive them because there is a waiting list for those packages. By doubling the number of those in-home care packages we are making sure that there are more older people who can have the choice to stay at home for longer. Over the next 10 years the government's reforms will more than double that number of home care packages.

The government is also funding its fair share of building a National Disability Insurance Scheme through an investment of $1 billion over four years to start the scheme. From the middle of next year selected launch sites across the country will begin serving people with a disability. Many of the 7,000 people who access a disability support pension across my own electorate will hopefully benefit from this investment. It is a historic announcement for our nation. The approaches we have had to disability services in this country, frankly, have been a disgrace. We all know it is time for the National Disability Insurance Scheme and I dearly hope that state governments will come to the party and pay their fair share of the National Disability Insurance Scheme as well. We have had the arguments about this and the time has come to actually deliver this to the many people who have disabilities in our country.

Employment training and skills is something that, again, I am particularly proud of with the record of this government. I am particularly proud that in this budget we have continued our ongoing commitment to skills and training. It follows on, obviously, from our $3 billion over six years in the previous budget to skill Australia's future workforce. As part of this budget we have seen the investment of over $18 million to establish three Australian skills centres of excellence which are giving 21st century education to workers to prepare for the latest emerging industries. In addition the My Skills website will be improved to give greater detail on the quality and location of training providers. It will assist those looking for training and jobs on the ground with the greatest possible opportunities for their future. The National Workforce Development Fund is receiving a $35 million injection that will see mature-age workers upskilled to reskill across a number of areas where a shortage in skills is identified.

In addition to this some $19.4 million has been allocated to tradespeople who have recently become qualified to start up their own businesses. This funding will be used to help those who are finishing their apprenticeships to train in business and finance. We are also providing some $4.2 million to the Australian Skills Quality Authority to support higher quality training. We are investing some $225.1 million over four years in the very successful and very important Jobs, Education and Training Child Care Fee Assistance Program. It helps parents on income support to receive the training and skills they need to re-enter the workforce. It is a very important program.

The Gillard government have also offered the Victorian government more than $2.2 billion to support their reform of the training system, because we know the importance of investing in the skills and training of the Australian people. It is really important to emphasise that. The cuts to TAFE funding we have seen from the Victorian Liberal government are, frankly, unbelievable. It is politically unexplainable and counter to all of the work that we have been doing as a nation in developing skills and encouraging people to get into training.

Last week the University of Ballarat—it is one of the few dual sector universities in the country; it has a university and a TAFE—announced that it will have to reduce its courses and jobs as a result of the cuts. It is a disastrous outcome and one which totally ignores the vital national drive to continue to develop the quality workforce which is being demanded by industry. The Victorian government needs to explain how TAFEs can retain courses and continue to deliver skills to industry, and support regions and communities like my own, in the face of these substantial cuts to funding. The TAFE network is an essential public institution and one which the Gillard government values very highly. We have invested some $224 million in TAFEs over the last four years through projects that have upgraded facilities and equipment in 39 campuses across Victoria, in addition to the $360 million in funding provided on average each year.

Recently, this government provided $25 million to the University of Ballarat to lift education participation across the region. We are one of the regions that has a very low participation rate of postsecondary education. When you look up in the west of Victoria, past my electorate of Ballarat, into the Wimmera, into the member for Wannon's electorate, and on into the member for Mallee's electorate, the participation rates are even lower still. We have provided $25 million to the University of Ballarat to work with other TAFE providers to actually get TAFE education into these regions, but the state government, at the same time as we are investing $25 million in the University of Ballarat, has cut $20 million—40 per cent of the TAFE funding to the University of Ballarat. It is unsustainable and must be reversed.

TAFE is absolutely at the front line when it comes to giving the people of Ballarat and the regions the skills that they need to get a job. The Victorian government is risking significant skills shortages with its budget cuts, when some of the state's biggest training providers, like the University of Ballarat, are forced to downsize and reduce their courses. I am advised that the Victorian government decision will see funding at the University of Ballarat decrease by around $20 million—around 40 per cent of total TAFE funding. In excess of 50 TAFE courses are going to close.

Staff and students at the university are absolutely shocked by the decision, and I am particularly concerned that the decision is affecting some of the most vulnerable in our community, particularly those who have disabilities, who have learning difficulties and who are from low socioeconomic backgrounds. I know community leaders and the local business community have strongly condemned this decision. Not only will we not be developing people with the skills we need in this region, we will be putting quality trainers on the scrap heap. I urge families across my electorate to go along to the rally that is being held tomorrow at the University of Ballarat's SMB campus at 12:30. I know from Facebook that there are many, many people who have never been engaged in political rallies before who have been activated by this government's decision.

To me, it is an absolutely perfect example of why you need to not just listen to some of the spin that comes from Liberal politicians about what they think is a good policy outcome but actually look at what they do. Have a look at what Liberal governments are doing in states like my own, Victoria. They have an ideological opposition to TAFE, they have had for a very long time period of time, and they want to kill it. You can see no better example than what is happening in Victoria at the moment.

Frankly, I find it absolutely astounding and I think many National Party MPs in Victoria are dismayed at the decision. The minister in Victoria is dismayed at the decision that he has now had to go out and sell. I am sure it is not one he supports.

But what I say very clearly is: have a look at what good Labor governments do—what we do in terms of helping families; what we do about making sure we support low and middle income Australians; what we do to develop education, health, infrastructure and skills. Then have a really good look at what Liberal governments do in the states of Victoria, New South Wales and Western Australia. Have a look at what they actually do when they are in government, and have a good think about what that might mean federally.

The Australian people should be under no illusion that, if the Leader of the Opposition became Prime Minister, then we would once again see a Liberal government that rips funding out of education, that rips funding out of training and skills, that rips funding out of health and, instead, looks after its mates at the big end of town.

In conclusion, I want to say that the budget in my electorate has also invested significantly in health infrastructure. That has come on the back of the $42 million commitment to the Ballarat Regional Integrated Cancer Centre. We are also seeing $1.6 million go to Ballarat District Nursing and Healthcare, and $3.3 million to Ballan District Health and Care. I am very proud of the record that we have in my electorate of investment in infrastructure in health, and in roads, and in education, both within our TAFE and within our University of Ballarat. That is what good Labor governments do, and I am very proud to support this budget here in the appropriation bills.

Ewen Jones (Herbert, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Appropriation Bills for 2012-2013. When a Treasurer rises to give a budget night speech, it should be a great occasion and ceremony. Unfortunately, that has been trashed by this Treasurer. To have brought down a budget claiming austerity but presiding over spending of $370 billion and an increase in government revenue of some $39 billion, that is increased taxation.

For all the spending that this government does, Townsville received nothing in this budget. We got nothing for the Bruce Highway and we got nothing for infrastructure. We saw Defence stripped bare. We need a government that 'gets' Townsville, that can see that we punch above our weight in our contribution to the economy. We need a government that is prepared to plan for the future of North Queensland and to give us our fair share. Instead, this Labor budget has dudded Townsville and left us in the lurch.

Since he delivered the budget, the Treasurer has boasted about delivering the first of four years of surplus budgets—and he did it with a straight face; it was a credit to the rehearsal that he must have done—supposedly through tough budget cuts. The word 'productivity' to my reading was not mentioned once in his speech. Surely, we must look at the way we do things in this country and reward those who do them more efficiently, faster, with higher quality and better finish. We need to compete in a global market.

I am also struggling to understand why a government that believes it is delivering a surplus also needs to increase the Commonwealth debt limit from $250 billion to $300 billion in the same budget, leaving government debt at absolutely unprecedented levels. When you are making headway on your own mortgage and your home budget, and you are increasing your payments on your mortgage, the last thing you consider is to increase your mortgage limit. It just beggars belief.

This will also be Australia's first carbon tax budget. The real impact of this year's budget on Townsville households and businesses will begin when the world's biggest carbon tax starts on 1 July. We have seen the cash bribes blatantly trying to distract voters. We have seen the $36 million ad campaign which talks up the compensation without mentioning the reason that families need to be compensated. But you cannot compensate for a cascading and compounding tax that will act as a wrecking ball across my local community and my local economy. We will all be paying for this through increased prices, higher energy bills and pressure on local businesses who are still not going to receive any compensation. The pain from this tax is only going to get worse. The budget papers have confirmed that despite falling international prices, Labor's toxic carbon tax will steadily rise for three years. This is all coming despite the Prime Minister's declaration that there would be no carbon tax under the government she leads.

Townsville's small businesses, some 9,000 in number, are the heart of our local economy and they are struggling at the moment, especially in retail. I regularly receive emails from business owners telling me that times are tough and they are having trouble getting their bills paid. They look to this government to inject much-needed confidence into the business community with this budget. Instead, it has all but ignored them. The only people in Townsville who are super busy are the liquidators.

Small business owners are the ones who are prepared to take a chance, often risking their own home to start something new or take on another employee. We should be encouraging them, ensuring there is reward for these risks and opportunities to become more productive for the benefit of their business in the wider economy. Instead, this government is slapping them with the world's biggest carbon tax and offering only mirages of compensation. We drown them in red tape, regulations, fees and taxes. We just make it so hard for them to perform. This government has also abolished the entrepreneur's tax offset, designed to foster microbusinesses to assist them to get started.

It seems as though the only place that this government is prepared to make big spending cuts is in defence. This budget saw the biggest cut in defence spending since the end of the Korean war. Defence spending now is at its lowest level as a percentage of GDP since 1938. If you add the deferments and cancellations to the quoted $5.5 billion you will end up with defence copping it in the neck to the tune of $17.1 billion—and we have not even mentioned the submarine debacle. Australia is going to face critical capability gaps that will be felt for a whole generation simply because this Labor government cannot manage its finances.

I represent a city within which exists the largest army base in Australia. Lavarack Barracks is the home of the 3rd Brigade and 11th Brigade. We also have RAAF Base Garbutt and 10FSB at Ross Island. We are home to some 5,000 defence personnel. My defence personnel are the ones who get deployed. Townsville's defence family is the one that trains all the time in preparation for emergencies all over the world. You cannot rip $5.5 billion out of defence without hurting Townsville as a whole, and our ADF personnel in particular. The Prime Minister and the defence minister have been at pains to tell us that no-one in uniform will be affected, but when you delay, defer and cancel things such as this, how can it not have an effect on the troops on the ground? In times of trouble we do not turn to the department in Canberra, we turn to the men and women who are part of the redeployed units of 3rd Brigade, 11 Brigade and RAAF Base Townsville. Those guys deserve first-class training and first-class facilities; it is that simple.

I also worry about the relationship between the ADF and the government. I must be clear here and state that I have never heard a serving officer or member say a negative thing about the government. That is not their way; their way is to faithfully serve their country. We had a welcome home parade for some 1,100 soldiers and RAAF personnel. The Prime Minister and the defence minister had been to Townsville to meet the troops about to deploy. Their plane was grounded due to mechanical error. They could have made the parade for the returning men and women. That they chose to stay away speaks volumes, not about the Defence Force but about the respect in which the ADF is held by these two key politicians.

This was also another Labor budget that ignored the need for fairness for veterans. The Defence Force Retirement and Death Benefits Scheme, the DFRDB, is not indexed in the same way that age and service pensions are. Every year DFRDB recipients become a little worse off than those on other pensions. After 40 years this has left the pensions of those who served our country in poor shape. It is time we finally did something about it. I am proud that, in March, Tony Abbott recommitted the coalition to fix this problem once and for all. Townsville has a large veteran population and they and their families deserve fair indexation. A coalition government will deliver it and I urge this government to stop giving veterans a raw deal.

I was proud to be the first politician to support the NDIS in Townsville, but we must get it right. The fact that it has been politicised is beyond doubt. The way the funding was announced reminded me of the launch of the MSPT, the mining super profit tax. There were no discussions with the key players, the states. The Productivity Commission recommended that the Commonwealth fund 100 per cent of the scheme. The reasoning was that they are the only level of government capable of raising the expected $8 billion extra annually. To me that reasoning is sound. The announcement of a 78-22 split was made without any consultation with the states. The start of the scheme is underfunded by almost $3 billion. The government has three times refused to create a joint House committee on its establishment. That all this can happen as they raise hopes among the disability sector sounds exactly like that press conference in late May 2010 where the then Prime Minister and the current Treasurer launched the doomed mining super profit tax. If we do not deliver on this NDIS we will only have ourselves to blame. But we have to be straight up with the people and tell them why they need it and how it is going to be funded. We have to ask the community where the line will be drawn and what level of personal responsibility will be expected. We need to have the conversations with people not directly involved now and get them on board. What we have now is pure politics and it does none of us any good.

Townsville is a great destination for visitors, but even after recovering from cyclone Yasi the local tourism industry is still struggling. This reality has fallen on deaf ears in the Labor government. Instead of helping the local tourism industry they have used this budget to cut $8 million from Tourism Australia's budget and have failed to provide the industry with any compensation for the carbon tax, which is threatening around 6,400 jobs in the tourism business alone. This budget increases passenger movement charges to the tune of $668 million and pushes the cost of Federal Police back to the airports. That will only increase the costs to our tourism sector. It surely sends a message that this government simply does not care about this vital sector of our economy. Add to that the carbon tax on domestic airfares and it is no wonder tourism operators have given up hope that this government will do something, anything, for them.

The great disappointment for me in this budget is that there is next to nothing for Townsville and North Queensland. Townsville is a rapidly expanding city. Our population growth is more than double that of the rest of the country. In fact the member for Thuringowa, Sam Cox, in the state parliament said that Thuringowa is the second fastest growing area in Queensland. We need a government that will invest in the region to plan for the future now. Instead, we have a government that has completely ignored us. There is no new funding for the Bruce Highway. This is supposed to be the national highway and it has been in dire need of attention for decades to get more overtaking lanes and pull-over areas and to be flood-proofed, yet this government could not find one cent to help North Queensland drivers and industries that rely on that highway. There was no funding for any road projects urgently needed in Townsville to support the increased traffic in growth corridors. The only reason Townsville residents will finally be able to rely on Blakey's Crossing next wet season is that Queensland's new Liberal National state government responded to the community's 'Fix Blakey's' campaign and saw the need. This was once the Bruce Highway and should have been fixed generations ago. There has also been nothing for the residents of the upper Ross, who are wondering when their main road, Riverway Drive, will be duplicated so that it can handle increased usage.

Even beyond roads, this budget has offered no infrastructure for Townsville. The Northern Beaches is crying out for better services and facilities, as more and more families move to the new developments there. It needs a cyclone shelter, which would act as a large community centre, to give this growth corridor the facilities it needs and the region the heart and soul it is looking for.

In Townsville over recent months we have seen a rise in crime rates, particularly youth crime. We must work together as a community if we are to tackle these problems. I call on the government to work with groups in the community like Neighbourhood Watch and groups that are looking at different initiatives to engage at-risk youth and get them off the streets and out of trouble.

In looking to the future of Townsville as leader of the region we need to be looking beyond just North Queensland. The closest capital city to Townsville is Port Moresby, and its relationship with Papua New Guinea is a vital one, offering numerous opportunities to foster trade, education, aid and research to the benefit of both Townsville and PNG. We have already seen the importance of this connection. Local businesses are developing their trade links with PNG. Curtain Bros have been doing it for years. The Chamber of Commerce and Industry is very active, as are the North Queensland Cowboys. Youth With A Mission provides a vital health service to remote parts of this country as well.

It disappoints me that this country has ignored the opportunity to fund the Australian Institute of Tropical Health and Medicine at James Cook University. This research project, headquartered in Townsville and Cairns, will benefit people throughout the tropical world. JCU is highly respected for its tropical research. The AITHM creates the opportunity for the university to use this specialty with its school of medicine to lead the world in tropical health research. Once again, it took the new Queensland Liberal National state government to provide the funding and get this vital project off the ground that this federal government should have taken responsibility for during the 2010 election. The coalition remains committed to this vital health link and we will see that it happens.

I call on this government to start planning for the future of Townsville. We need to be investing in infrastructure projects that will meet the needs not just of today but also of our population tomorrow. We need a government that cares about the future of Townsville and wants to work with the region to achieve the right outcomes. Townsville is a great city in a great state. We should be doing all we can to provide our residents and businesses with hope for the future and reward for their effort and opportunities, not just for us but also for our children. This budget does not address any of these things. We in Townsville are a positive and vibrant people. We will hold this Treasurer and this government to account for this budget.

Greg Hunt (Flinders, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Climate Action, Environment and Heritage) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In addressing the budget, let me begin today with what is tragic news for families in the Hunter region, who had a sense of the future, a sense of opportunity and a sense that they could make through their work a pathway for their lives and their families with security. Yet we see that the heart of this budget is a $36 billion carbon tax. What was that carbon tax intended, designed and constructed to do? It was to destroy jobs and production in areas which are deemed to be high emission. Most particularly, the government's own Treasury modelling predicts that as a consequence of the carbon tax the aluminium sector will be 60 per cent smaller than it would otherwise have been. The variable there is the carbon tax. This is not the opposition confecting; this is not the opposition asserting; this is a direct finding within Treasury's own modelling based on a comparison between what would be the case without the carbon tax and what will be the case with the carbon tax. This day, Norsk Hydro—otherwise known as Pacific Hydro—made it absolutely clear that the Kurri Kurri plant in the Hunter would be wound down, at a cost of 344 jobs, and that one of the critical long-term factors was the carbon tax.

In question time today, the Prime Minister and the Minister for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, Mr Combet, denied that this was a factor in the company's decision—they denied that the carbon tax was a factor in the loss of 344 jobs today and 150 jobs earlier this year. I read directly, clearly and in an unedited form from Norsk Hydro's press release of today:

Following a thorough review, it is clear that the plant will not be profitable in the short term with current market prices, while long-term viability will be negatively affected by a number of factors including increasing energy costs and the carbon tax.

Let us unpick that.

Dennis Jensen (Tangney, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Explicit.

Greg Hunt (Flinders, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Climate Action, Environment and Heritage) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What we see, as the member for Tangney said, is explicitness. There is no equivocation and no doubt; there is an express, clear, explicit reference to the carbon tax as one of only two long-term factors. This should not be a surprise, because the nature, the purpose, the operation, the being, the meaning, the structure, the approach of the carbon tax is to close down heavy-emitting businesses and to send them offshore. That is its design and its intent.

Dr Jensen interjecting—

This is exactly what it is intended to do, and it is precisely because of my historical work that I make that assertion. So I say to the members of the Labor Party—to the members of the government that brought this $36 billion tax into being: face the consequences of the policy you bring to this House.

When you look at what the company said, you see that they acknowledge that there are short-term difficulties. We have never denied that—the dollar and the metals price are critical issues. But, most significantly, what they say is, 'We may have been able to ride through these issues; but then there are fundamental long-term issues around viability, all relating to electricity prices.' These are the elements: the carbon tax is first and foremost an electricity tax; it is also a tax on additional emissions where they occur outside of the electricity cost process.

The government has tried to say, 'It is only a minor impost on the aluminium sector.' That is false, because these businesses have to plan for the capital costs and the return on capital over a period of decades, and a carbon tax, as the Aluminium Council has indicated, will quadruple its impact on the aluminium sector over a decade. This is not some minor erosion or decay of permits or some incremental increase in price; it is the combination of those two factors, which, as the aluminium sector's own work shows, will result in a quadrupling of the burden on that sector.

There are only six aluminium plants in Australia. We have Boyne Smelters in Queensland; we have Kurri Kurri, which, as of today, is gone; we have Tomago, which shed jobs in the Hunter earlier this year; we have Point Henry in Victoria, which is under review; we have Portland in Victoria; and we have Bell Bay. What we see is this: there is a difficult international environment, and the worst possible thing you could do is impose a unilateral hit on the competitiveness of that sector in Australia. There are real pressures on each of these six plants. What the aluminium association warned me of earlier this year is a fear that three of them could have announced a pathway to retirement and closure by the end of this year in the light of the carbon tax. The warnings were expressed and the government was notified. Then, when that of which it was notified, that of which it was warned, came to pass it denied the causation. It denied the link.

This day we begin to see the real and profound impact of the central measure of the budget. The government tried to present this as some redistributive budget. The central measure of the budget was the carbon tax. The single biggest change between last year's budget and this year's was the $36 billion of revenue included in the forward estimates from the carbon tax. That is an enormous burden on Australian industry and Australian families. It is an enormous burden on Australian councils.

That brings me to the second great deception we have witnessed today. We have seen this view that councils will not have to pay. Yesterday the then Acting Prime Minister said councils will not have to pay the carbon tax next year on their landfill. Let me go to something which was received by 104 councils. This letter was sent to the Chief Executive Officer of the Gold Coast City Council. It is a letter from the regulatory implementation branch of the Clean Energy Regulator, dated 17 May, 2012:

I am writing to you as we have identified your council as possibly operating a significant landfill which potentially could mean that you will be liable under the Clean Energy Act 2011. You may also operate other facilities such as water treatment plants that could mean you are a liable entity. If you consider that you will be a liable entity please advise us in writing by 31 May 2012.

It then went on:

Under section 184 of the Clean Energy Act, where the Clean Energy Regulator has reasonable grounds to believe that a legal person, including trusts, local governing bodies, corporations sole and bodies corporate is or is likely to be a liable entity for the 2012-13 financial year that entity will be recorded in the liable entities public information database.

What does it mean? It means that councils are about to be hit. The government's pretence that these councils are not about to be hit is that they will not have to pay anything immediately.

But councils have to start collecting with higher landfill fees immediately. That is why a senior official from the City of Manningham publicly declared that the city will be raising its landfill fees on the advice of the Commonwealth Department of the Treasury. That is why the City of Wyndham, in the Prime Minister's own electorate of Lalor, has put in place a contingency revenue raising through higher landfill fees of $13.02 million for the financial year commencing on 1 July 2012. That is why 104 councils around Australia have just received 'please show' letters from the Clean Energy Regulator to say whether they will or will not be in for the coming year. These councils will have a liability for all waste contributed after 1 July 2012 if they fall within the system—and the vast majority of them will. And that liability could be for up to 40 years. They must start collecting now, otherwise they will never be able to recover the costs because they will never know who will have deposited that waste. That is why, around Australia, 104 councils are now trying to determine two things: what will their actual waste, landfill and gas liability be—

Mr Stephen Jones interjecting—

Actually that is completely false. I want to put on the record that the member for Throsby has said that most councils will have a zero liability for their waste landfill gas when 104 councils have just received show-cause notices from the Clean Energy Regulator as to why they should not be included on the list of liable entities, and it is absolutely certain that they will all have obligations if they are included on that list.

What we see here is that the councils are next in line to be hit. Around Australia, in small-town newspapers, these stories are being recorded, that a government which had indicated this was about the top 500 polluters has deceived them. People are discovering that their waste-tip fees are going up as of 1 July this year. The biggest problem for councils is to understand what their liability is. With five weeks to go, they still do not know for certain whether they are on the list and they still do not know for certain how much they will pay.

That is the essence of this carbon-tax budget. We see the impact on workers and we see the impact on families. Electricity is the third great limb. It will go up on the government's estimates by 10 per cent and on the Electricity Supply Association estimates by 20 per cent. The great deception in what the government is saying is the pretence that the first bill is the only rise. The Electricity Supply Association is expecting a second 10 per cent rise in early 2014 when, under the government's own system, companies are going to have to buy forward permits to hedge their prices. That is what the Electricity Supply Association estimate. They were right about part 1 and they will be right about part 2, so we are talking about a 20 per cent price rise. We have already seen one firm talking about a 25 per cent price rise.

Those are the elements of the budget, the carbon-tax budget, and its central features. Jobs for working Australians; council tip fees as an example of the deception for 104 councils trying to deal with the letter that is a week old which warns them that suddenly they will be hit with this liability on 1 July. Then there is the cost of living for families through electricity price rises of up to 20 per cent in two main stages.

Then we go to other failures that have been identified in this legislation. I want to single out two of these failures. Firstly, the solar hot water industry was deceived out of $44.7 million. On 21 March 2012, just after the government had cancelled the solar hot water rebate, the Parliamentary Secretary for Energy Efficiency wrote to the Greens that the government never intended to make any savings from the closure of this program. What we found once this year's budget papers came out, of course, is that and there was a saving of $44.7 million. That money was taken directly from the industry in direct contravention of a public pledge. It is an example of what the government said would never happen.

The second is that the Home Insulation Program, the most disastrous of all programs, has costs which amount to almost $2 billion. We had a cost blow-out last year of $59 million compared with what was pledged a year ago was the cost of fixing the roofs. This government cannot fix the roofs, cannot be trusted on solar and its members are the last people you would want to put in charge of an economy. (Time expired)

Louise Markus (Macquarie, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I commend the words of the shadow minister for the environment, who highlighted the challenges faced by many councils. Later in my speech I will particularly highlight the challenge facing the Blue Mountains City Council, who have estimated that the cost through to 2034 will be up to $11 million.

Today I rise to speak about the federal Labor government's appropriation bills. This budget confirms the incompetence of the Gillard government, a government that has established a reputation for broken promises. Despite Julia Gillard saying five days before the last election, 'There will be no carbon tax under the government I lead,' budget 2012 is Australia's first carbon tax budget—the first of many broken promises from this government.

This government have removed themselves so far from the local community, from everyday Australians, that they have lost all understanding of the genuine concerns of hardworking Australian families and businesses. Quite simply, this government have lost their way. There is no clearer example of this than the government's rationale that a family who earns a combined income of $150,000 per year is wealthy. When was the last time the Treasurer spoke to one of these families? If he had done so recently, he would know that these families are struggling to meet the rising costs of living. A combined income of $150,000 means a police officer and nurse raising their young children, a teacher and truck driver, possibly supporting their children at university while struggling to pay their mortgage. These people are not rich. They are working hard to pay their bills with the hope of getting ahead.

If the federal Labor government were in touch with the Australian community, they would understand that these families are struggling with the rising costs of living. Since Labor took office in 2007, electricity prices have increased by 66 per cent. Gas prices have increased by 39 per cent. Health costs have gone up 25 per cent. The price of education has increased by 31 per cent. And now we are staring down the barrel of the world's largest price on carbon—a tax that will hit families, jobs and businesses at the toughest time. Why won't Labor give Australian families, Australian children, Australian single parents and seniors a break? Why does the government want to put unnecessary pressure on hardworking people?

This comes after years of broken promises—the carbon tax, the company tax, the promise to increase defence spending by three per cent. The list goes on and on and the Australian people are quite simply fed up. We are fed up with the broken promises and the government's failure to deliver on its policy promises and its budget projections. Because of this government's record, the Australian community do not trust the Treasurer's ability to deliver a surplus of $1.5 billion. And why should they? The record speaks for itself. In 18 months its estimated deficit for 2011-12 blew out from the Treasurer's projected $12 billion to $44 billion, and it may blow out even further. The year is not over.

Why should we expect this budget to be any different? If further proof is needed, one only needs to look at Appropriation Bill (No. 2), part 5. If the federal Labor government really believed it could deliver a surplus, why is it moving to increase the Commonwealth debt limit from $250 billion to $300 billion? It is an extra $50 billion—for what? How will it be spent? Is this going to be spent leading up to an election? Australians are right to be concerned about handing Wayne Swan yet another increase in our nation's credit card limit. If the Treasurer and the federal Labor government have no faith in their ability to achieve and manage this supposed surplus, why should the Australian people?

Speaking of increasing the Commonwealth debt limit, why did the Treasurer bury this proposal in Appropriation Bill (No. 2)? To avoid proper scrutiny and a specific vote on the debt limit? It could only be because the Treasurer and the government are embarrassed that government debt levels are at absolutely unprecedented levels. This year the government interest payments on Labor's debt alone are set to reach an alarming $8 billion over the next financial year—$8 billion. What a waste. This money would be better spent on providing better services throughout our local community, protecting our borders, supporting defence programs, providing additional funding to the National Disability Insurance Scheme and maintaining and protecting the Australian lifestyle.

In addition to the waste, this year's budget demonstrates no plan to build a stronger economy, repay debt or create secure jobs. I am genuinely concerned about the impact that this budget and the carbon tax will have on Australians, specifically the impact on the people I represent within the electorate of Macquarie, who work, live and endeavour to build a future. I was at Blaxland Explorers Day only recently, and throughout the day people came up to me where I was working to express their concerns about this budget and this unnecessary carbon tax. Seniors, young families, young couples and single parents are all concerned about the rising cost of living and the lack of support and services provided to local communities by this budget. What is clear is that the Treasurer believes that the government can compensate for the larger cost and impact of this budget and the carbon tax that is set to hit families, small businesses and every aspect of the Australian economy. No-one will be spared, especially not by the token handouts provided by the government to compensate for a dramatic increase in the cost of living.

One such token gesture is the $657,000 within the budget allocated to Blue Mountains City Council to maintain and upgrade local roads. While this may seem like a large sum of money and a boost to the local council, it is not sufficient. I recall in 2007 when a local road, Racecourse Road in Clarendon, was resurfaced. This road is 3½ kilometres long. The resurfacing of this road cost more than $700,000. That was $700,000 to repair 3.4 kilometres. There is more than 717 kilometres of road managed by the Blue Mountains City Council. It is fair to say that the $657,000 in this budget allocated to the Blue Mountains City Council for the repair of local roads will not go very far.

In addition to this, Blue Mountains City Council and Hawkesbury City Council are both set to be hit by the carbon tax, with little compensation from the Treasurer's budget. A report in April to a Blue Mountains City Council meeting stated that the council was liable for emissions generated from its operational landfill at Blaxland under clean energy legislation passed by the Senate in November last year. A review commissioned by the council predicted the Blaxland facility would exceed 25,000 tonnes per year in 2013 to 2014 based on current landfill patterns and would remain above the threshold until 2033-34. According to the report the 'absolute minimum liability' for emissions in 2014 was predicted to be $307,434, rising to $390,284 in 2014 and to a projected $11.3 million by 2034.

Julia Gillard's carbon tax will mean these local councils have to lift their own fees and charges, raise their council rates, cut services or some combination of these hits, all of which will mean more pain for Australians at the local level. Where is the compensation for local city councils within this budget now that they have to accommodate these price hikes as a direct result of the carbon tax? This means councils will have less money to allocate to vital local services such as libraries, parks, youth services, the arts and cultural initiatives. These make up such an important part of our communities and it is a disaster for local councils that they will have to make these sacrifices to pay this tax.

The first priority of a coalition government would be to abolish this carbon tax and reduce the cost-of-living pressures which are soaring under Labor. Along with the concerns that I have regarding the rising costs of living I am also troubled by the government's ability to stimulate tourism. The tourism industry is an important part of the local and regional economy for both Hawkesbury and the Blue Mountains. Tourism's contribution to Australia's gross domestic product was $73.3 billion or a 5.2 per cent share of the Australian community. In Australia, tourism directly and indirectly employs 907,100 persons, representing 7.9 per cent of total Australian employment—and this is shrinking. Although the sector is already stressed, this budget delivered by the Treasurer reduces the tourism budget by 6.2 per cent or $8 million. Not only has the Labor government cut funding to the sector but it has failed to provide adequate carbon tax compensation for the tourism sector . As a result, according to the Tourism and Transport Forum submission on the carbon tax, the tourism industry stands to lose 6,400 jobs and a cut of 10 per cent from industry profits. What is the government's plan to secure the jobs of those in the tourism industry? Does the government have a plan to stimulate tourism growth, particularly for those regions like the Blue Mountains and the Hawkesbury where tourism operators are keen to see growth in their sector?

Another important component of the economies of both the Blue Mountains and the Hawkesbury regions is the contribution made by our wonderful small business owners: 4,515 across the electorate. Under the 2012-13 budget, the Labor government provide no compensation to small businesses for the carbon tax. Small business people who put their houses on the line to create jobs deserve support from government, not broken promises. The coalition government would give small business operators more time to focus on growing their business by cutting red tape and reducing their regulatory burden by at least $1 billion per year. The coalition will also support small businesses by simplifying the administration of compulsory employee superannuation contributions by allowing small businesses to remit their contribution in one payment directly to the ATO with the PAYG payments. The coalition have always supported small business owners in the Australia. We believe they are a vital part of our economy.

The desperate attempt by the Gillard Labor government to bring the budget to surplus also comes at a heavy price for the Australian Defence Force. The government has cut $5.5 billion from the 2012-13 budget, making a total of $17 billion over the last three years. I would like to know why the Gillard government has broken the commitment it made to increase defence spending by three per cent until 2017-18 that was set out in the 2009 defence white paper. As a result of this broken promise and the budgetary cuts, defence spending will be at its lowest level since 1938 as a percentage of GDP.

The federal Labor government needs to explain what impact these budget cuts will have on Australia's ability to respond to disasters or emergencies in the nation and the border regions. It clearly demonstrates that Australia's borders are more vulnerable than ever under this Gillard government and its 2012-13 budget. Paul Howes, National Secretary of the Australian Workers Union, confirmed that as a result of these spending cuts the federal government has jeopardised the jobs of 250 aircraft specialist workers at RAAF Base Richmond. This will have a significant impact on the people of Macquarie and particularly the Hawkesbury as Richmond RAAF is a vital source of employment. Labor says that this budget is about creating jobs and economic growth, but the budgetary impact is that a projected 250 specialist aviation maintenance jobs are potentially under threat when the C130H Hercules aircraft are retired. What will happen to that local expertise? What will happen to those 250 workers and their families? The Minister for Defence needs to explain. How does the government justify the loss of these jobs and the impact that this will have on the Hawkesbury community?

This government claims to be for Australian workers. It claims to be creating Australian jobs, but again its record shows otherwise. In last year's budget the federal government promised 500,000 new jobs over two years and now expects to miss its target by 300,000 jobs. Meanwhile, the unemployment rate is forecast to increase to five per cent, while the government is cutting $200 million out of jobs service programs.

The coalition would invest over $2 billion to support Australians. This would include, for example, in the area of mental health, an additional 60 Headspace sites. The coalition is committed to working with the states to improve health care and provide added funding towards these fundamental services. The coalition government would ensure access to affordable, world-class health care for all Australians when they need it most by protecting Australia's public health benefits and restoring the private health insurance rebate. Unlike the current federal Labor government, the coalition is committed to bringing hope, reward and opportunity back to all Australians. This budget and the incompetent government is slowly stripping the nation of these vital qualities. It is time we put a stop to it.

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

I speak today in support of the appropriation bills that underpin the Gillard Labor government's return to surplus budget. At the outset I want to congratulate the Treasurer, his staff and his department for the extremely significant, and yet still underrated, achievement of delivering a surplus so soon after the global economic wreckage that began in 2008 and of putting Australia on a path to surplus budgets in the years to come, while continuing this government's steadfast pursuit of necessary and innovative reform, especially with regard to the introduction of a National Disability Insurance Scheme. It is right to focus on the return to surplus as the key characteristic of this budget and to recognise the difficult decisions that have been made in order to get us to this position when there has been such a large contraction in the revenue side of the equation. Through these appropriation bills we take a number of further critical steps in improving the provision of public goods and the foundation of economic fairness of this country.

I will speak in more detail of these steps in due course but first I will consider the quite remarkable core details of Australia's macroeconomic position. The OECD has confirmed overnight that Australia has the best-performing economy in the developed world, with stable economic growth of around three per cent this year and projected to be closer to four per cent next year, at a time when the majority of the world's major economies have suffered, and are continuing to suffer, recession. Unemployment in Australia remains around five per cent—in historically low territory—as a direct result of this government's actions to protect the Australian economy during the GFC.

We have created more than 800,000 jobs since taking office and we have done that while returning Australia to a fair system of workplace regulation. I recall that when the Labor government got rid of Work Choices we did so in the face of a scaremongering campaign conducted by the coalition and supported by many in the business community and some in the press, who said that the abolition of Work Choices would cost jobs. That was plainly wrong. It is one of the government's great achievements that we have restored a fair and sensible framework of workplace regulation and at the same time grown the Australian workforce and the opportunities for Australians to have the benefit of fair and safe work.

Inflation in this country is stable and low, not least as a result of this government's fiscal discipline, with our peak net debt one-tenth of that of comparable economies. Interest rates are also at historically low levels and certainly are lower than at any point under the Howard government. As the Treasurer has pointed out, Australia now has a AAA credit rating from all three major ratings agencies for the first time in our history. That is not surprising when we consider the basic statistics I have outlined: steady growth at three per cent, unemployment at five per cent, inflation under three per cent and the RBA cash rate at 3.75 per cent.

The significance of these economic achievements, which speak clearly to the quality and consistency of this government's economic management over the last 4½ turbulent years, is felt right across the country, especially with respect to employment but also in the form of low, stable interest rates and inflation. What is more, the fundamental strength of the Australian economy is not just an end in itself—at least not for a Labor government—because we recognise that a strong economy ought to be the foundation of positive reform. We are seized by the fact that there is always work to be done in improving the public goods we share like health, education, environment and of course in preparing ourselves properly for the future. In that way this budget, our fifth budget in government, continues to add steadily to the changes we have introduced and funded for the long-term benefit of all Australians.

It builds on the investment we have made in schools and trade training centres, like the Maritime Trades Training Centre at South Fremantle High School, and by offering nearly $1 billion to the WA government for reforms under the auspices of the National Workforce Development Fund, one object of which is the creation of a HECS-style system of loans to support TAFE students. In terms of university education we are making an investment of $38.8 million over the next four years, with the cap on university places, with a particular emphasis on raising the participation of lower-SES students. On that point, it is worth noting that since 2009 our setting of targets to improve the participation of students whose economic circumstances create an inequality of opportunity has resulted in a 49.3 per cent increase in the number of offers to lower-SES students to attend Curtin University, a 9.7 per cent increase at Murdoch and an 11.2 per cent increase at the University of Western Australia. That is an emphatic improvement and it is resulting in better and fairer opportunities for young Western Australians, a number of whom, like myself many years ago, will come from outside the Perth metro area for their chance of a university education.

In this coming financial year we will see the introduction of the mining tax and the staged introduction of compulsory superannuation towards a super guarantee of 12 per cent by 2020, with the twin benefits for the individual and for Australia as a whole of much higher personal savings in retirement for millions of Australians. In this coming year we will also see a tripling of the tax-free threshold and reform of the tax treatment of superannuation that is fairer at both ends of the scale. It is fairer by virtue of the fact that it ensures some 3.6 million low-income Australians will effectively pay no tax on their super guarantee contributions and it is fairer at the other end of the scale by ensuring that the top one per cent of income earners receive a smaller tax concession—one that is more in line with the concession that most wage earners receive. In considering how a government is able to make savings and fund new commitments at the same time, it is clear that the difficult work tends to be in removing payments, subsidies or revenue concessions that are not equitable or effective. This government has been prepared to grasp that nettle and we have done so in a climate of unrelenting negativity—and we have been prepared to take the political consequences. We have done so in being prepared to make changes to the private health insurance rebate, we have done so when it comes to better means-testing of family support payments and we have done so in the area of tax concessions on superannuation. When we took government, something like $17 billion of the $21 billion in annual tax concessions on super was going to the top 5 per cent of all income earners. That was not a sound policy outcome by any measure.

It is by making these eminently fair and prudent reforms, however difficult they might be politically, that this government has been in a position to run the strongest economy in the OECD and embark on one of the steadiest, most far-sighted reform programs in Australia's history. That is why this budget is able to build on one of our previous substantial reforms, matched funding in the area of health, by beginning to tackle one of the great blind spots in our public health framework—namely, the public funding of dental healthcare. This budget provides $515 million to address urgent dental care needs. It does so, firstly, through a $346 million blitz to tackle the long waiting lists for public dental services; secondly, through $78 million to support the relocation of dentists to rural, regional, and remote areas, the three Rs of geographic health inequality in Australia; and, thirdly, through an $81 million boost to training for graduate dentists and therapists. I congratulate the Minister for Health, who referred to dental health in her first speech as health minister. We are already starting to see that commitment turned into reality.

I am also incredibly pleased to see the extension of the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program, with $49.3 million allocated to include screening for people turning 60 years of age in 2013 and those turning 70 years of age in 2015. This has the potential to make screening freely available to around 12 per of the people in my electorate over the next few years. It is yet another important preventative health measure from a government that has made preventative health one of its key focuses. I thank the Cancer Council of Australia for its strong campaign on this important issue.

Above all else, I am absolutely delighted that in this budget a Labor government is providing $1 billion over four years to fund the first stage of the National Disability Insurance Scheme in order to cover 10,000 people from 2013-14 and 20,000 people from 2014-15. Yet again, when it comes to the NDIS, this government shows its commitment to good policy process and to following through on that process with real reform and real funding. In 2011 we tasked the Productivity Commission with the job of considering the best way to provide better and fairer support for Australians with disability. Through that process it was brought home to all of us in government and to the wider community that people with disability face circumstances that vary wildly depending on which part of Australia they live in and on the cause of their disability, and that the funding and mechanisms currently in place to ensure a basic quality of life are at best patchy and are in some cases abominably inadequate. This is a long-awaited and long-overdue first step—and it is only a first step—but, as the representative of a community that is strongly engaged on the need to do much better in caring for people with disability and enabling them to live their lives as fully as everyone else and to lighten the sometimes unbearable weight that our current system places on carers and families, I can say that the arrival of the NDIS is hugely welcome.

While of course I understand the effort and discipline required to make real reductions in government expenditure for the sake of returning the budget to surplus, that does not mean that I agree with all the measures through which this has been achieved. Like others, I have my own view on where savings should be made and my own sense of those programs and priorities that should not have been asked to provide reductions. I am glad that Australia's contributions in the areas of foreign aid and humanitarian assistance will increase by $300 million in 2012-13 and that we remain committed to reaching a level of contribution of 0.5 per cent of GNI. But I do not believe we should have delayed our progress towards reaching that level of foreign aid. Australia is in a very strong economic position and I do not see the justification for lessening, or slowing the rate of growth in our contribution to relieving the hardship and suffering of those of our fellow human beings who live not in relative poverty, like many in Australia, but in absolute poverty—those for whom rising electricity and fuel prices do not matter because they have no houses or appliances or cars. They are struggling just to find food and water to survive each day. To borrow the words of UK Prime Minister David Cameron, 'We cannot balance the budget on the backs of the world's poor.' As a representative from Western Australia, I want to conclude by addressing what seems to have become an entrenched myth about the role and place that my home state has within the federation. It is a myth that runs in a couple of different directions—and it is a myth that to a large extent is being perpetrated by a very small number of self-interested state politicians and mining magnates. The first aspect of the myth is the idea that Western Australia's resource sector is running so strongly that everyone in WA is basking in the economic glow. This is just wrong—and it comes as a shock to some people when they learn that the resources sector is only responsible for employing something like four percent of the Western Australian workforce. Yes, there are indirect benefits of the resources industry—but there are matching indirect costs, including the cost of housing and other goods and services. This means that those not directly or indirectly involved are actually living in a higher-cost environment, and this is particularly difficult for those on low and fixed incomes.

The second aspect of the myth is the idea perpetrated up hill and down dale by the WA government, and by the WA coalition representatives in this place, that Western Australia is somehow being short-changed by the Commonwealth. That is absolute rubbish, and it is rubbish based entirely on a very narrow, selective, distorted and hypocritical view of the GST arrangements—which of course were put in place by the Howard government. Can I say how glad I was to read a fine piece of analysis in the West Australian on Monday pointing out that the expected reduction in direct government-to-government payments from the Commonwealth to WA over the next four years is $700 million, whereas the increase in mining royalties is double that, at $1.4 billion dollars in the next two years alone. As Shane Wright, the economics editor of the West Australian rightly points out:

While certainly more GST would make their job easier, life isn't too bad when you're billions of dollars in front of where you thought you'd be just a couple of years ago.

People who live in WA—including the coalition members in this place—should perhaps ask how it is that the WA government can only manage the barest real surplus of $26 million dollars in 2012-13 when its annual revenue has jumped $4.8 billion from last year? The fact is that the Barnett government continues to blame the federal government for its own failure to provide good economic management in Western Australia.

While this federal government has delivered an unprecedented and transformative capital investment in schools right across WA, and a mining tax that will return a fair share of WA's resource development to Western Australians in the form of increased superannuation and new infrastructure, the Barnett government has presided over a 60 per cent explosion in electricity costs and the occasional colour picture of a poorly conceived waterfront development.

The reality is that this federal Labor government has nearly doubled annual infrastructure spending in WA from $154 to $261 per Western Australian; it has provided the largest increase in payments for WA pensioners in Australia's history, with the addition of a higher-paying method of indexation for those pensions; and it has made a greater investment in public transport and road projects and school buildings in WA than any previous federal government. These transport projects include the Perth Link rail project and the widening of the Kwinana Freeway between the Leach and Roe highways, and of course the lion's share of the Gateway WA project, involving a major upgrade of the roads around Perth Airport.

I am a proud and passionate Western Australian, and as such I am strongly conscious of the fact that there has been throughout Australia's history a gravitational pull that has centred on Canberra and the larger eastern states, with the effect that those of us who represent WA and South Australia, and who represent Queensland and Tasmania and the Northern Territory, need to keep our voices loud and clear about what goes on outside the Canberra-Sydney-Melbourne triangle. It is precisely because I hold this perspective that I find the self-interested and baseless parochialism of some politicians and some businesspeople so disappointing. I have fought and will continue to fight for my constituents in Fremantle, and for my state, but I will always do so as a thoughtful and responsible member of the Australian parliament—and with a fundamental sense of belonging to this nation as a whole; a nation whose collective long-term interests we all share and from which we all benefit.

This budget sits well in the sequence of economic blueprints that the Labor government have designed and implemented and that we will continue to implement in the provision of stable economic management, which in turn allows us to deliver on our ethos of a fairer and more forward-looking Australia.

Debate adjourned.

Federation Chamber adjourned at 19:29.