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

The burning question for productive Australia—certainly agriculture but manufacturing probably even more so and tourism even more so again—is interest rates. Our interest rates are wildly out of step with the rest of the world. I keep being accused, with my non-free-trade viewpoint, of being out of step and ridiculous. The only place I am out of step is in this chamber, in this parliament. This is the only place I am out of step. The rest of Australia agrees with me. Eighty per cent of Australians continually say that they would be prepared to pay a few bob more for whatever they are buying to protect and create Australian jobs. Interest rates are a classic example. Europeans are on one per cent; Japanese and Americans, last time I looked, were on 0.1 per cent; and Australia is on over 4½ per cent. Where are you going to park your money? Of course you are going to park your money in Australia, where you get 4½ per cent. You are not going to park it in Europe, where you get only one per cent interest. And also, we have got an appreciating dollar under this regime. So there are two reasons to park your money here.

It is a self-reinforcing mechanism which has pushed the dollar up. In Mr Costello's second year in office, the dollar was at 52c. The dollar is averaging more than 100c now. Mr Costello can take most of the blame for that, but the Labor Party can most certainly take their part of the blame. They are in office, they should be doing something about it, and they are not. Having said that, we praise the Treasurer because he said that the interest rates coming down is good. I think there was pressure from the Treasurer to bring them down half a per cent. But they are still four per cent above the rest of the world—most certainly 3½ per cent. They are 300 times higher than they are in the rest of the world. So, if you invest your money here, you get 300 per cent more money than if you invest your money there—if the dollar comes down. When the dollar rose under Mr Costello from 52c to 90c, the income for my cattlemen halved and the income for my miners halved. And we closed down mines. We closed down mines; Kagara zinc mine is closed at the present moment—a great company.

We plead with the government to take the bit between their teeth and do the sensible thing that every other government on earth is doing. I am telling you that, with the Europeans moving to an increase in money supply, money will drain out of Australia, interest will drain out of Australia, their industries will surge forward and ours will continue to die.

Let me be very specific. As I get up to speak today it looks like this year we will have 82 per cent of motor vehicles in Australia come in from overseas. Mr Keating started this stupidity—and I can remember vividly hearing him on the radio when I crawled out of bed one morning; he said, 'We will be the freest economy on earth.' I thought: 'This imbecile. Are we going to go to Chinese wages or are we going to import all our jobs to China?' Those are the only two possibilities if you move to a free market.

No-one else in the world moved to a free market. The only two countries on earth that have a free market are Australia and New Zealand—and, if you want to include a third country, it would actually be Canada. One cannot help but believe that the colonial spot marks are showing. Why would these two—arguably three—countries be the only three countries on earth that move to free trade?

Mr Deputy Speaker Scott, you are well aware that we cannot get a pound of beef into Europe. We were allowed technically 6,000 tonne but we cannot even meet the requirements for 6,000 tonne. To put that in perspective for other people here: America takes 400,000 tonne a year, and they are one-half or one-third the size of Europe. What a joke. We cannot sell beef to Europe. We cannot sell a pound of beef to China. These are the two biggest economies on earth, and we cannot sell a pound of beef to either of them. So much for free trade.

When Mr Keating made his wonderful statement that we were going to become a 'free economy', over 72 per cent of the motor vehicles in Australia were Australian made. This year, 82 per cent of them were imported from overseas. We all know that within 10 years there will be no motor vehicle industry in this country. We cannot build a tyre in this country. We cannot build an electric motor in this country. We will not be able to build a motor car in this country. We will be a Third World technology country.

As for agriculture, Mr Deputy Speaker, you would be well aware that the Fin Review and the Sydney Morning Herald have said loud and clear—this place has not listened to them—that within three years this country will be a net importer of food. It will not be able to feed itself. We are a net importer of fruit and vegetables now. Three years ago we were an exporter of seafood. This year 80 per cent, it would appear, of our seafood will be imported from overseas. We are a net importer of pork. But soon overall we will be a net importer of food. We live in a country that cannot feed itself.

So, to that silly fella that led a party—which I am ashamed to say that I was once a member of—who walked around with his hat turned down and said, 'We will be the food bowl of Asia,' I say: listen, you fool; we are going to be the begging bowl of Asia. All this country now has, as a result of the policies of this place, is an iron ore quarry and a coal quarry. That is all it has.

I predict the new government, the LNP government in Queensland, will be the worst government in Queensland history, because they have the terrible combination of arrogance and no vision, perspective or intelligence. They have already announced that the Galilee Basin—half of our entire coal reserves in Queensland—will be mined by people from overseas. Thanks to the policies of this place, all six of our great mining companies are now all foreign owned. They were all Australian owned 15 years ago. Now they are all foreign owned. Thanks to this place, we allowed every one of them to be sold overseas.

We do not own the resource. The resource is owned by China, China and India. Those are the three groups of people that own the resources. We are not going to get any profits out of it. We are not going to get any wages out of it. What the hell will we get out of it? All the machinery and equipment comes from overseas in mining. We do not produce any machinery or equipment for mining in Australia. So what do we get out of it? We get a hole in the ground; that is what we get out of it.

But a grubby little government like the outgoing ALP government was grasping for some taxation out of it. The grubby little government that has come in, that cannot see around the doorstop, just want to get some taxes out of it and look after their corporate friends. Who are the front men for the two Chinese areas that are owned? The front men are Gina Rinehart and Clive Palmer. Who owns the LNP? Clive Palmer. Surprise, surprise.

If you are a Chinese person, you say: 'Well, hold on a minute. Our boys back home are getting paid $5,000 a year'—that is the average weekly earnings in China. 'What are we going to pay your people? $160,000 a year?' Fair damn go. I mean, naturally, Clive Palmer, Gina Rinehart and the Indians, the Adani Group that own the top of it, are going to say: 'Hold on a minute. We are going to fly our people in from overseas. None of this paying you Australians $160,000 while our people back home are being paid $5,000. No more of that.'

We do want to thank the government very sincerely for the $350 million which is still in there for the transmission line. Governments throughout Queensland's history gave us railway lines and ports. The great Theodore governments up to the 1950s, and they were Theodore governments, gave us railway lines and ports. The government built the railway lines and ports and made absolutely unconscionable amounts of money out of it. The great Bejelke-Petersen government created the coal industry and the aluminium industry in Australia. They built the power station for the aluminium industry. They built the railway line for the coal industry. That is why we have a coal industry and an aluminium industry here today. So we thank the government for that $350 million for that transmission line. But, if you give us that transmission line to send coal into the Galilee Basin, you can use that railway line to sell coal. Have the courage to say: 'No, we will not fly in 40,000 workers from overseas. Those jobs are for Australians.' Yes, you might have to pay an extra $10,000 and, yes, you may not be allowed to kick the workers around. God bless the CFMEU. I stand 1,000 per cent behind the CFMEU and their stand against fly-in mining—and that is in Australia.

I will be out there at every rally and stop-work meeting that the CFMEU have, because, if they are turning it on for fly-in mining in Australia, what are they are going to turn on when the LNP government in Queensland attempts to fly workers in from overseas? I leave it to your imagination. We have a proud history of industrial force in Queensland and we will not be resiling from that position, I can tell you.

If you give that to us and we get those wages out of the coalmines, then we will give back to Australia $75,000 million a year from the Galilee Basin. My homeland is the richest mineral province on earth, with vast uranium, phosphate and iron ore deposits. If you give us a little canal, about 150 kilometres—that is all; most countries have tens and hundreds of thousands of kilometres of canals—so we can get out through the gulf instead of coming all the way back through Townsville, particularly for phosphate and iron ore, then we will gift to Australia an extra $15,000 million a year. That is $90,000 million a year, nearly $100,000 million, into an economy of $1,000 million a year. e will increase your GDP just in the income from those ore and coal reserves by $100 million a year. That is what we will give back to Australia.

We have a commitment from the federal government—$350 million on that transmission line, but the LNP government has knocked the transmission line on the head. They have already announced that they are going to fly the miners in from overseas; they are not going to give you any infrastructure to open up your resources and this is all in two months! They have announced they are tightening the gun laws and, effectively, strangely enough they have announced that they are going to do nothing about flying foxes as well, which of course is the burning question in the state of Queensland.

If we get a government that builds things—a nation-building government—which we have not seen for 30 years in this country; not since Doug Anthony, one of the greatest figures of stature in this country's history. When he left the stage we had no one. When Bjelke-Petersen left the stage we had no one. And to our eternal shame, Ted Theodore is remembered for the Mungana scandal and the Bjelke-Petersen government is remembered for silly, stupid rubbish: there was not a single, solitary minister went to jail for corruption—they went for misuse of their parliamentary expenditure. Be careful, everybody, because what it was for was using their cars for private purposes. That is what the four ministers went to jail for in Queensland—so much corruption!

But these great builders like Theodore and Bjelke-Petersen—I plead, Mr Deputy Speaker, for people to read my book where you will see it in detail and flashing neon lights. Those who may have been brought up in the Labor tradition will walk with very great pride. It is only $39, too, Mr Deputy Speaker.

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

Is it in the library here?

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

Yes. But the details of what those successive Queensland governments did to hand to their nation the coal industry, the base metals industry and the aluminium industry are in there, and I named the chapter, 'Walking with giants'. Probably Les Thiess was the greatest of them.

We can build again, but we need money from the budget. We thank the government for the $350 million but the government must do a lot more because there will be no enlightened government coming out of Queensland. The one project that was needed for nation building they knocked on the head.

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

Order! Before I call the parliamentary secretary I will just remind members once again. I was reluctant to pull up the honourable member for Kennedy for the use of the word 'you', the word 'you' referring to the occupier of this chair. It is a reflection on the chair. I have reminded him of that and also other members on both sides of this House before. Next time I will interrupt, and I am sure that members do not want to be interrupted in their precious time of speaking in this chamber or in the main chamber. I just ask members to remember that when they use the word 'you' they are pointing directly to the occupier of the chair, and it is a reflection on the chair. Refer to 'the member' or to 'the government' or other bodies but do not use the word 'you will'. It is a habit that has crept in that I have observed as an occupier of the chair.

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

Mr Deputy Speaker, I have great respect and friendship for you, and I would never, ever put you in the category of the contempt in which I hold many other members.

Sharon Bird (Cunningham, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Higher Education and Skills) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is a great pleasure to speak to the budget that was presented by the Treasurer this year, and to follow the member for Kennedy. Much of what he has contributed I would not agree with, but some of it I do. I think that in talking about the significance of the mining industry in this country he has touched on two very important areas that as a government we have been pursuing since we were first elected. They are: the development of the skills of the people of this nation to ensure they get access to the jobs of the future—exactly the issues he was addressing there—and also that we redirect some of the wealth into infrastructure across this nation to ensure that as a nation we are well positioned to make the best opportunities of the future, and where we sit in particular in the Asian century.

So while I may not always agree with the member for Kennedy's description of history or his prescription for the solving of the problems, I think that we can start with the base of an agreement about what the problems are and to acknowledge that they are certainly priorities for this government, and have been. Indeed, they were priorities for people representing the peak industry associations when I was first elected in 2004, when there were constant reports about backlogs and blockages in our system as a result of a shortage of skills and a shortage of infrastructure. They are two very important issues that the member for Kennedy touched on in his contribution.

This budget, I would argue very much, is a budget in the great tradition of Labor budgets and reflects the values that we seek to represent in this place. I say that for two reasons. Firstly, we do have a great tradition of building the skills and infrastructure of the nation. The Labor government has at the federal level a long history of building road, rail and transport infrastructure and ports and shipping. Indeed, at the moment the minister for transport is undertaking a mammoth task to rebuild the shipping industry of this nation, which has been let wither on the vine so badly for so long. We have a great tradition of putting in place the transport infrastructure on land that is needed to move the goods and services of our nation around what is, at the end of the day, one of our biggest challenges—the tyranny of distance not only internationally in terms of where we sit from major markets but also internally in connecting our cities and regions across the nation.

This has been really importantly reflected in this budget by the fact that we seek to introduce a new form of profits based tax on the mining industry in order to be able to redirect what is the wealth of this nation. I take the member for Kennedy's point and note that he has some concerns about who owns the companies. But, at the end of the day, the wealth of the nation is owned by the nation. It is owned by the people of this country, and we should ensure that we leverage that to get maximum benefit for diversifying our economies and supporting the sections of industry and the country, in terms of regions, that need to be able to be supported to take advantage of the boom and, indeed, supporting the regions that are experiencing the boom to manage that in an effective way—which I think many members here would, I think, reflect. That is exactly what a large part of the task of this budget is directly aimed at.

In my own region of the Illawarra, clearly we see both of those phenomena happening in one place. We have a very vibrant and strong mining industry. Coming from five generations of coalminers, I am most conscious of the reality of that industry in my region—and it is continues to flourish. I was talking to some of my uncles on the weekend, one of whom said that the biggest job he has had was writing CVs in the 1980s when he was retrenched 12 times when the mining industry was at the other end of the cycle. So we are very conscious in our region of the importance of the mining industry. But we are also a base for manufacturing. People would be aware of the BlueScope restructure last year and the significant flow-ons from that. So we do see both speeds and both challenges.

We are also a region with a major university, and we have seen growth. For example, our university produces the largest number of IT graduates in the nation. We have seen growth in aged care, in a much more professional, developed aged-care sector providing services of a much greater variety to people with different demands as they age in the modern age. We have seen a growth in our service sectors as well. So we reflect that diversity and those various speeds in the economy.

Part of that first part of the task of the budget that I referred to is about delivering on those infrastructure transport links and freight support that we have talked about. I am also very pleased that the budget gave a very strong injection and support to the development of skills in this nation and a continued support for our TAFEs, universities and private providers in this sector to continue to provide the opportunity for people to get the education that they need in order to be able to take advantage of the future.

We are very aware that if somebody leaves high school in this day and age—let alone in the future—without a further tertiary qualification, whether that is a certificate, a diploma or a degree, they are going to significantly struggle to hold a job in the modern economy. That is not something that we should be accepting in any way, shape or form.

Part of my new role as the parliamentary secretary in this area is to look at how we ensure that adults have the language, literacy and numeracy skills to be able to access those educational opportunities I am very pleased to be able to be undertaking that task, because I think it is very important. Indeed, members may have heard some of the stories of people in their own communities who grew up illiterate as adults and have had the opportunity through various governments over time to gain literacy skills. What a difference it makes to not only their own lives but also their kids. If your parents are literate and able to support you in your schooling, you are going to do much better at school. I think those commitments in the budget around education skills are also particularly important.

The other side of it is the micro side: it is what we are attempting to do to support individuals and to support families in order to manage the cost-of-living issues. In my own area of Cunningham I want to acknowledge that, in particular, the additional money—the schoolkids money—is going to be very important. I have talked to lots of local families who are very pleased with this particular initiative. My own sons are adults now, but I have had a lifetime of understanding the challenges, as many of us in this place with children have, of the costs to commence schooling, whether it is uniforms or equipment and so forth. There are just over 7,000 families in my electorate who are going to be eligible for that bonus—that is $410 a year for each child in primary school and $820 for each child in high school. It will be very welcome.

There are about 8,000 families in my electorate who will get the increase of up to $600 in family tax benefit A from 1 July next year—another important initiative to support families. Just over 9½ thousand young people, single parents and unemployed people in my electorate will receive the supplementary allowance. This is designed to help them meet the cost of utilities. The singles will receive $210 and couples $350. I think it is important to acknowledge that sometimes people hear the big stories and think: 'You're just talking about families.' That is not the case; we are also seeking to support young people, single parents and the unemployed with that sort of allowance.

There will be, very importantly, about 47,000 workers in my electorate who will receive a tax cut from 1 July this year. When you add that to the history of tax cuts that we have put in place since coming to government, it is a very important addition to give people more of their own income in order to meet their costs of living. About 4,000 workers in my electorate will no longer pay tax due to the increase in the tax-free threshold. So it is a great incentive to say to low-income workers, 'Get back in the workforce and engage with the workforce, even if it is getting a casual or part-time job, because you can earn up to about $18,000 now before you will even have to put a tax return in. You won't have to pay tax.' It is an enormous initiative. In my area it will be very welcome for 4,000 workers and I am sure it will be welcome in many other members' areas where there are significant issues around unemployment, particularly if that unemployment is connected to people who are disengaged from the workforce, such as disadvantaged young people, single parents or mature workers who have been out of the workforce for a long time. We know that that first step in the door, whether it is a part-time or casual job, can be the turning point to getting someone re-engaged with the workforce. To be able to say to those people, 'You can earn up to $18,000 without paying tax,' is a huge incentive. I am really pleased with that initiative in the budget.

There will also be nearly 23,000 workers in my area who earn up to $37,000 who will receive up to $500 towards their superannuation accounts—again, another great Labor tradition building on superannuation in this country. One of the GFC realities was that one of the strengths of our economy was our investment of over $1 trillion dollar in superannuation and the solid savings base that gives to this nation, so it is good to see that also supported in this budget. About 45½ thousand workers will get increased superannuation benefits when we move from nine to 12 per cent. As we all seek to have a retirement that is long and of quality, we will increasingly appreciate the importance of that increase to superannuation. Just over 15,000 small businesses will be eligible for the instant tax write-off for each asset worth up to $6,500. I think it is really important I make the point to my own local businesses: that is not one a year; that is up to $6,500 on every asset that they purchase, including up to $5,000 on a new vehicle, if that is part of their business requirement. When we initially introduced this as part of the stimulus response to the GFC, local small businesses in my area got a double bang because they bought from each other. It was not just the purchasing business that got the benefit of an instant asset write-off; they were likely to buy their car or their new computer or new piece of equipment from another local business, so that business got the benefit as well. I would argue it is a really good incentive. Some of my local businesses talk to me about the fact that we could not get the one per cent decrease in tax through for them because, sadly, those on the other side opposed it. But they were very supportive of this initiative, which provides the capacity for them to write off these assets and also supports other local businesses. At a more local level, the budget contains just over $1 million towards local roads for the Wollongong City Council, and I know they very much welcome that investment.

There is a commitment in this budget of $25.5 million towards the next stage of the Maldon-Dombarton rail link, something I have been campaigning for since I was first elected. Some members here might have an understanding of it. It was actually half built by the state government. When Mr Greiner was elected as Premier he stopped it. It was in the mid-eighties, when the coal industry took a dive. In a sadly short-sighted way, it was seen as not worth proceeding with. There are magnificent visions of a fly-over bridge across the gorges, but it just stops half-way. It is half built and has sat like that for nearly 30 years now.

The port of Port Kembla has become a critically significant port for the eastern seaboard of New South Wales. There is real capacity at Port Kembla to utilise it in a greater way and to create more local jobs, but we need that rail link completed. The Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, Minister Albanese, has very much supported us on that project. When the Prime Minister came to the area to respond to the BlueScope announcement, she announced that we would commit to taking that project to the next stage and to get all the engineering and environmental work done. I will continue to lobby to get it included on the next round of nation-building infrastructure priorities. It is not a small task but it is a strategically very important and significant task.

All round, this is a great Labor budget, doing all the things that the nation needs to do. I absolutely commend these bills to the House.

Ken Wyatt (Hasluck, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak on the Appropriation Bill (No.1) 2012-2013 and related bills. Before I examine some of the critical infrastructure needs that have been left off the list for Hasluck yet again, I would like to take the time to speak about the suite of bills in their totality and what they mean for the Australian people. This budget will deliver all the wrong things for the residents of Hasluck and the nation as a whole.

Inside Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2012-2013 is what amount to bribes to soften the impact of the world's largest carbon tax. There are massive blow-outs in the cost of border protection as the government run around trying to find rooms for asylum seekers as detention centres overflow. The NDIS is underfunded, while equity funding for the NBN is being kept off the bottom line of the budget. Behind the smoke and mirrors is a government that has hidden the rise in the Commonwealth debt limit from $250 billion to $300 billion in Appropriation Bill (No. 2) to avoid proper scrutiny and debate on the matter.

This government continues to borrow more than $100 million per day and in four years has delivered a cumulative record deficit of $174 billion. The interest on this debt runs into the billions of dollars every year. That is money that could be better spent on many projects in many electorates, but in particular Hasluck, which is being neglected by this Labor government. All of the above comes without taking into account the world's biggest carbon tax, which is being rolled out in a matter of weeks. The carbon tax will hurt the people of Hasluck; make no mistake about that. Despite the fact that Julia Gillard said, 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 world's biggest carbon tax is about to hit families, jobs and investment at the world's worst time. The budget papers confirm that despite falling international prices Labor's toxic tax will go up to $29 a tonne in just three years, and an additional $36 million will be spent on taxpayer funded carbon tax advertising over the next two years. The advertisements mention the cash bribes but do not even mention what they are for—the world's biggest carbon tax. The carbon tax will cascade through the economy. Despite the Labor government's lie that only big emitters will pay the price, the cost of virtually everything will go up and up and up.

I would like to draw the chamber's attention to the Red Hill Waste Management Facility to the north-east of my electorate. This is managed by the East Metropolitan Regional Council, a conglomerate of local governments in Hasluck and its surrounds. The Department of Environment and Conservation provides the EMRC with an annual licence to operate the site once it has been adequately demonstrated that a range of conditions regarding pollution, buffer distances, noise control and waste types and quantities can be met. The use of modern techniques and principles of sanitary landfill design and operation, including leachate collection and methane gas capture, have contributed to the site successfully operating within DEC conditions for the last 22 years.

I had the privilege of visiting the Red Hill site with the member for Swan, Steve Irons, earlier this year, and we were blown away by the work and effort that has been put into managing landfill responsibly—educating schools on responsible waste disposal and capturing in excess of 75 per cent of all gases emitted from the landfill. These are just a few of the amazing things that the Red Hill Waste Management facility is doing to protect our environment. You would think that such an initiative would be rewarded by a government—but, no, this facility is one of the entities set to be included in the carbon tax. The reason? Its size.

You would think that the pooling of the resources of six local government authorities to save money and create a better environmental outcome than a typical landfill would be rewarded, but not in this instance. This government and its lazy approach to environmental policy is penalising them. I know they are worried about this tax. They will be forced to put up their prices and inflict an additional cost on constituents within my electorate and surrounding ones. They are worried that this will drive some people away from the landfill to dump their waste illegally as it becomes too expensive to do the right thing. This is another example of Labor's failed policies, which are too numerous to mention, even in a 15-minute speech.

I turn my attention to small business in Hasluck, which is the engine room of the local economy. They get no compensation for the carbon tax in this suite of appropriation bills. The Gillard government must cut red tape and axe the carbon tax to help improve small business conditions which are well below the five-year average. The Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry's May 2012 Small Business Survey states that small business conditions were at low levels, with conditions expected to deteriorate further in the coming quarter.

The Prime Minister has also dumped her promised company tax cuts. Less than two months ago she said, 'If you are against cutting company tax, you are against economic growth. If you are against economic growth, then you are against jobs.' I regularly speak to local business owners in Hasluck when I am visiting shopping centres or precincts or when I am out doorknocking. They all tell me the same thing: this is the worst possible time to introduce the world's biggest carbon tax.

Small businesses are the biggest employers in my electorate and, in uncertain economic times, everyone is concerned that this carbon tax, which will have no environmental benefit to Australia, is the coup de grace to economic growth and many small businesses in Hasluck. If you think I am exaggerating about this, I challenge Labor members to go and visit small business owners in their own electorates. Ask them how things are really going and you will find out there is no popular support for this ridiculous tax. Tourism is a vital sector in the north of Hasluck, particularly the Swan Valley, Kalamunda and Guildford. People travel from afar to visit these areas and incorporate these activities when they are choosing to visit Perth from Asia and even Europe. Once again, this budget does nothing to help this struggling sector. Let me highlight some figures to show just how important tourism is nationally. It is worth 5.2 percent of our gross domestic product; or, in money terms, $73.3 billion. It employs nearly 910,000 people.

However, the tourism sector is feeling the pinch. Domestic tourism numbers are falling as the cost-of-living pressures hit Hasluck and Australian families. International tourists are faced with the strong Australian dollar, that rising debt levels do nothing to address. Although the sector is hurting, this suite of appropriation bills fails to provide adequate carbon tax compensation for tourism. It stands to destroy 6,400 jobs and cut 10 per cent from industry profits. It will also reduce Tourism Australia's budget by 6.2 per cent or $8 million in real terms.

During its peak in the Howard years, Australian tourism made a profit of $3.584 billion. Next year the sector will stand to make a net loss of $8.7 billion under the Gillard government. Shame on this inept government! I am a strong believer in a smaller government that allows citizens to flourish without being saddled with mountains of red tape and regulations. Excessive government interference in the market place creates inequitable outcomes.

Honourable members interjecting —

It is good that the members are having the conversation. Instead of spending even more money on creating further bureaucracy, I call on this government to spend money on helping fertile ground where small businesses can flourish. Spend money on actually helping the people of my electorate to be masters of their own destinies instead of spending millions on advertising propaganda with no positive outcome.

In the south of Hasluck there is a desperate need for further services for my constituents. Let me highlight a few areas of desperate need that would create an ideal set of conditions for attracting more businesses and residents who would boost our local and even national economies. This is where a relatively small investment from the federal government would have major benefits to its citizens.

The growth areas in the east of Western Australia are in the Southern River, Gosnells, Huntingdale and Thornlie areas. Many people from these areas are forced to travel up to an hour to their place of employment as house prices rise and they cannot afford to buy closer to the CBD or work centres. Their commute is often slowed down terribly by the inadequate Nicholson Road and Garden Street roundabout. Delays of 30 minutes or more at this one intersection are not uncommon. This is made worse by the fact that a national train line runs just 200 metres from one of the entries to the roundabout. This and the fact that it is close to a major arterial road, the Roe Highway, causes misery for many. An overpass there would allow the free movement of traffic over this rail line and help emergency vehicles clear the area. It would also help small businesses based along Nicholson Road to attract more customers who are not put off by these delays.

To relieve congestion over a period of time, creating an environment where more people can work from home if they choose to is important. Giving businesses better access to faster download speeds is also critical if an area expects to hold its local industry and not lose them to the CBD. The broadband services in this part of Hasluck are very slow, and in some cases non-existent. I regularly receive letters, calls and emails from constituents in these areas who are frustrated about this situation. A common thread that runs throughout these complaints is what happens when they call Telstra.

When they call they are told there is nothing that Telstra can do due to the snail's pace of the NBN rollout. They are also told that they will have to wait anywhere from five to seven years for faster broadband speeds. How is my electorate supposed to grow in a sustainable way when people hear that moving into the south of Hasluck means living with dial-up speeds and shocking traffic congestion? Ten to 15 years ago broadband speeds may have been considered a luxury but everything is pushed online now, and my constituents in the south of Hasluck are being left behind by this woefully inadequate government. At this point I would like to acknowledge the work of the WA state government member Peter Abetz MLA, who has been tireless in his efforts to improve the Garden Street-Nicholson Road intersection and to improve broadband speeds in this area. Between us we have lobbied hard at state and federal levels for two years to see this change realised. I would also like to mention the outstanding work of three local governments in Hasluck—the City of Gosnells, the Shire of Kalamunda and the City of Swan—who all travel regularly to Canberra to lobby for improvements to our area. They go out of their way to facilitate shadow ministers I bring to Hasluck so they can bring these matters to their attention.

What we never see is the actual Labor government ministers venturing into Hasluck to speak to these LGAs. Unfortunately, despite their best effort, it seems the Gillard government is content to ignore their practical approaches to improving parts of Hasluck and seems to be content on rolling out bloated, ill-conceived policies that do more to create blockages in society than to improve things.

Finally, the surge of new residents to this area—particularly Gosnells—has created an unbearable strain on GP services. There are over 90 languages spoken in this area of Hasluck. The government is dumping people into this area with little or no support. This is not news to this government. In a bid to prop up support in the Midland area, the Gillard government chose to build a GP superclinic right across the road from the existing GP superclinic instead of putting one in Gosnells, which has limited access to the range of GP services. This neglect is outrageous and shows how badly it performs with policy. Waiting times and the lack of bulk billing in Gosnells is a major issue for my constituents and has once again not been addressed or funded in this budget.

People want to know when choosing an area to live in whether or not they can have access to the CBD and transport links and whether or not they can shop if they need to. They need to have access to modern technology like broadband and to be able to visit a GP when necessary without month-long waiting times. The Gillard government has repeatedly failed tens of thousands of people in this area of Hasluck not by accident but by ignoring the lobbying of local government, the complaints of local people and the pressures placed on them by political representatives. Instead of spending billions of dollars housing illegal immigrants in this country, Prime Minister, adopt the coalition policy on border protection; use the billions you will save to improve the lives of Australian people; and take greater care of our pensioners, self-funded retirees and service men and women. It is what they deserve.

I know that we live in times in which the global economy will have an impact. Certainly the Department of the Treasury papers say the conditions in some parts of the economy are likely to remain challenging. I think that in challenging circumstances the ability of the people of Australia to access services that they pay for through their taxes and expect to be delivered so that their needs are met also has to be considered.

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

Today I rise to speak on the 2012-2013 budget. I was wondering as I was putting together this speech what Tony Abbott might have said to his party room meeting the day after the Treasurer delivered the speech. I am sure he would have said: 'Let's not worry about facts. They get in the way of the truth. Let's get out there and continue to mislead the Australian community about the state of the economy.'

This budget very much is a Labor budget. It is structured in a way that will support families, particularly in terms of delivering economic growth, supporting low unemployment, supporting low inflation and keeping downward pressure on interest rates. If we look at the state of the economy today with its national unemployment rate of 4.9 per cent, the reality is that our unemployment rate is lower than that of the Howard government. We have created some 800,000 jobs in what has been a remarkably challenging economic environment not just domestically but also globally. And we have heard members on this side of the House indicating very clearly the challenges that we face. This budget very much delivers on Labor's commitment to continue to maintain a surplus, which of course is very, very important. But it also is a Labor budget in that it is structured in a way that will help families, particularly in responding to cost-of-living pressures.

Labor is delivering for my constituents throughout their entire lives to ensure access to services and support and to make sure that no-one is left behind. From Alvie to Belmont, children are getting the best start in life thanks to Labor's paid parental leave scheme. This scheme provides working mums—some 969 of them—support in looking after their children in the very, very early weeks of their lives and supporting mums and dads who might choose to adopt a young one. It is a fantastic Labor initiative. This will ensure that parents have that precious opportunity to bond very early with their child, which I think is certainly very important. Having two young sons myself, I know the importance of not only spending time with a newborn baby but also in assisting our wives and partners in looking after those children.

From Colac to Dereel, Labor is supporting the delivery of high-quality child care. The 50 per cent child-care rebate is very much appreciated by families across my electorate. Indeed, there are about 3,854 families that have been enjoying that benefit to enable young parents to return to work and to continue to support their families. From Elliminyt to Forrest, this budget delivers a boost to family tax benefit A and family tax benefit B provisions. In Corangamite, there are over 10,000 families who rely on family tax benefit B, and that will provide $110 per child per year—again helping to support families. There are around 8,000 families on family tax benefit B, and that will provide those families with an extra $69 per child per year. Once again it is Labor that is delivering money to help support families with children. We know that there are many pressures on families, and anything that Labor can do to support families we will of course do.

There are also around 9,000 families across the electorate who will be receiving the schoolkids bonus. My electorate of Corangamite is a key part of the Geelong growth corridor. Many young families are moving to my electorate to build their first homes and to raise their families. The schoolkids bonus is going to help support them in raising their children—which I know is a very popular aspect of the budget. There will be some $410 per year in support provided to families with children in primary school, and some $820 will be provided to families with kids in secondary school. This is an initiative that will help right across my electorate to support families in their efforts to raise and educate their children. It is absolutely the Labor way; it is what we do. We are providing additional support for teenagers so that families can support young people, particularly during their later high school years, their university studies, their apprenticeship studies and the like. Again that is very important.

Some 50,000 taxpayers in the electorate of Corangamite will be receiving a tax cut on 1 July, and some 40,000 of those 50,000 constituents will receive a tax cut of at least $300 a year. These tax cuts are very well tailored to support my community, in particular to support people who have been out of the workforce for some time, whether it be because they have been raising a family or because they have been made redundant at some point in the years before. These tax cuts will provide a real incentive to get those young and older people back into the workforce. It is a Labor way to go about things. The tax cuts will very much support families in Corangamite, and that is very important.

Labor has historically played a very important role in working, particularly with the trade unions, to build and deliver people's superannuation savings. It was Labor and the trade unions that worked hand in glove to put in place compulsory superannuation savings that enable people to retire with dignity. That very strong Labor initiative was undertaken primarily in the eighties and nineties. It is Labor again that is recognising the importance of superannuation—and we are particularly recognising that a larger percentage of our society is going to be post the age of 65 as the baby boomer generation moves through. We are recognising the importance of providing dignity in retirement to families by increasing superannuation by three per cent. That means that a typical 30-year-old worker today will retire with more than $108,000 in their superannuation account when they get to retirement. That is critically important not only for those individuals but also for the Commonwealth budget, because it will enable future governments to keep our pension costs low. It is important that, wherever we can do that, we do so.

Corangamite—and, indeed, the Greater Geelong area—has a very large number of small businesses. In fact it is often misunderstood how important the small business sector is in the Greater Geelong region. Most people when they think about the Greater Geelong region talk about the very large manufacturing businesses that are in the region—and indeed they are important. But equally important, if not more important in terms of it being the engine room of the Geelong economy from both an employment perspective and a wealth generation perspective, is small business. Labor recognises that, and we are putting in place arrangements to help support it, including the instant asset write-off. These measures, I think, are very important combined with the loss carry-back mechanism—again, something that will support cash flow and liquidity in small business. It is something that I am very pleased with and very proud of.

Unfortunately, we were not able to continue to pursue the one per cent tax cut that we wanted to provide to business across my electorate and the economy. We were not able to do that because Tony Abbott was not prepared to support tax cuts for small business. It is very disappointing, but we have put in place a number of other mechanisms in its stead which we have been able to get through the parliament.

Labor also recognises that for pensioners—and I have some 25,000 pensioners in my electorate—it is a particularly challenging and difficult time. We are putting in place additional money, some $338 a year for singles on the pension and some $510 a year for combined pensions, to support them in meeting the cost of living pressures that are within the economy at the moment.

This budget is very much a Labor budget. Time does not permit me to talk about some of the very local outcomes that we have been able to secure not only in Corangamite but across the Greater Geelong region. I look forward to engaging with my constituency around those matters to highlight the very strong contribution this government, the Labor government, is making to the Greater Geelong region.

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

It is my pleasure to speak on these appropriation bills and the budget itself. In doing so, I want to raise a number of issues with the government's economic approach, which is embodied in their budget. At the outset, let me say that this budget should be judged against the backdrop of the government's believability, against the government's capacity in the past and against the government's performance. Indeed, as the shadow Treasurer said just last week at the National Press Club, a budget is a measure of so many things: a government’s honesty and honour, a government’s competence and capacity. This budget, unfortunately, as so many Australians now know, is a budget that fails all of those critical tests.

Across Australia at the moment, there are various indicators of falling confidence. Just recently the Sydney Morning Herald had the headline 'Consumer confidence wilts'. 'Lack of faith puts Australian economy at risk,' warned Dennis Shanahan in the Australian. 'Small business pessimistic,' pronounced the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry. Just this week the AustralianFinancial Review proclaimed 'Labor’s image is bad for business.' It is the case that as this is happening the shadow of what is happening overseas, particularly in Europe, is critical. We see Greece threatening to drag the entire eurozone over the brink. We observe America grappling with huge economic difficulties and massive deficits that have driven the US federal government debt to 100 per cent of GDP. We hear the Chinese economy may also be slowing. Indeed, in question time this week the Treasurer spoke of events in Europe that he said 'cast a very dark shadow over the global economy'. He went on to concede that Australia was 'not immune from the global instability'. The Treasurer has a real talent for stating the obvious.

The critical point as we debate this package of bills and the budget is how, in the midst of this global turmoil and turbulence, the government is affecting Australia's ability to withstand these challenges. Has the Treasurer strengthened or weakened Australia's economic position? Is his approach and that of the Prime Minister making the Australian economy more or less robust? Has Australia's economic resilience been buttressed or buffeted by the policies of this government? The answer to these questions is clear: despite Labor's best efforts to obscure and obfuscate the facts, the fact is that unfortunately this government's crisis of competence has spawned a crisis of confidence throughout the Australian economy.

We emerged from the global financial crisis in good shape. The primary reason we emerged from the global financial crisis in good shape is that we entered it in great shape. We have so far weathered the worst of the storm, because Australia was in a very solid fiscal position back in 2008. As we debate these budget bills we should look back to the days of surplus budgets. We should look back to the days of paying off Labor's $96 billion of net government debt. We should look back to the days when not only $96 billion of net government debt was paid off but also $45 billion was left as a nest egg in the budget tables for all to see to buffer against future crises and challenges, just as it did.

Without the policies of the Howard government we would not have been able to emerge from the global financial crisis in the shape that we did. Without the responsible budgeting of Treasurer Costello between 1996 and 2007 we would not have been in a markedly different position on the debt front from many other countries. In fact, if we had kept accumulating debt at the rate that we were in the last five years of the Keating government we would have entered that crisis with much more lead in our saddlebags.

Over the last 4½ years, first with the member for Griffith as Prime Minister and now with the member for Lalor as Prime Minister, we have seen a frenzy of ill-conceived and ill-executed spending. The government have not only burnt through that $45 billion cash nest egg that was left after paying off the $96 million of net government debt but plunged on the forecast to $145 billion of net debt, nearly $200 billion of deterioration over their period of office. The Treasurer likes to claim that it was the government stimulus spending that saw Australia through the global financial crisis. The Treasurer does not like to talk about the waste. The Treasurer does not like to talk about the fact that he has been unable to deliver a surplus budget.

The Australian public have seen the record of this government on so many things—from the carbon tax which they were told would never happen, to the Treasurer's constant pronouncements about what his budget will do each year. It is worth looking at how he has put this budget together and what that means for the future. Sometimes what he does not mention is more important than what he does mention. In trying to conjure together the projection, the forecast, of a small $1.5 billion surplus, the Treasurer has fiddled with as many programs as possible to shuffle money from one financial year to the next—all so that he can project, as of now, a surplus. The truth, which he did not mention in his budget speech, is that he is seeking to increase the Commonwealth debt limit from $250 billion to $300 billion, in other words increasing the national credit card limit. Instead of stating this in his budget speech, of course, it is buried deeper than the wreck of the Titanic in a vain attempt to escape the blatant contradiction between his record and his rhetoric. Despite his talk of fiscal restraint, this Treasurer will continue to borrow $100 million every day.

If we look back at the current financial year—that is, the financial year that the Treasurer talked about and predicated his last budget on, just over a year and a couple of weeks ago when he stood in the House of Representatives—and when you look at his deficit estimates, it really does provide a window into both his capacity and the extent to which the Australian people should believe his pledge of a $1.5 billion surplus. Just 18 months ago, in the mid-year economic update, the Treasurer said that the deficit for the current financial year—which ends in five weeks or so—would be about $12 billion. By budget night last May, he said that the $12 billion had almost doubled to $22 billion for this financial year. By December last year, in the six-monthly official update, it has risen again, from $22 billion to $37 billion. Then on budget night he estimated that the final outcome would be $44 billion. That is, over 18 months, $12 billion to $44 billion. We will not get the final figure until September—and we ain't finished yet. There are still a few weeks left in this financial year.

But this Treasurer who—and let me be generous and just take the one-year blow-out—forecasts a $22 billion deficit and says it will come in at 44 billion, missed by that much and yet he expects us to believe that he will deliver the small surplus. Even to get those figures into the budget, it meant money-shuffling throughout programs on the most ridiculous level. And this is before he has introduced a carbon tax and all the other taxes that I do not have time to speak about.

It is no wonder that when small business owners and families across Australia look at the economic challenges coming down the pipeline, and then look at the capacity of this Treasurer to deal with them, they lack confidence. They lack confidence because the only thing they can trust with this Treasurer is that his word will not be kept. The only thing they can trust with this Treasurer is that his forecast will not be met. That is the only thing small business owners and families across Australia can trust with this Treasurer.

Small businesses are critical. There are 2.7 million of them. If they lack confidence, that has a huge impact on our economy. It is little wonder that the Dun and Bradstreet business failures and start-up analysis for the December 2011 quarter found that small business start-ups had fallen a staggering 95 per cent. These figures show that small businesses, and the small-business leaders of tomorrow, are looking at this Treasurer and looking at this government's lack of competence and these figures show they do not have the confidence to begin a small business—and that is before we talk about what is going on in the small business sector itself. I make this prediction: when we speak on these bills next year, we will be talking about how, once again, the Treasurer has missed his forecasts and misled the Australian people.

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

Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Speaker, and I congratulate you on your elevation to the chair. This is the first time I have spoken when you have been in the chair and I know that you will be a fine Deputy Speaker.

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

Thank you.

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

I rise to support the budget that was brought down on 8 May. I would like to congratulate the Treasurer on the fine work that he has done in putting together a budget that I am proud to take to my electorate. This is a budget that delivers to Australian families and a budget that delivers to older Australians. It is a budget that will see Australia go into surplus by the end of this year. It is a budget that really hones in on the issues that are of greatest importance to the people that I represent in this parliament. It is a budget that delivers on the National Disability Insurance Scheme, and that is something that is very close to my heart, as I worked for 12 years in the area of disability before coming to this place. I know how important it is for people with a disability to have the opportunity to maximise their quality of life and to be able to have opportunities that they are currently denied. I know how important it is for their families and their carers to have certainty about what is going to happen to their child when they are no longer able to care for them. I know how important it is for them to see that their child is respected and offered opportunities that other children are offered. Quite often in the past they have been denied these opportunities. The National Disability Insurance Scheme is creating a new era, an era where people with disabilities will have the opportunity to maximise their independence and to live as long as they possibly can in a situation where, maybe, they can live independently in the community, looking at their options for employment and ensuring that into the future they will have choices and opportunities that they have been denied. I really encourage the opposition to support those particular changes and the National Disability Insurance Scheme.

The other area that I think was particularly impressive was dental health. For a long time Australians have been denied the opportunity to have the dental health care that they need. In this House earlier this week, we debated a motion—or a bill, I think—that was put forward by the shadow health minister. I was extremely disappointed that in the overall scheme of things he brought a bill to this parliament that actually is about 37 dentists and not about providing dental health care to Australians. The chronic dental health program that is in place at the moment has benefited some people, but there are a lot of people who do not have a chronic dental health issue who are denied access to this scheme. Whilst a millionaire can get access to the chronic dental health scheme, somebody on Newstart or a pensioner who relies on their pension and enjoys reasonably good health is denied any access to dental health care. So the major commitment in this budget to dental health is something that will benefit that people I represent in this place. It means $515 million in funding which will address the immediate dental healthcare needs. All those people who have been languishing on the dental health waiting list will have a chance now to be seen a lot quicker. I checked what the current waiting time is in my electorate. People are waiting months. People come to me in my office and have told me that they have been waiting for over 12 months to get the dental care that they need. I think that is very unfair. This is addressing that issue. This is putting in place a program and funds that will address an area of real need.

There will $346 million over three years—it is going to blitz this dental health waiting list—and $78 million to help dentists relocate to regional and remote areas. While it might be a problem getting dental health care if you are on a low income in an area like mine, after 12 or 18 months you can access it. But, in some areas, you have absolutely no chance of ever being able to get that dental health assistance. I know when the Howard government was in power and the Leader of the Opposition was the health minister, we were advised that the Commonwealth's contribution to dental health was made through private health insurance. Private health insurance is something that not everybody can afford, and it is those people who cannot afford private health insurance that are the ones languishing on the dental health waiting list. These changes are going to be welcomed by everyone I represent in this parliament.

The money that has been put into the national health reform is something that has also made a big difference within my electorate. There have been big, big changes, and now with the local hospital networks it has really improved the functioning of the health system.

I was a member of the Committee on Health and Ageing in the parliament when the Blame game report was brought down. When that report was brought down it showed how it was a very convoluted system and how it needed to be reformed. The previous government did nothing about it. The Rudd and Gillard governments have embraced it and have undertaken reforms that are benefiting all Australians.

One area of health that received extra funding was the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program. In the first week of June it is the National Bowel Cancer Week. During that week I will be holding a forum within my electorate. A wife of a friend of mine died of bowel cancer earlier this year. If she had had a bowel cancer screening test she would still be with us here today. She had had bowel cancer for five years by the time it was finally discovered and she was being treated for something else at the time. Also at that forum will be somebody from the Cancer Council, obviously, speaking and somebody who has survived bowel cancer.

This money over four years to expand the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program is welcomed by everyone. I was pleased to hear the minister say that in the future she is going to expand it even further. My local Rotary Club is currently gearing up to undertake its bowel screening campaign in the community, where they will go out there and get as many people to have the bowel cancer screening test. It is a really, really important initiative in this budget.

Members of the opposition have been scathing in their criticism of the schoolkids bonus. I would like to share with the opposition the fact that in my electorate it was welcomed. The parents who heard comments made by the opposition that they were going to go and waste that money on gambling and alcohol and drugs were absolutely horrified. These are parents who are buying school uniforms and books for their kids, supporting their kids in their education, and they are being accused by the opposition of going to waste this money. It is absolutely horrific that any opposition in this parliament could come out and be so disparaging of Australian families. I think they stand condemned by their actions in relation to that and I am sure the Australian people will let them know loud and clear just how important this bonus is to them in providing education for their children. The other area that I was particularly pleased with in the budget was the Living Longer, Living Better aged-care reforms. It is a massive reform to the aged-care sector. It is about delivering better access to aged-care services. It is about addressing the critical shortage in aged care. It is about allowing older people to stay in their homes for a lot longer. It is about giving support to carers. It is about addressing the national dementia epidemic. I might add here that, as you well know, Mr Deputy Speaker, the health and ageing committee is now conducting an inquiry into dementia, and I think that we will really become aware of just how important this need is.

This is a new approach to aged care. I moved a private member's motion in this House on Monday and I was absolutely horrified to hear speaker after speaker on the opposition side saying that they did not support this package, that they did not support massive reforms to the aged-care sector that would deliver great outcomes to older people in the community. They were at odds with the pensioners and senior citizens at Lake Munmorah Senior Citizens. When I attended their meeting and explained to them how the system would work, they were really very, very excited about it and they were pleased to hear that they would not be forced to sell their family home. It is a great initiative.

I was a little bit disappointed in the budget in relation to foreign aid. I would have liked us to have kept the previous goal, but the Treasurer has assured us that it is only moving the time frame out by a year. But I would have liked to have seen us uphold our former commitment in relation to foreign aid. In the area of Newstart I think that there was room to provide a little bit more support for people who are on Newstart. But, overwhelmingly, I see that this is a budget that will benefit the people I represent in this parliament.

It is a budget that has delivered many things to the people of the Shortland electorate, particularly through the programs that have been funded through this budget—for example, the Energy Efficiency Scheme that has delivered in excess of $353,000 to the Lake Macquarie Business Enterprise Centre. They are welcome initiatives that are going to benefit the people I represent in this parliament. (Time expired)

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

I rise to speak about yet another federal Labor government budget—yet another great disappointment for my constituency on the Gold Coast and yet another squandered opportunity. The reality is that this was a typical Labor budget in that, despite its headline surplus figure of $1.5 billion, it will in reality be another significant budget deficit. We have remarked that it will take 100 years of Wayne Swan surpluses to repay four years of Wayne Swan deficit. The fundamentals are this: Labor are bad economic managers. That Australia is still in relatively good shape is a consequence of the longevity of the reforms that were implemented by the Howard government and the very strong economic footing that the Howard government provided the people of Australia with and indeed the way in which our institutions were funded and the debt repaid.

There are several inescapable facts. Most fundamental of these is the key driver of Australia's debt-to-GDP ratio, which was 100 per cent a consequence of the fact that the previous Howard government and the then Treasurer, Peter Costello, left Australia with zero public debt—zero public debt. In fact, Australia was left at the end of the Howard government's period in office with net assets of $70 billion. In the short four or five years since the Labor Party was elected, we have seen that position erode from a $70 billion net asset position to now a negative $130 billion of debt. That is, for all intents and purposes, a $200 billion turnaround in the space of about four years. That, of itself, speaks volumes about the Australian Labor Party.

If you listened to the Australian Labor Party, you would think that this complete erosion of our nation's finances was a consequence of external factors. If you listened to the narrative from the Australian Labor Party, you would think, 'Look, we just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, and that is why Australia's finances have been completely eroded.' That is a nice cover, but it is not the reason for the turnaround. The reason Australia's finances have gone backwards at an incredible rate of knots is the reckless spending and the badly applied use of taxpayers' funds by this Labor government. We have seen billions upon billions upon billions of dollars utterly wasted by this government; which, frankly, in my view, borders on economic incompetence.

Speakers from the government in this debate have stood up, puffed their chests out and said: 'We are proud to give money out to Australian kids through their families. We are proud about what we did with the Investing in Our Schools Program.' Do you know what? I do not share that pride. It is not because I begrudge Aussie kids having brand-new school halls. It is not because I think that parents are going to waste money. The reason I begrudge the Australian Labor Party, when they stand up to crow about their so-called economic achievements, is that those Aussie kids that they talk about—who are sitting in those school halls, whose parents are receiving $800 or $900 or $1,000 in cash handouts from this Labor government—will be paying off the debt that Labor has left us for the next 20 years. So, when they sit in a school hall, they are not sitting in that school hall with the full knowledge that that school hall was built by borrowing money from overseas, money that those kids will have to pay off for 20 years before Australia is even back in the position of starting to save for our future. That is the real legacy of the Australian Labor Party. It is entirely consistent with Labor's form when it has been in federal government before and with Labor's form in every single state across this Federation.

It is extraordinary when you look at the state of Queensland. For so long Queensland was the economic beacon of Australia. We were the lowest taxed state in the Federation and we were the central hub for economic activity in our Federation. After 20 years of Labor government in Queensland that has all been erased. Queensland is no longer the lowest taxed state in the Federation. We are about third or fourth. Queensland no longer is the epicentre of economic activity. Population growth in the state has declined to now being in net terms nearly zero. Economic growth has slowed down. The previous Bligh and Beattie Labor governments have left Queensland with debt of around $60 billion to $80 billion.

It is a farce that members of the Australian Labor Party stand up and try to whitewash these things, as if in some way they are good, because they care about the people, because they want to hand out money hand over fist, and say that it is the coalition who are the problem because we say no. That is right; we do say no. We say no repeatedly to this government when it comes to economic stewardship, because this government has frankly no idea. It is not bold. It is not visionary. It is not good governance to say: 'We want to hand out $900 here. We want to build $16 billion worth of school halls there. We want to spend money doing this and that and the other. It is the coalition who always stands in our way.' That is right. I am proud to stand in the way of the Australian Labor Party. I am proud to say to the Australian Labor Party, 'Your reckless spending must stop,' because I have two children and I know that it is my kids who will be paying off for decades the debt that the Australian Labor Party leaves behind.

At what point does the Australian Labor Party wake up, look in the mirror and say to the next generation of Australians, 'I am sorry; we have betrayed you'? At what point does the Australian Labor Party say to the Australian people, 'I am sorry; whereas the previous coalition government meant that we paid zero when it comes to paying off interest on debt, we now have to pay $8 billion a year in servicing interest that this government has racked up'?

I recall when the Labor Party first came to office, roughly four short years ago. At that time they wanted to increase Australia's debt ceiling to $75 billion. They said: 'Don't worry about it. We'll never reach it. $75 billion will be more than enough to see us through. We are never going to get to it.' Well, guess what? We got to $75 billion. So then the Labor Party said: 'We need to increase our debt ceiling to $100 billion. But don't worry. We'll never get to it. It is just a precaution. It is just there as part of our financial manoeuvring.' Guess what? We reached $100 billion. Then the Labor Party said: 'We need to increase our debt ceiling again, up to $200 billion.' And now the current debt ceiling is at $250 billion. Do you know what Labor is doing in these budget papers? In these budget papers the Labor Party says: 'Look, we are going to have to increase the debt ceiling again. We are just going to push it up to $300 billion. But don't worry about it. We will never get to it. $300 billion. It is okay. Our debt to GDP ratio is low by world standards.'

The audacity of the Australian Labor Party is extraordinary—their spending and the way they portray themselves. They constantly sap people's aspirations in this country by punishing those that are successful by saying, 'If you earn over $150,000, we are going to effectively tax the bejesus out of you.' It escapes them that this erodes the desire to move ahead in this country. They punish those who are successful, they punish those who generate wealth, they punish those who create employment, they punish the industries that are the entire reason the Australian economy is still moving forward, and then they redistribute all of that and give it to those who are not in that situation. Then they wonder why Australians say: 'Do you know what? This is just too hard. We would rather take our money and invest our capital elsewhere.' They seem to think that we live in a closed environment, where Australians do not have options to invest that capital in overseas markets—which they are doing, because that is more profitable for them than retaining their capital here.

In addition, it is important to recognise the opportunity cost of the way Labor wastes money; there are two ways Labor has wasted money. We have seen the billions of dollars that have been wasted on the school halls program, the pink batts scheme, GroceryWatch, Fuelwatch, the green car fund—the list is endless. You name it. Billions upon billions upon billions of dollars of money has been channelled into all of these harebrained schemes that Labor backs wholeheartedly the one minute and walks away from the next. That is the first opportunity cost.

The second opportunity cost relates to the fact that now, as I said, we are paying an interest bill of $8 billion a year. Under the coalition that $8 billion a year could have been spent on programs. There could have been new hospitals, new roads, infrastructure spending—a whole range of different things. That is what the coalition did.

What we are doing now as a direct consequence of Labor's spending is paying $8 billion a year in interest. I have to say to my constituents: 'I am sorry; we can't extend the heavy rail down to Gold Coast Airport—a cost of $2.8 billion—even though that money would have been available, because now that money has to go towards servicing Labor's debt. We cannot have $30 million for a cruise ship terminal on the Gold Coast—something that would drive employment and tourism—because now that money goes on repaying Labor's debt. We cannot find $2 billion to cover the cost of hosting the Commonwealth Games—something that would showcase my city and indeed all of Australia to the world—because now that money has to be spent on servicing Labor's debt. And we can't find $280 million for the cultural precinct at Evandale, because now that money has to be spent on servicing Labor's debt. We cannot find $1.8 billion to pay for light rail on the Gold Coast, because now that money has to be spent on Labor's debt.' n fact, one of the announcements that I made prior to the 2007 election was for $455 million for the widening of the M1 between Nerang and Tugun. Guess what? This government, in collaboration with the Queensland Labor government, tore that money away from the Gold Coast, ripped it away from my constituents and funnelled some of that money up the road. Instead of having an eight-lane carriageway on the M1, a national road between Brisbane and Sydney, we now have parts that are three lanes and other parts that are two lanes in each direction. That is Labor's legacy.

When people of the Gold Coast in my constituency look around and say, 'Where is the money for the light rail? Where is the money for the Commonwealth Games? Why aren't we improving heavy rail to the Gold Coast airport? Why aren't we doing something with the cruise ship terminal? Why aren't we seeing more funding like, for example, the local Roads to Recovery program, which was a coalition initiative—why aren't we seeing more funding there?' the answer is straightforward, and there are two reasons. Firstly, because that money now has to be spent to service the massive debt that the Labor Party has left us and, secondly, because that money was simply blown. Wasted. It may as well have been thrown on a fire and gone up in smoke; ridiculous programs, like their pink batts scheme—so-called stimulus programs.

If you want a good example of the way that this government has just absolutely wallowed in ineptitude, look at their set top box scheme, an announcement that I think was in the last federal budget. An allocation of around $450 per set top box installation to transform an old analogue TV to be digital-ready now—$450 per installation. The simple fact that you can buy a 42-inch plasma screen, delivered and installed, for less money than that—go to kogan.com.au if you need to verify it—escapes the Labor Party.

The reality is that this certainly has all the hallmarks of a Labor budget. It is a failed budget, and it fails because their centrepiece of this budget—which is to crow about additional compensation for Australian families as part of Labor's attempt to buy them off, frankly, before the introduction of the carbon tax—is nothing more than a laundering exercise. It is a laundering exercise, because Labor is borrowing that money from overseas, then taking that money and giving it to Australian families and saying, 'Aren't we great?' But there is a little asterisk at the end of that sentence. That little asterisk is this: that those Aussie kids who are supposedly the beneficiaries of that money will be the people who for the next two decades are forced to pay higher taxes in order to repay the massive debt that this government has racked up in four short years. One hundred years of Labor Party surpluses are required in order to repay four years of Labor Party debt and deficit. The Labor Party stands condemned for their reckless spending, for the opportunity costs that they have brought about on the Australian people and, most fundamentally, because they have betrayed future generations of Australians, who will have to repay the debt in order to get Australia back to square one. (Time expired)

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

I like the member for Moncrieff, and I have a healthy respect for his ability and capacity. I really cannot understand why he is not serving on the front bench, representing his party, but I am sure his time will come. But when we come to speak on the budget we come largely to speak about our local communities, and I have never heard such rubbish from him. I cannot believe the dissertation I have just heard from the member for Moncrieff. He represents a thriving tourism area. Where would it be now if Australia were in recession? How would the member for Moncrieff's electorate now be faring if, like Europe in particular, we were now in recession as a country?

As we speak today, in every corner of Europe they are wondering what they will do next about their economic situation. The eurozone is falling apart and they are wondering how they get growth back into their local economies, and they wonder how they are going to deal with the debt crisis of southern Europe. Meanwhile, back in Australia, of course, we still enjoy healthy growth. We managed to avoid recession, one of the only Western democracies to do so, and of course that has left us with a little bit of debt. The member for Moncrieff's alternative was not to spend that money and allow Australia to sink into a deep recession. All those things he was just talking about, which are no doubt worthy projects in his electorate, would not be funded today, because government revenues would have fallen considerably as the economy went into negative, and government outlays would have risen considerably as people joined the unemployment queues. Unemployment now in the Hunter region is at 3.9 per cent. In my electorate it is 3½ per cent. That would not be the case—

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

No, it isn't.

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

I will take the interjection. I am not sure what it was, but I suspect I know. I do not take all the credit for that, nor does the current Labor government. The Hunter region is transforming itself off the back of reforms over a period of more than 20 years, started by the Hawke and Keating governments, continued by the Howard government and now kicked along again by the current Labor government.

But let us not have this rubbish that this debt, which as a percentage of GDP is very small in Australia, is somehow a problem for us and that, if we had not had it, we would be funding things in the member for Moncrieff's electorate. That is not true. If we had gone down the path he has suggested, his electorate would be in much worse shape today than it is thanks to the intervention of this government—intervention recommended by no less a person than the then Treasury secretary, Ken Henry, who was very persuasive recently on 7.30. I can advise the member for Moncrieff that that full interview can be seen, by the way, on the ABC website, and he should read it. I would ask those who might be listening to this debate this morning to ask themselves who has it right—Ken Henry or the member for Moncrieff? I know where my money is, and I suspect most of them will come to the conclusion that Ken Henry probably has a better idea about these things than the member for Moncrieff, as talented as the member for Moncrieff might be. I suspect they would also see Ken Henry as being just a little more independent in his pronouncements than the member for Moncrieff is, because as you would expect the member for Moncrieff is in here playing the political game. I am not saying I have never done that. I am sure I did in my younger days, but I have come to mature and I have come to understand that you do better in this place if you speak frankly about the challenges facing us and the opportunities before us, and that is what I will do this morning in the time afforded me.

On that theme, I want to say this: when I was elected to the Cessnock City Council in 1987, the Cessnock LGA was in pretty bad shape. Historically the area affectionately known as the Coalfields was established on the back of pit tops. Cessnock, Paxton, Ellalong and Millfield—I could go on and on—were there because there were mines there. The mines were sunk first and the communities were established around them. Of course, eventually the mines moved on and the people did not. That left the Coalfields in pretty bad shape. When I was elected, unemployment in Cessnock, for example, was more than 13 per cent. Youth unemployment was probably around 30 per cent. Things were pretty rough. Our roads were goat tracks. Roads like Allandale Road, Maitland Road, Aberdare Road, Lang Street in Kurri, Mitchell Avenue in Kurri and Victoria Street in Kurri were just goat tracks. We still have some problems with roads; all of us continue to work on those. We have more than our fair share, but basically our roads have come a long way. We did not have recreational facilities to speak of. We did not have any decent parks. We do now. We did not have any traffic lights. When I was elected to the Cessnock council in 1987, there was not a set of traffic lights in the whole city—a city covering Cessnock, Kurri and many communities around them. We have many now. Many of these things come naturally as the city grows, but the Cessnock LGA is a very different place today from what it was then.

If we wanted entertainment in the Cessnock LGA in those days, we went to the club or the pub. There was nothing wrong with that; they are good pubs and clubs and they are getting even better. But, if we wanted to do something beyond that, we drove to Newcastle or, more likely, we drove to Sydney. Today Sydney comes to us. The vineyard concerts are becoming very famous and well attended.

The whole Cessnock economy has been transformed, driven by the services and retail sectors. Coalmining is very important. We are very fortunate, because we are part of the boom, but the boom is not in our backyard. A large proportion of our workforce still works in mining by travelling down to areas like the member for Charlton's area and more particularly to the Upper Hunter. But things have improved dramatically. I said that I think the unemployment then in Cessnock was 13 per cent. Today it is a six per cent unemployment rate in Cessnock, and 3.5 per cent is the unemployment rate in the Hunter electorate.

We have the Hunter Expressway now coming through our area—a federal government investment of $1.45 billion, which will transform traffic flows through the region and provide towns like Cessnock and Maitland and a number of communities in between—Lochinvar, Greta, Branxton, Mount Vincent, Mulbring et cetera—with much-needed bypasses of their local communities and much needed relief from heavy vehicle traffic in particular. The Hunter Expressway is going to significantly impact positively on the Hunter's economy.

I say all these things not to take credit for them, although I like to think that over 16 years in this place and then eight years before that on Cessnock council I played my role. I will say again that for 11½ years of that period the conservatives were in power here in Canberra, and they take some credit for some of the transformations we have seen in the Hunter's economy and social fabric over those years. It has been a team effort. When John Howard was the Prime Minister, I like to think that I worked pretty well with his government to do what was right for my electorate, including the Cessnock LGA, which I love very, very much. I have lived there all of my life and I suspect I will live there for the balance of my life.

One of the reasons I make this point is that yesterday Norsk Hydro announced that it has finally taken the decision to close down its aluminium-manufacturing plant in Kurri Kurri, with the loss of around 400 jobs. Already a number of months ago they closed down one potline, which caused them to shed about 150 jobs. This is very, very unfortunate, disappointing and distressing for those directly affected—either those who have been working at Hydro, some of them for many years, or those working in the industries would support Hydro, whether they be supplying food or doing other manufacturing and works associated with the plant.

What concerns me is the way people talk down the town in the wake of these things. Hydro have been making it clear for a while that aluminium prices and the Australian dollar were killing them. They have had the additional frustration of their inability to secure an appropriate and acceptable long-term power supply contract with the New South Wales government. We knew this was coming, as sad as we find it. But it is not the end of Kurri Kurri, it is not the end of the Cessnock LGA and it is certainly not the end of the Hunter electorate. We are a booming community. We are very fortunate. We have much at our disposal. With unemployment at 3.5 per cent in the Hunter electorate and six per cent in the Cessnock LGA or thereabouts, most of those workers, in my view, will have very good employment prospects. They are semiskilled and skilled, and well placed to pick up the enormous amount of job opportunities in the Hunter region, including very close to home. The biggest challenge for me when I became the member for Hunter was finding jobs to put people in. Today my biggest challenge is finding the people to fill the jobs. I regularly talk with employers who are simply crying out for employees.

A division having been called in the House of Representatives—

Sitting suspended from 11:59 to 12:15

If I were one to write and read my speeches, I might know where I was before I was interrupted by the division—a first for me—but I know what theme I was on, and it is this. The Cessnock LGA is in great shape. It is more beautiful than it once was and more vibrant than it once was. The unemployment rate has never been so low. We have never had such economic diversity and I am sure that all those who are looking for a job post-Hydro will find themselves a job in a labour market—and I remember where I was up to in my speech now—where employers are screaming for employees with the sorts of skills held by those who, very unfortunately, will be made redundant as a result of Hydro's closure. So my main message to the many out there talking the area down is: please stop it. It does not help. We are in very good shape and our future is a very bright one indeed. Please stop this rubbish about blaming the carbon price for the closure and, in doing so, making political capital out of what is a pretty distressing time for those who were directly affected.

In the minutes left to me, I want to mention a couple of people who have, sadly, passed on in recent times. I spoke about Mrs Lola Neilly in the adjournment debate on Monday, and I want to quickly mention two other people. One is Bill Parker, who was a Kurri resident, served for many, many years on Cessnock City Council, including a term as deputy mayor, and served with me for the eight years I was on Cessnock council. He was a wonderful individual of unchallenged integrity and a talented councillor who always put his city first. He will be sadly missed.

The second person I want to mention is Mr Kevin Levido. Kevin Levido was a very well known Cessnock resident from a very well-known family. He for many years managed the local Bandag tyre-retreading business for the O'Neill family. He was very active, like Bill Parker, in the Labor Party. He was also involved in a range of other organisations, including the local Masonic lodge. He was a very disciplined character and always very fit, even in his later years, but, again, like Bill Parker, he was a man of very great honesty and integrity. He was known to be pretty tough too, including on his employees and, indeed, those close to him. But that was his way—we are all different. He remained a person who was very highly respected in the local community. To both of those families once again go my sympathies and condolences.

Although we lost Bill probably some months ago now, this has been my first opportunity to acknowledge his passing and to thank him again for his contribution and to thank his family for allowing him to spend so much of his time doing what he loved, trying to improve his local community. It is the very community that I have just been talking about, of course—Kurri Kurri. If Bill were here, I have no doubt that he would agree with me that we have gone ahead in leaps and bounds since the days when we enjoyed one another's company on Cessnock council. He would not be happy to hear people talking down the local area. He, like me, would say, 'It's a tragedy we've lost Hydro, but, gee, we've got so much else going for us.'

Natasha Griggs (Solomon, Country Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2012-2013 and cognate bills. As I have said before, while I am in this place I will do whatever is possible to ensure that my electorate of Solomon—and, indeed, the Northern Territory—receive their fair share of funding from the Commonwealth government. Once again, despite the endless rhetoric from Labor in the lead-up to the budget, this was not a tough budget. There was more borrowing, more debt and more taxes and then a sugar-hit cash giveaway to offset the carbon tax.

The government have resorted to accounting tricks and money shuffling to manufacture the appearance of a wafer-thin budget surplus of $1.5 billion in the 2012-13 financial year. If the Gillard Labor government really believe they can deliver a surplus, why are they moving to increase the Commonwealth debt limit from $250 billion to $300 billion? They are increasing the government's credit card limit, and we all know that we cannot trust Labor with credit cards. They have tried to hide the fact that they need to increase the credit card limit by having the proposal buried in the Appropriation Bill (No. 2) in order to avoid proper scrutiny and a specific vote on the debt limit. This government are embarrassed that government debt levels are at absolutely unprecedented levels. They do not want Australians to know that they have maxed out the credit card again.

The Treasurer did not even mention the plan to raise the debt limit in his budget night speech, and, when he was asked later why he needed to lift the debt limit if he was returning the budget to surplus, he responded, 'Well, very simply, this is no big deal.' Net debt is rising to $145 billion. This dwarfs the previous record of $96 billion left by Paul Keating—and this is no big deal? That is not what my constituents tell me; they tell me it is a big deal.

This government tell us about restraint, but they are now spending $100 million more per year than they were when they came to office. This represents an almost 40 per cent increase over a time when inflation has risen to 13.2 per cent. Look at what Labor do; do not listen to what they say. They are continuing to borrow $100 million per day. That is $100 million for every day that this Labor government are in power. In 18 months, the government's estimated deficit on the 2012-13 financial year has blown out from $12 billion to $44 billion—and it may blow out even further, because the year is not over. In the last four years Labor have delivered record cumulative deficits of $174 billion. The interest payments on Labor's debt alone are set to reach an alarming $8 billion per year.

What this budget did was very simple: it confirmed to every Australian that this government are not fit to lead. The government are so swept up in holding onto power and improving the polls that they have forgotten their core responsibility to the Australian people. To a nation that is facing high costs of living, and dealing with a failed immigration policy, the Gillard Labor government give the following: the world's biggest carbon tax; cynical bribes to soften the impact of the carbon tax; broken promises on corporate tax cuts; higher unemployment; blowouts in the cost of border protection; an underfunded NDIS, which is nothing more than a cruel hoax; and equity funding for the NBN which is being kept off-budget. That is what this Labor government give us.

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 world's biggest carbon tax is about to hit families, jobs and investment at the world's worst time. The budget papers confirm that despite falling international prices Labor's toxic tax will go up to $29 a tonne in just three years and that an additional $36 million will be spent on taxpayer-funded carbon tax advertising over the next two years. The advertisements, as we know, do not even mention the carbon tax. They mention that cash bribes, but they do not mention the phrase 'carbon tax'. The carbon tax will cascade through the economy. Despite Labor's lie that only the big emitters will pay the price, the cost of virtually everything will go up, up and up. Small businesses, which are the engine room of the economy, will receive no compensation for the carbon tax.

We have had four deficits in four years. The overall budget for 2012 delivers a deterioration of $26 billion in the cumulative Commonwealth budget position over the forward estimates since last year's budget. The blow-out in this year's deficit from $23 billion to $44 billion means more borrowing and more debt, which future generations will have to repay. All of this is despite the fact that in real terms the government is experiencing the fastest growth in revenue since the mid-1980s. This is the fourth Labor deficit in four years, and together they total $174 billion.

Treasurer Swan has never managed to get his figures right. The 2011-12 budget deficit has now blown out, as I said, three times, from $12 billion to $23 billion to $37 billion to $44 billion, and this year has not even finished. This year's budget, as I have said, was all about cooking the books. In headline cash terms, the Gillard Labor government will spend $8.7 billion more than it earns in the 2012-13 financial year, because the government continues to spend on projects such as the NBN, which have been taken off budget. If the government were honest and included the NBN expenditure, the budget would show deficits over the next three years. To put it simply, there would be no surplus if the NBN were on the books. In fact, by bringing forward just two programs, the back to school payment and the Commonwealth grants to local government, the government artificially saves more than $1.5 billion in the 2012-13 financial year. Honest budget treatment of these two programs alone would wipe our Treasurer Swan's wafer-thin surplus.

We now have record debt. As I have already said, this government seeks to increase Australia's debt ceiling to a record $300 billion, which is four times higher than it was in 2008. Australians are right to be concerned about Treasurer Swan, with yet another increase in our nation's credit card limit. Net government debt will climb to a record $144.9 billion in 2013-14. That is an increase of almost $40 billion since last year's budget. By 2015-16, the government will be spending over $8 billion a year, or around $22 million a day, on interest payments alone. This is the price tag of Labor's legacy of waste and reckless spending.

With the higher unemployment, last year's budget promised 500,000 new jobs over two years, but the government now expects to miss its target by 300,000 jobs. Meanwhile, the unemployment rate is forecast to increase to 5.5 per cent, while the government is cutting $200 million out of job service programs. This government is all about high taxes. The budget includes another six new tax hikes, including through heavy vehicle road user charges and reduced tax offsets for families with higher medical bills. This brings to 26 the number of new or increased taxes the Rudd/Gillard Labor governments have delivered since 2007.

Let us get to the broken promises. The Gillard Labor government has dumped the Prime Minister's promise about company tax cuts. Less than two months ago in the House of Reps on 14 March, she said:

If you are against cutting company tax, you are against economic growth». If you are against economic growth, then you are against jobs.

The Prime Minister 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 the 2017-18 financial year. In this budget, the Prime Minister and Treasurer Swan cut a further $5.5 billion out of Australia's defence budget, on top of the $2.5 billion they cut out of the defence budget last year. As a percentage of GDP, defence spending is now at historically low levels. While defence continues to be cut, Prime Minister Gillard's broken border protection and onshore processing policy has delivered another $1.4 billion blowout in asylum seeker management. Yet, despite the Gillard Labor government's big talk, the $1 billion committed over the forward estimates to the National Disability Insurance Scheme is almost $3 billion less than the Productivity Commission recommended. Australians with disabilities will be forgiven for feeling short-changed by the Gillard Labor government's budget. The budget also set aside just $5 billion towards the Gonski review. The $5-billion-a-year price tag means Labor's independent schools hit list is not far away.

Australians want a government which can deliver an economic strategy to build a strong Australia, reduce the cost-of-living pressures and create secure jobs. Instead, they have a government mired in chaos and a Prime Minister with no judgment. My electorate of Solomon is in desperate need of infrastructure to make its economy more productive. In Solomon, we are also in desperate need of health infrastructure to give our people better access to health services. There are more disappointing elements in the budget: in particular that families have been targeted and the perception of a wealthy family is now a family on $150,000. With the higher cost of living continuing to apply pressure on families' budgets and interest rates, we all know that a family on $150,000 is far from being wealthy, especially in regional Australia, where the cost of living in high.

Many people in my electorate and my family and friends across Australia have raised with me their concerns regarding the significant expenditure on housing associated with asylum seekers in the Territory. The general view is that this money could be better spent on infrastructure to build on the Territory's potential and on funding longer term projects within my electorate. This Labor government's short-sighted measures and poor fiscal management are set to continue to the pain for families within my electorate of Solomon. Despite Labor talking down the impact of the these changes, the truth is that, at a time when families are struggling with costs of living pressures, the carbon tax will hurt families. I remind the House again of the pink batts fiasco, which resulted in the deaths of Australians. I remind the house of the Building the Education Revolution scheme, which directed funds to building halls at schools already scheduled for closure. I remind the House of the hard-earned taxpayers' money spent on an inefficient solar rebate program—a program that not only was economically inefficient but did almost nothing for environmental outcomes. How can we forget the exorbitant and unnecessary cost of giving set-top boxes to pensioners at a cost higher than that of a whole new television? Nor have we forgotten the $900 of stimulus payments that were sent to people living overseas and to people who were in fact dead.

On another note, after the 2010 federal election the Prime Minister was asked by the member for Denison what Labor would do with the promises made by Labor candidates in seats where Labor did not win. The Prime Minister stood at the dispatch box, hand on heart and said, 'Our promises were fully costed—every single one of them. Of course they will be delivered. Of course they will. We don't go around making promises that we won't fulfil.

Following on from that passionate statement of commitment in the chamber, I wrote letters to the Prime Minister on behalf of the electorate asking for clarification as to when the pre-election commitments made by Labor would be delivered in my electorate of Solomon. One promise I would like to touch on quickly was the promise of 1,200 new affordable rental homes in the Northern Territory, priced at at least 20 per cent below market rates under the National Rental Affordability Scheme. This promise was rebadged from the previous election. Now, according to a recent National Rental Affordability Scheme monthly performance report dated 30 April 2012, out of the 1,696 NRAS incentives, the Northern Territory has currently a grand total of—wait for it—14 allocated incentives. That was 14 out of 1,696 in the Northern Territory. As I have said many times in this place, the Northern Territory and indeed my electorate of Solomon is experiencing a housing crisis, and the best number this government can come up with is 14. Mind you, this comes at the same time this Labor government is introducing its toxic carbon tax. This Labor government is definitely toxic and cannot go through with its plans. It really is a mess. At the same time, this government is demolishing houses in my electorate. The RAAF base is fantastic, with really good houses, but this government is knocking them down. It just beggars belief. It is just a disgrace. The coalition government said that it would save those houses, and I am here again today to say that it should.

I would like to end by reminding the House that the carbon tax will hurt families, small businesses and all the people in the Northern Territory, and they are very clear that they do not want a carbon tax. This budget was all about the carbon tax.

Debate adjourned.