Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have received a letter from the honourable the Leader of the Opposition proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely:

This Prime Minister’s chaotic and unfair Budget hurting Australians

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

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

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This week will be the last week for five weeks that parliament sits. The government has an opportunity over the next five weeks to face the people being punished by its unfair and chaotic budget. This Prime Minister loves to talk about manning up and other references to his courage and strength. Perhaps the Prime Minister of Australia should show the courage to talk to the people being harmed by this budget.

Once upon a time, the once great Liberal Party loved to talk about the forgotten people of Australia. Tony Abbott should get out and talk to the people he has forgotten: the people who put him there. He should talk to families who will lose up to $6,000 a year because of this rotten, unfair budget. Does the Prime Minister have the moral courage to talk to a single mum on $50,000 a year and explain why the family payments are being cut? Does he have the strength of character that he likes to claim to talk to parents of modest income working hard who, because their children are older than six and not yet 16, will lose family benefit payments? I think not. Does he have the courage to talk to pensioners to explain why they will lose $80 a week once his full measure of pension changes are done? These are people who have contributed their whole life. This chap opposite, this Tony Abbott fellow, wants to take away from pensioners.

Before the last election, this Prime Minister of ours was very keen and always helpfully popping up at a petrol station bowser, talking about the price of petrol. Is he taking any petrol bowser photo opportunities now? I think not. Mind you, I acknowledge that, when he is talking to President Obama, he talks about his new carbon tax—the petrol excise—but he tore down Malcolm Turnbull, the only Liberal with the courage to stick to his convictions on an ETS. Well done you! Well done member for Wentworth!

Will he talk to students and teachers in the classrooms of Australia? Will he talk to them about the cuts? We think not.

Will he look at patients in emergency wards? Will he visit nursing homes and talk about the cuts to health care in this country? Of course not. Will he go and talk to the GPs so terribly worried about the poor health outcomes for so many Australians? He will not visit a GP surgery in this country to be told something that he does not want to hear.

I think Australia is, after 10 months, working out the character of this Prime Minister. What a narrow, prejudiced, unthoughtful person we have as Prime Minister!

Will he be talking to university students about increasing their fees? Will he be talking to women punished for taking time out to raise a family, the women who have to get the tertiary degrees and then pay them off over a longer time period than they otherwise would?

We know this Prime Minister loves the flag. He wraps it around himself. He would wear it every day. He loves a good parade. He is always there talking about how patriotic he is—except when it comes to veterans, their pensions and orphans.

As for the carers, I congratulate the Prime Minister on one thing: he gets on the pollie pedal. Good on him! If he raises money for carers, he is going to have to ride a lot more to raise more money because he is taking away from the carers.

What about Indigenous Australians? I said before that this Prime Minister is a narrow man with a bleak vision. I also say to you that he is the great pretender of Indigenous politics. He will certainly say that he cares, so why is it that he is cutting half a billion from programs to support Indigenous Australians? Will he visit an Aboriginal legal centre keeping young Aboriginal men out of jail when he is cutting their funding? The chances of seeing him visit an Aboriginal legal centre are none. I wish I could be as certain about the winner of the next Melbourne Cup.

Indeed, there is another group of forgotten people whom he will not visit. They are some of his backbenchers! I am not sure that Premier Napthine wants him in. I do not think he will get to the Stafford by-election any time soon either! Perhaps, even if he will not talk to the millions of Australians being hurt by his unfair budget, he will sit down with his backbench. Will he ask them one-to-one if they think it is the right budget for Australia? I think not. The Prime Minister will not do that. He will not visit the Australian people.

We have seen new records set in the last 2½ months. The period before the MPI may well be called question time; but, under this Prime Minister, it will never be called 'answer time'. He knows that in the last 24 hours his Treasurer, fresh from Fiji, has not helped the budget case. I respect some on the government backbench here, because they have certainly got a degree of loyalty even as the budget ship is sinking. But the Treasurer yesterday embarrassed the whole of the government. For weeks and months Tony Abbott would say, 'I might be wrong, but I'm dumb enough to stick to what I am doing on this unfair budget.' The Prime Minister said that there is no alternative and there is no Plan B. Well that's smart Sherlock! No Plan B! The Treasurer said yesterday that there is an alternative. I believe that Malcolm Farr in today's Daily Telegraph has noted that the Treasurer has moved from being 'cheerful Joe Hockey' to 'grumpy Joe Hockey', but what he really should have said is that he is still empty-headed Joe Hockey. The reason I say this is that this government has no alternative and, if they have alternative, it is in the Commission of Audit. We asked the government today and yesterday to rule out measures. They were happy to rule out some measures but not others. The very fact that they were not prepared to rule out all measures and yet rule out some shows that everything else is on the table.

We have sensible alternatives which have been articulated by Labor. We believe in cracking down on multinational profit shifting and tax minimisation. This government has never seen a vested interest it did not want to hug.

Fresh from the atrocities of financial planning and the Commonwealth Bank scandal, this government has cut $1 billion in measures to collect tax in Australia. This government certainly has no shame. They are prepared on one hand to slug all those people I mentioned—the pensioners, the sick, the vulnerable, the low paid—but when it comes to a multinational: too hard, can't be bothered, or why bother?

We have offered constructive compromises on family tax benefit B. I also know the greatest single weakness of this unfair budget is that the Prime Minister is so arrogant, so narrow, so proud that he will not cut the Paid Parental Leave scheme which everyone in Australia, including most of those in the government, knows is a turkey. How on earth can you propose a budget emergency justifying the sorts of atrocities, the creation of a new permanent underclass in this country, yet persist with this Paid Parental Leave scheme which everyone knows is unfair?

This government is not serious about its own so-called budget emergency. Labor are prepared to step up. We have seen them say here very clearly they are not ruling out putting a handbrake on the NDIS. This Prime Minister has swallowed the dictionary of weasel words when he says, 'We want an NDIS, in good time.' They want to abolish family tax benefit part B. The GP tax, once in, will go up and up and up. And, of course, they love cutting the minimum wage—they have got their minimum wage scissors in their pocket every day of the week. Nothing is safe.

This government, though, is so desperate to get through its shonky legislation that we have seen the chaotic week where, if this government wants to get something done, they have to go and doff their cap, tip their forelock, to Clive Palmer. What a fantastic state for the Liberal Party of Australia and this proud government 10 months ago so excited to do so much! What we have seen this week is that if the PUP are run by Clive Palmer there is a new party in Australia, the 'PUPpets', and these are the 'PUP pets'. They are being run by Clive Palmer. How embarrassing! They love to say how much they dislike Clive Palmer. They will go to black-tie gala events, rub shoulders with business and say: 'Yeah, this Clive Palmer—terrible man, terrible man. Quick, is that the phone? Clive's on the phone—excuse me!' The Prime Minister is the discredited figurehead of the 'PUPpet' government.

Labor in the next five weeks, I promise Australians, will stand up for Medicare. We will stand up for a fair pension. We will make sure that higher education is accessible. We will stand up to make sure schools and hospitals do not get cut. We will fight for what is right. This government, no matter how much bluster and bullying it does, will not defeat the will of the people. We will stand up for the people. What the Prime Minister really needs to do in five weeks is change his mind about the budget. He needs to change his mind because we will not be changing ours.

Steven Ciobo (Moncrieff, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If one thing is clear it is that Labor not only will not change their mind, Labor will not change their approach. We just had 10 minutes from the Leader of the Opposition about Labor's approach. What we on this side of the House know and have known for some time is that Labor have not learnt a single lesson over the past six years. In that 10-minute diatribe from the Leader of the Opposition, the alternative Prime Minister of the nation had an opportunity to set the tone for this debate but, instead, he took the opportunity to do little more than engage in bile and invective. This is a Leader of the Opposition who could have taken the opportunity to highlight Labor's alternative for how Australia can live within its means. Instead, we had a Leader of the Opposition who did little more than pour scorn and personally abuse and attack the Prime Minister and the Treasurer of the nation. That in many respects speaks volumes about the Leader of the Opposition and the Labor Party's approach.

I think the Australian people will mark down the Labor Party and the Leader of the Opposition because they know that this was a poor attempt, a pathetic attempt, by the Labor Party to somehow try and become relevant once again in the debate. Labor's consistent approach is: 'We don't care how much it costs, we don't care how much we need to borrow, we don't care how much debt and deficit we are making sure this nation delves into, we will not change our policy.' We know that. That is not a news flash from the Leader of the Opposition. We know that Labor are being stubbornly consistent. Thank goodness there are saner heads that prevail in the upper house. We have seen today, for example, that people have listened to the will of the Australian people. We have seen today the crossbench work with the government to make sure that the national interest is protected. We have seen today and over previous days this week that the crossbench has been willing to make sure that the national interest goes ahead of their own political interest. But you cannot say that about the Leader of the Opposition and you cannot say that about the Australian Labor Party.

The Australian Labor Party is wedded to debt and deficit. With respect to the so-called unfair budget, we have seen some rank hypocrisy, and some of the clearest examples were just highlighted by none other than the Leader of the Opposition himself. Labor rails about how apparently this is an unfair budget that the coalition has put forward, completely disregarding the fact that it is only the coalition that has put forward a plan for this nation to live within its means. But, that notwithstanding, the Labor Party rails about how this is an unfair budget and claims that the coalition is only concerned about standing up for the big end of town.

Shayne Neumann (Blair, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Indigenous Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's true.

Steven Ciobo (Moncrieff, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We just hear it now in an interjection at the table. The extraordinary thing is that around $5 billion of the savings that have been proposed are actually Labor Party savings. And one of those savings measures, worth around $1.1 billion, is changes to research and development tax incentives. The coalition adopted this saving that was announced by Labor. The saving effectively works to exclude companies with turnovers of $20 billion or more. And what is Labor doing? Labor is actually fighting, in the chamber up there, to make sure that that incentive stays in place for some of the biggest companies in the world. If you ever wanted a clearer example of hypocrisy it is the Labor Party going in to bat for that. The Labor Party will wear the crushing weight of hypocrisy for saying they are standing up for the Aussie battler when in actuality they are fighting to maintain a $1.1 billion savings measure in the interests of some of the biggest companies not only in this nation but globally.

In addition, the Labor Party's approach is, 'We don't care about the fact that we are sentencing future generations of Australians to decades of debt and deficit.' Apparently it is equitable to pay for spending today by ripping money off future generations of Australians. Only the coalition has put forward a clear plan to make sure that we live within our means. And only the coalition has put forward a budget that requires all strata of society to make their contributions.

And it simply is not good enough for the Australian Labor Party to say, 'There is no crisis. There's nothing to worry about. There's no problem here.' I notice that the shadow Treasurer is in the chamber. This is the man who presided over the complete debacle of Australia's border protection laws. At the time, the shadow Treasurer made the comment, 'There's no crisis here.' Sure, there were 50,000 people, 750 boats, and over a thousand people who perished at sea, but apparently there was no crisis.

We have heard the shadow Treasurer saying, now, 'There's no problem with expenditure. There's no problem with revenue. There's no need to have any of these savings.' It was the shadow Treasurer who argued, after announcing some $5 billion of savings, 'We want to keep those savings; we're not prepared to stand by our own policies.' This just underscores what rank populists and opportunists the Australian Labor Party are. On that basis, I think the Australian people will continue to mark down the Australian Labor Party.

Labor does not need to be in a situation where they have dealt themselves out of the game. Labor will have the opportunity to demonstrate that they are prepared to step up and take decisions in the national interest. Frankly, it beggars belief that the Australian Labor Party would be willing to incur tens of billions of dollars of additional debt and would be willing to incur a gross debt peak that is some $667 billion—money which they know this nation cannot afford to spend. Yet the Australian Labor Party are willing to borrow that money because they believe it is in their short-term political interest.

So when the Australian Labor Party say that they care about working families, and when they say, 'We've got to take care of the environment for the next generation,' why do they exclude any concern about the next generation starting out with $25,000 worth of debt for every man, woman and child? The rank hypocrisy of Labor being concerned, apparently, about the next generation of Australians is just so clear. Labor are willing to sentence Australian children to paying for their debt which has resulted from the spending that they think will get them a couple of extra votes.

On behalf of the next generation of Australians, we will stand in Labor's way. The coalition will stand in Labor's way because we are not prepared to shackle generation after generation to more debt and deficit to enable Labor to claim to be all about largesse and being equitable and fair. There is nothing fair about sentencing Aussie kids to decades of debt. There is nothing fair about running six, seven or eight years of record deficits.

There is nothing fair about saying to people, 'There is no need for there to be any change.' It requires maturity. It requires the adults in the room to look the Australian people in the eye and say, 'We recognise that everything we announced isn't universally popular, but—you know what?—we are not doing it to be the most popular people in town. We are doing it because it is the right thing to do.'

That is something that the Australian Labor Party has always taken great lengths to avoid. The Australian Labor Party will not do the right thing. The Australian Labor Party will not take decisions in the national interest. The Australian Labor Party will always take the easiest, laziest path if they believe there are a couple of votes in it. Well, thankfully, there are others in the Senate that a more prepared to govern in the national interest.

I say to the Australian Labor Party that in the short term if there is something they want to do they need to start to put their political interests second and the national interests first. They could start, very simply, by backing their own announced savings. If the Labor Party did that there would be a brighter tomorrow—a brighter future when it comes to the sustainability and long-term finances of this nation.

Tanya Plibersek (Sydney, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you Mr Deputy Speaker. It is always such a pleasure to see you in the chair. The American philosopher John Dewey once said:

What the best and wisest parent wants for his own child, that must the community want for all of its children.

Those words are more than a century old but they still speak of the hope that all parents have for their children—the hope that their kids get a good education, that there will be a job for them when they are grown and that they are healthy and prepared to step out into the world. But Dewey's words, and that hope, have been betrayed by this government and its unfair, chaotic budget.

The best thing we can do for individual kids—kids like those up in the galleries today—and for the prosperity of our nation, is to invest in education. But what has this government done? It has cut $1 billion from child care. It has cut 650 trades training centres. It has cut $1 billion from the Tools for your Trade program. It has cut $30 billion from school funding. The fairer Gonski school funding model has been abandoned, which means that the kids who need the most help will not get it under this government. The School Kids Bonus and family tax benefit part B have been cut. But perhaps nothing underscores the Abbott government's true values more than their cuts to universities.

Steven Ciobo (Moncrieff, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

How are you paying for it?

Tanya Plibersek (Sydney, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No. 93 over here says that national debt is bad but student debt is great. Big, American-style student debt is great! The Minister for Education says that taxpayers hate paying for university education for other people. Here is some news for him. Even those cleaners that this government has cut the wages of, may hope that their children, one day, can aspire to go to university. They do not mind paying their taxes to make sure that we live in a more prosperous country where every child has the opportunity of a university education. And here is the other piece of news for the education minister: those university students turn out to be taxpayers. And when we have got a progressive taxation system, guess what? That extra income that they earn because they have gone to university, they pay extra tax on that.

One of the other things that has been so disappointing about this budget are health cuts: $50 billion from hospitals, $400 million from public dental, $400 million from prevention. You know what? There are ways of making savings in health. The best way to make savings in health is to keep people healthy and out of hospital. Our work in prevention dropped the rate of smoking.

Budgets are all about choices, about priorities and about values. This government shows its priorities and it shows its values when it says everybody has to tighten their belts: families on $60,000 a year, by $6,000; pensioners, by $4,000 a year; young unemployed people, by almost $7,000 a year. Everyone has to tighten their belts but high-income earners pay an extra little bit of tax for three years and then nothing. Poor people's cuts are large and they are permanent; rich people's cuts are small and they are temporary.

It is a priority for this government to spend $20 billion to give millionaires $50,000 to have a baby. It is a priority for this government to hand $1.1 billion to multinational companies in tax breaks. It is a priority for this government to make sure that people on high incomes get big breaks on their superannuation not available to low-income earners. It is a priority for this government to give handouts to big polluters. They are their priorities.

What are our priorities in government? Our priorities are: investing more fairly in education so that every child has great education; investing in a National Disability Insurance Scheme so that disabled Australians finally get choice and control over the services that they get; looking after the poor and the vulnerable; and, yes, making sure that what the best and wisest parent wants for his child, society gets for all of our children. This is the type of society, the type of country that we want to hand over to our children.

One of the things that strikes me most about the response to this budget was it is not pensioners saying, 'I am really worried about my pension.' It is pensioners saying, 'I am really worried about the uni students.' And it is not uni students saying, 'I am really worried about myself.' It is students saying, 'I am really worried about the pensioners and the health system.' This shows that we care about a fairer Australia.

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am pleased to be speaking on this matter of public importance and very pleased that the member for McMahon is in the chamber. Yesterday he was not in the chamber and that is why we did not have an MPI. We saw that unedifying spectacle of the Manager of the Opposition Business coming to the dispatch box begging, pleading and cajoling the Speaker saying, 'Could you please just let the member for McMahon in the chamber. I know he has been punted under standing order 94(a), but could you please let him into the chamber so that he could lead our debate on the MPI?' Obviously nobody else over that side was good enough because the member for Watson pulled the plug on the MPI yesterday. It reminded me of Cameron Smith of Queensland or New South Wales's Paul Gallen begging Shayne Hayne saying, 'I know you have sin binned them but can you just please let our star players back on the field because we need help in the State of Origin?'

Labor certainly needs help. They are in a state of denial about the September 7 election result last year. They are in a state of denial that the people spoke and said that they did not want a carbon tax. It took vote after vote after vote. Like a desperate person clinging to a life raft, they wanted the carbon tax restored. They did not want it repealed but today in the Senate sanity has prevailed, 39 votes to 32. And the carbon tax is gone.

We went to the last election with a plan. We heard the member for Moncrieff say that the other side has no plan. The member for Maribyrnong, the so-called opposition leader, has no policy direction. When he stood here at the dispatch box for 10 minutes, he gave no plan, did he, member for Moncrieff? He has absolutely no policy ideas. But we went to the election with a plan. We have to fix up the debt and deficit that has been left by Labor.

The previous government turned nearly $50 billion in the bank into projected net debt of more than $200 billion. Listen to this, Labor members, who are screeching and crying over there: Labor's legacy to Australia was 200,000 more unemployed and on the jobless queues and gross debt projected to rise to $667 billion.

Mr Neumann interjecting—

That is because they are listening to me. The Australian public have stopped listening to your side and they will stop voting for you next time. There were $123 billion in cumulative deficits.

Opposition members interjecting—

Ross Vasta (Bonner, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! On my left.

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, they are a rabble. You talk about shambolic and chaotic, and it is writ large over on the other side.

Mr Bowen interjecting—

We hear the member for McMahon shouting out. How many people arrived under your watch? Was it 24,447 whilst you were the world's worst immigration minister? You were the 28th immigration minister of this fine nation but you were the worst. You were the absolute worst—50,000 illegal arrivals by boat and the biggest carbon tax the world has ever seen.

Labor's legacy is $1 billion worth of interest payments per month. What could we spend $1 billion on? Let me see. This Parliament House, this fine institution was built, finished and completed in 1988. It cost $1.1 billion. We could build another Parliament House every month on the interest we are paying on the debt that you have left us.

Opposition members interjecting—

Ross Vasta (Bonner, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! On my left.

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Absolutely, and so there should be. The Tarcutta bypass cost $290 million and was finished in 2011. Last year, the Holbrook bypass cost $247 million for 9½ kilometres and that finished the duplication of the Hume Highway, a great project. Who opened that project? Who turned the first sod? It was none other than Julia Gillard, the former Prime Minister. But what happened just four short days later? She went the same way that Kevin Rudd went. She went because of the carbon tax. She was stabbed in the back by a chaotic government. She was stabbed in the back by her supposed colleagues.

Opposition members interjecting—

Yes; Albo, the member for Grayndler, was there too. The member for Grayndler was certainly at that opening. My point is that $247 million is just a quarter of what we are paying in interest per month now—just a quarter. It is a disgrace. The Snowy Mountains hydroelectricity scheme, completed in 1972, cost only $820 million. Think of everything that we could be spending all that money on but we are sending 70 per cent of it overseas. It is an absolute disgrace and the Labor opposition is an absolute disgrace. (Time expired)

Tanya Plibersek (Sydney, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I want to ask for an extension of time so that the member for Riverina can talk about the budget.

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would be happy to—

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No—it might possibly be our last day before the winter recess, but the cold has not set into the chamber yet.

Chris Bowen (McMahon, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will be talking about this government's budget, just like people around Australia are. Everybody is talking about the budget except members opposite. They did not send a minister in to defend their budget today—they are too busy backgrounding against the Treasurer. They sent in the B team to defend a C-grade budget. The budget was brought down two months ago. As much as we former treasurers would wish otherwise, normally budgets have receded into people's memory by now—but not this budget. Around Australia people are still expressing their white-hot anger at this Treasurer for his deceit, for his dishonesty and for his lack of care for the fundamental Australian value of fairness. They are still angry and they not have forgotten this budget.

We have seen ministers question the judgement of the Treasurer. We have seen ministers question his ability to sell this budget, as well they might. But these ministers should be questioning his values. They should be questioning the Prime Minister's values, too. They should be questioning their values and their prejudices—their prejudices against hardworking Australians who commit no crime other than to need some support from the government. They are hardworking Australians who commit no crime other than working hard and saving for the future and relying on their government to care about them. The values of this Treasurer tell him that it is okay to rip away universal health care; his values tell him it is okay to impose debt on people who commit no crime other than wishing to better themselves through tertiary education; his values tell him that it is all right to reduce the age pension because apparently the age pension is too generous, according to this Treasurer. This is a Treasurer whose values tell him it is okay to say that if you commit the crime of being under 30 and temporarily unemployed, you get nothing. The values of this Treasurer tell him it is okay to deliberately create an underclass in Australia. That is what these ministers should be questioning—the values of the Treasurer, not just his salesmanship and his judgement. We on this side of the House question his values, and that is what people are questioning right around the country.

We have seen the spectacle of this chaotic management approach adopted by the Treasurer of Australia. Yesterday he said that they had alternatives up their sleeve; they had secret plans that they could reveal to go further unless the Senate passed their legislation. We were told by everybody there were no alternatives, but now apparently there are alternatives. I am going to surprise the House—I agree. There are alternatives. We gave the Treasurer four at question time. He could drop his $5.5 billion a year Paid Parental Leave scheme. There is a saving he would get some support for. He could drop direct action—so-called direct action; this scheme which subsidises polluters. He could drop that, and it would have a pretty easy passage through the parliament. He could drop his plan to give a billion dollars back to multinational companies who should be paying a fair share of tax in Australia. This government talks about small business, but why don't they give small business a break by letting multinational companies pay their fair share so that small business can compete on a level playing field? Here is another alternative: why don't you say to high income earners in Australia, 'You can pay a fair share of tax on your superannuation.' A modest measure was proposed by the previous government to make the superannuation system a little fairer, and this government says, 'Oh no, we can't have that.'

So there are alternatives, but they are not ones that this Prime Minister or this Treasurer want to hear about because they do not fit their prejudices against ordinary, hardworking Australians and they do not fit this government's determination not to shrink the state—no, this government does not want to shrink the state—but to shift the state to give more support where they think that is important, like sending $50,000 cheques to somebody who happens to have a baby while taking money away from Australia's age pensioners, while saying to unemployed people that they will get nothing, while cutting child care and while saying to people who dare to dream for the future and study for the future that they will have to go into debt. (Time expired)

Scott Buchholz (Wright, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I welcome the member for McMahon back into the chamber and note with interest that the terms of the matter of public importance contain the word 'chaotic'—it is always a pleasure to have him back in the chamber given yesterday's unsavoury performance. This week is a great week for Labor because they have been celebrating the anniversary of the announcement of the abolition of the carbon tax by none other than the member for McMahon and the then Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, in Townsville not 12 months ago. Not 12 months ago this government stood in front of the Australian public and said 'We are abolishing the carbon tax' and yet this week they voted three times against its repeal. Here is a government that will continually say one thing and do another. I hardly need to take members back to a previous Prime Minister, Prime Minister Gillard, who said that there would be no carbon tax under a government she led. You cannot trust one thing those on the other side of this House say—you cannot even believe them when they say hello.

There are an enormous number of people in my electorate who are going to benefit from the measures we have introduced with reference to the carbon tax. The Hood family who are farmers and have large refrigerators to keep the fruit and vegetables fresh. Mulgowie Farms, Kalfresh, Bunny Bites, Moffats and many other businesses will benefit. There will be a $9 billion hand brake let off our economy. This is a great day and a great week for the budget of this nation. It will release the entrepreneurialship of our businesses and that money will be spent back in local communities and that in turn will have a direct impact on our budget and on productivity. When you take money out of that sector and you allow the multiplier effect to spread through the community, our nation will be better for it and it will prosper. We were elected to government to do a number of things: to fix the budget and to fix border security. In passing I concur with a previous speaker: the member for McMahon was a pretty ordinary immigration minister.

Steven Ciobo (Moncrieff, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

And a pretty ordinary Treasurer too.

Scott Buchholz (Wright, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

During question time today the Leader of the Opposition said that there would be pain in the electorate as a result of some of our budget measures. We should not pretend there will not be some degree of pain throughout the electorate, but I remind those Australians who will be feeling pain as to why that pain is coming. It is coming as a result of the deficits and the debt that was incurred through the mismanagement by those on the other side of this House. Does the problem need to be fixed? Do not take the Treasurer's word that the budget needs to be fixed; do not take the Prime Minister's word that the budget needs to be fixed. The Australian public has a choice: they can believe those on the other side, who put their heads in the sand and say, 'There is no problem,' or they can believe the then Treasurer, the member for Lilley, who said in 2011:

… meandering back to surplus would compound the pressures in our economy and push up the cost of living for pensioners and working people.

That was said by the then Treasurer who knew there was a problem.

But do not rely on the member for Lilley. Perhaps you could take a comment from Glenn Stevens, the Governor of the Reserve Bank. He does not bat for one side or the other; he calls it as it is. He said:

Early, measured actions … that build up over time are a much better approach than the much tougher responses that might be required if decisions are delayed.

But you do not have to believe the Governor of the Reserve Bank. The Secretary for the Treasury, Martin Parkinson, said it had to be fixed, as did Phil Bowen of the Parliamentary Budget Office. The Secretary General of the OECD, Angel Gurria, also said that the problem had to be fixed.

Ladies and gentlemen of this House, there are budget measures that need to be fixed. We were elected to get on and fix them, and we will do it. If you vote for Labor, you will get a carbon tax back; the boats will start coming again; and you will constrict future generations to debts and deficits. The only way this country is going to prosper is under a coalition government.

Ms Catherine King (Ballarat, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Health) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am very pleased to speak on this matter of public importance about the Prime Minister's chaotic and unfair budget. It is hurting Australians and no more so than when it comes to the portfolio area of health. It is extraordinary that on the last day of sitting before we break, when the budget has been at the top of people's minds for the last few months, that we do not have a senior minister at the desk able to defend the budget. We saw that on show yesterday as well, when the first of the health budget bills came into this parliament and was debated through second reading. There were only six speakers on the other side, and none of them was a senior member of the Liberal Party. No senior member would speak on the government's decision in the budget to increase the cots of pharmaceuticals for every Australian, including pensioners, those on disability support pensions, people with chronic conditions who require multiple medications. There were six speakers from the other side—none of them were senior and none of them from marginal seats. Those from marginal seats went out and campaigned at the last election as to how they would do better for their constituents and how they would stand up, but not one of them would speak to defend that measure. I suspect that not one of them will speak on the GP tax, either.

Not one of them has spoken out about the impact of their $50 billion of cuts on public hospitals. Those cuts started this month, and they are impacting on emergency departments, elective surgery, bed numbers across the country. People in Mount Gambier were recently told their hospital had lost staff because of the government cuts. We know that none of those opposite are prepared to defend this budget, but we are prepared to talk every single day about what this budget means to people. The absolute arrogance of this government and the Minister for Health not even able to be in here for consideration of the bill in detail. He was not here to answer questions or to defend the budget measures that he has put before this parliament. It is not usual for a health minister to be a member of the ERC—the budget razor gang—but there he was offering up health cuts. 'Take this! Take this! Take this!' That is from the health minister, who is meant to care about the health system in the country and about the sick and vulnerable patients in this community. That is what we got from the health minister—he could not turn up to debate one of his own budget measures. I suspect it was an audition for one of the finance ministries.

We have heard the health minister interject over the chamber as we talked about the petition from 3000 people—and 2½ thousand of them are general practitioners in communities right across the country. They were not Labor voters; they had no particular political affiliation. This was something that Australian Doctor, not necessarily an organisation that writes well of the Labor Party, had done. They had collected real stories from around the community. If anyone in this place has not had a chance to read it, I encourage you to do so. Here is an example of some of the stories in that petition. There are many stories that were told in that petition. I will read one from Kingston in Tasmania:

There are many stories that could be told, but I'll tell this one. My patient was a mum in her 30s with two little kids. She was poorly educated, nervous, respectful. The three of them were living in a women's refuge for the usual reasons. They came in every few weeks: asthma, kids' colds, anxiety.

One day, as they were leaving, the mum said to the children: "We're going to the chemist now." And the kids beamed and said with obvious delight, "The chemist! Will we be able to get some water and one of those mints Mum?" The mum smiled and said yes, and gave me this look that I have always remembered.

See, at the chemist there is a free water dispenser and a little bowl of free mints. The look the mum gave me showed the delight that every mother feels in seeing her children happy. But she was also sad that these freebies meant so much to her kids, and embarrassed because now I knew too.

Seven dollars mightn't seem that much to people whose kids get to go out for milkshakes but if this mum had to pay $7, her kids wouldn't miss out on a trip to a cafe. They would simply miss out on going to the doctor, on their vaccinations …

These are real stories of people being told by their GPs across the country. This government is the most uncompassionate government I have ever seen. Those opposite should be ashamed of themselves. (Time expired)

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

I rise to speak about the government's Economic Action Strategy, which will build a strong, prosperous economy and a safe, secure Australia. Today we have repealed the carbon tax. Scrapping the carbon tax is a foundation of the government's Economic Action Strategy.

Mark Dreyfus (Isaacs, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Attorney General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What a disgrace you are!

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

Don't call me a disgrace! You are a disgrace!

Mark Dreyfus (Isaacs, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Attorney General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You are a disgrace!

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

You are a disgrace! You are a grot! A grot, that is what you are; an absolute grot!

Honourable members interjecting—

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There will be people getting a very quick path out of here, shortly, unless the interjections stop. I could not hear what was interjected for the noise from both sides.

Sharon Bird (Cunningham, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Vocational Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise on a point of order. You might ask people to direct their comments through the chair. That might help.

Mrs Griggs interjecting—

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Solomon hasn't got the call. I often comment on the fact that comment should be directed through and not at me. The member for Solomon has the call.

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

We are honouring our commitments to Australia and building a strong and prosperous economy for a safe and secure Australia. In response to the opposition's mistruths and misrepresentations, I am here to say that this government and not the opposition has Australians best interests at heart. This afternoon I intend to correct the record and provide some facts for Australians and my constituents to counter the untruths and nonsense that is being peddled by those on the other side of the House. After the budget was handed down, my office encountered upset pensioners and welfare recipients. They were upset solely because of the misrepresentations that were being peddled by those on that side. Labor's campaign of mistruths—I won't say—

Mark Dreyfus (Isaacs, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Attorney General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You'd know all about mistruth!

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

Mr Deputy Speaker, he is a serial offender.

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Isaacs will find himself out very shortly if he does not desist from interjection. The member for Solomon has the call and will direct her comments relating to the MPI before the House.

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

The Labor Party sent out so much mistruth that these poor pensioners were very upset and very concerned that they were going to lose their money, because of the misrepresentation that those opposite were giving out. When I explained to them that it was just a campaign of scaremongering by the Labor Party they were absolutely understanding and accepting. They understood that it was the typical Labor style of push polling, sending out emails saying: 'Come on, tell me what's going on. Tell me your story.' We heard from some of the people who were sending the stories, they were sending me copies of what they were sending to you. I did not hear any of you guys reading out some of those stories.

The mistruths the Labor Party has spread over the past three months have genuinely hurt Australians. Welfare recipients are genuinely upset because of the Labor Party's false assertions about this government.

Mr Snowdon interjecting—

Member for Lingiari, you should know better!

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Lingiari will desist from interjection.

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

It is only the coalition that is committed to repairing the budget to ensure that those who need it can still access welfare support now and into the future. It is only the coalition that is introducing Australia's most extensive higher education scholarship program, which will ensure that the smartest students can attend the best universities, no matter where they are from. Claims from those on that side about fees and costs are absolutely, completely wrong. We know that the education union is push polling every single marginal seat.

Opposition members interjecting—

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Members on my left! The member for Charlton is interjecting outside of his place in this chamber.

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

This is how ridiculous it is: they even rang my electorate office. They push-polled my electorate office. Really, how ridiculous are they? We know that those on that side will stop at nothing to manipulate and mislead and to cause Australians distress. I wish I had more time. (Time expired)

Kate Ellis (Adelaide, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is a very simple reason why those opposite would rather engage in slanging matches across the parliament, would rather talk about absolutely anything but the budget and the broken promises that each and every one of them told their constituents before the last election. The reason is that this budget is an absolute shambles. It is chaotic. It is a mess. There is absolutely nothing in this budget but cruelty, cuts and contradictions.

Mr Fletcher interjecting—

The member for Bradfield is shouting at the table. If he wanted to contribute he could actually have spoken about the budget, but none of the members opposite has wanted to do that. Maybe he could sit silently while I tell him about the cruelty contained in this budget. I will tell him exactly how this budget gives a hit to every single aspect of our education system, from early childhood to our schools to our higher education sector and to our VET program. When it comes to education, every Australian was betrayed by this budget after those opposite went throughout their communities promising 'no cuts to education'. Let's have a bit of a look at just how untrue that was. We know that right now the budget is having an impact on schools, universities, preschools, kindergartens and childcare centres in every single one of their electorates and right across this nation.

Unlike those opposite, we care. We want to talk about the contents of the budget because, unlike those opposite, we know that investing in education is the smartest investment a government can make for the future of our nation. We know that in government Labor took that responsibility seriously. We took on the biggest inquiry into our school system in 40 years. Then we set to work implementing those Gonski reforms. Australians knew it made sense—parents, teachers, schools and even Liberal premiers knew. They understood that the Gonski reforms were important, which is why those opposite, just before the election, decided to jump on board as well. They all yelled out: 'Me too. We're on a unity ticket. You can vote for us or you can vote for them and you will get exactly the same funding for your school.' This budget shows just how cynical that was. It is ordinary students, parents and teachers out there who are now left to pay the price of that betrayal.

The budget paper sets out in black and white the extent of that betrayal. We have seen $6.5 billion ripped from years 5 and 6 of the Gonski funding reforms. The government have gone back on their promise to implement the model and stand by the agreement. But those opposite are not content with that. The government, who claimed that they would be a government of no surprises and no excuses, included a bit of a surprise in this chaotic budget. The very large and very nasty surprise was the biggest ever funding cut to Australian schools—$30 billion dollars ripped out of our schools.

We know that these cuts are having an impact right now. They add to the $1 billion that those opposite have already cut ensuring that there will be no more trades training centres across the country. Despite the fact that as recently as this week we have had coalition members standing up in this parliament and talking about how great the trades training centre that they have just opened in their electorate is, each and every one of them have supported cuts that ensure that not a single additional school will have access to one of these.

We know that schools need certainty to plan and to deliver the best results of students. When it comes to education, all that this budget has delivered is uncertainty and chaos in every classroom across Australia. Right now there are extension programs which will not go ahead. There are literacy and numeracy programs, language and sports choices, music and drama programs, and new subjects, that schools simply cannot commit to because of the dark cloud of cuts which this government and this budget have cast over every school in this nation. There are preschools out there that do not know if they can even take enrolments next year, because of the uncertainty of the universal access funding.

The most despicable part of all of this is what we have heard in the last 48 hours. We have seen enough attacks on education and we have seen enough cuts. Now we hear the threat that there are more secret cuts to come. We know that our schools could be forced to pay an even heavier price for this government's terrible budget, this government's broken promise and this government's cruelty when it comes to the future of every Australian seeking a good quality education.

Brett Whiteley (Braddon, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I notice those opposite are all leaving, which is so disappointing! I noticed they all came in for Tanya and the 'plebettes', but they are all going now.

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! You will refer to members by their seat.

Brett Whiteley (Braddon, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker, I refer to the one-and a-half-minute mark of the deputy opposition leader's speech when she referred to Christopher Pyne. If she withdraws, I will be happy to.

Tanya Plibersek (Sydney, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am happy to withdraw, Mr Deputy Speaker. He is obviously not Christopher Pyne.

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Member for Braddon, this is not conditional: you will also refer to members by their title in this place.

Brett Whiteley (Braddon, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am happy to withdraw. This is an interesting matter of public importance.

Opposition members interjecting—

You should listen over there. You might learn something. There is a bullfrog noise coming from the third row over there. I am not sure what it is.

This matter of public importance has been brought to this House by a Leader of the Opposition whose life is littered with disloyalty to previous Prime Ministers who are still pulling knives out of their back, colleagues who do not speak to him anymore because of those very actions and many in the unions who have come to not trust this man. He is the sort of guy who turns up to the MCG on a Saturday afternoon to watch his favourite footy team and, if at half-time it is not going so well, he swaps sides. The man has no loyalty in him whatsoever.

If you look up the definition of 'chaotic' in the dictionary, the Australian Labor Party quickly pops up. What gall you have!

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I hope you are not referring to me, Member for Braddon, when you refer to 'you'.

Brett Whiteley (Braddon, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, Mr Deputy Speaker—certainly not. What gall from those down the front! They have done everything they can to constrain a newly elected government from implementing a strategy that was given approval by the Australian people. They stood by the carbon tax to the bitter end. What gall from a political party that left an economic trail of destruction. When she was health minister, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition presided over a health system that was in absolute chaos. If you are wondering where the Minister for Health is, he is out there cleaning up your mess. He is out there trying to find the superclinics that have never appeared. He is out there trying to fix the absolute mess you left. All you did was put backroom public servants into a job and collect the union fees. You are a failed health minister.

Stephen Jones (Throsby, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Regional Development and Infrastructure) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise on a point of order. I rise to defend your honour, Mr Deputy Speaker. The things the member said about you are not fair.

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Throsby for his assistance. The member for Braddon will refer his comments through the chair. The use of the word 'you' is a reflection on the chair.

Brett Whiteley (Braddon, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker, through you, this lot over here have got no shame. They have ruined this country. You went off to try and fix a problem and put pink batts into roofs, and you killed people—that is the bottom line. That is what happened. And that is what the royal commission has shown.

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Member for Ballarat, I will take your point of order. I know what it is.

Ms Catherine King (Ballarat, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Health) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker, I ask the member to withdraw that comment. It is utterly offensive and he should know better. It is unparliamentary.

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I ask the member for Braddon to withdraw that comment, which was a reflection on the opposition members that they killed people.

Brett Whiteley (Braddon, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker, I withdraw. But the policies of this government—

Opposition members: Withdraw!

I did. Are you deaf? I know you are dumb, but are you deaf?

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for Braddon will resume his seat.

An opposition member: He should be thrown out, Deputy Speaker. He is out of control.

Order! The Leader of Opposition Business on the point of order.

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker, I would simply ask that the member adhere to the previous rulings that you have given and address the parliament in an appropriate way.

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Braddon did withdraw. The member for Braddon has the call, and I will remind him of the motion before the chamber.

Brett Whiteley (Braddon, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am very much reminded of the motion, which talks about chaos. It talks about 'chaotic'. I will talk about chaotic. What about the live trade decision that left cattle farmers in the north of Queensland in absolute bankruptcy? (Time expired)

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The discussion is now concluded.