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

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

The Government’s year of broken promises, cruel cuts and wrong priorities.

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

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

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am pleased to move this matter of public importance today to speak about the year of broken promises from those opposite—broken promises on health, broken promises on education, broken promises on pensions, broken promises on the petrol tax and, this week, a broken promise on superannuation. The promises of the coalition are treated like plates at a Greek wedding: they are smashed at regular intervals; they are smashed one after the other.

Today I want to talk particularly about infrastructure, on which they said two fundamental things. The first was that, for projects with a value of about $100 million, there would be a proper cost-benefit analysis. The second was that there would be cranes in the sky and bulldozers in these new infrastructure projects that they allegedly were going to fund and create. Today we asked the Acting Prime Minister about these projects, and he could not name one. He could not name one—

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

Five—he named five.

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

Five.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

because there is not a single project commenced that was not in the May 2013 budget. Not one.

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

He named five. Five.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The crowd opposite says five. Well, one of the ones he named was the Torrens to Torrens project. Here I am, in this picture I am holding up, at the beginning of construction in August 2013! Another one was the east-west project, which those opposite thought was in South Australia! Many Melburnians would like it to be in South Australia, because in Melbourne it is about as popular as the Ebola virus. It has had no cost-benefit analysis. It is a project that is on the road to nowhere.

Those opposite could not name a single new project. In place of that is the magical infrastructure re-announcement tour: the Perth gateway project, North West Coastal Highway, Bolivia Hill, the Inland Railway, Tiger Brennan Drive. They are going around the country re-announcing projects that are already under construction. In terms of their imagination, you have to give them credit, because, for some of the re-announcements, they have come up with a new strategy: just give it a new name! So the F3 to M2 link, signed off on in June last year, has become NorthConnex. The Swan Valley bypass in Western Australia has become NorthLink. Giving it a new name does not make it a new project.

Those opposite stand here and they say they are not projects; the money was not real. But they go to opening after opening—the Hunter Expressway at the end of last year or, just a few weeks ago, the Gold Coast light rail project. It was opposed by the local member, Mr Ciobo, but he was happy to be on the first trip!

Mr Briggs interjecting—

The assistant minister for infrastructure, at the table, was happy to go to the opening of one of the Gateway North projects, even though they pretend that it is new. Sometimes they just forget!

The Treasurer this week stood up and said, 'We've got this new investment, the Regional Rail Link.' Seriously? Funded in 2009, at its peak more than 5,000 workers were employed as a result of that project. There are new stations at places like Footscray West, with new projects opened on the way to Ballarat, on the way to Bendigo, on the way to Geelong. But it is no wonder the government think it is new, because during the election campaign the Prime Minister said, 'The federal government doesn't fund public transport projects.' Where did he say it? He was in Melbourne—a $3.225 billion investment.

The member for Petrie has tried to claim the Moreton Bay Rail Link as a new project as well. One of the classics, though, I think, Madam Speaker, is that as you go to the airport this evening you will pass the Majura Parkway. Now, every parliamentarian saw when construction started on that, but that has not stopped the government claiming that as a new project as well. Sometimes they pretend it is new where the funding is actually less, like the Midland Highway in Tasmania. They have ripped $100 million out of that, but they claim that it is somehow new money.

Of course, there was no new money in the budget for infrastructure. What the government did was ripped money out of projects that had been properly assessed and approved by Infrastructure Australia, like the Melbourne Metropolitan, and the Cross River Rail project in Brisbane. They took money from properly assessed projects and gave them to projects that had no cost-benefit analysis.

It is worse than that, because they made an advance payment of $1½ billion to the East West Link project. One of the alleged five new projects that the Acting Prime Minister named today, it is not only not in South Australia; it is also not under construction and it is not under contract—and the Victorian government is desperate to try and put it under contract. So those opposite gave $1½ billion to it. The infrastructure minister's assistant said very clearly that they would make payments based on milestones. Here is a project, the second stage of which will not commence for at least two years, if ever, and they say they have paid $1½ billion in advance. They paid $2 billion in advance to WestConnex.

Jamie Briggs (Mayo, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Are you against it?

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This is why you do proper planning—

Jamie Briggs (Mayo, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Are you against it? Are you against it?

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Listen and you might learn something.

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

The assistant minister will desist.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Hear about one of my constituents, Vince Crow, of Haberfield. He got two letters signed by the senior project manager of WestConnex on 26 June 2014. He got two letters signed by the same bloke, in different envelopes. One of them said his home 'needs to be acquired to construct the project'. The other letter, on the same day, says that it will not need to be acquired by the New South Wales government. That is why you do proper planning. That is why you make sure that you get it right.

In Western Australia, the WestConnex project has not even been approved by the WA government. They did not know anything about it and, when asked about it in their estimates process, the representative said that it was a project that simply was not up to scratch and they were not in a position to make any of the information available on that project. The former WA state MP in the chamber, I am sure, knows that that is the case.

Today we have new legislation introduced by the minister saying that there will be cost-benefit analysis for projects of more than $100 million. I thought, this could be pretty good; maybe they are getting it, except that when you look at the legislation you give the money first and then you have the cost-benefit analysis. It is for projects which have already received $100 million. The reason projects like the Hunter Expressway received funding, and Majura Parkway, was that we did that cost benefit analysis, it was published on the website—in the case of Majura Parkway a BCR above three, in the case of Hunter Expressway a BCR above four—we published it as a result of our process. Those opposite just do not get it.

The first they did when they came to office was to abolish the Major Cities Unit. Those opposite do not believe in integrated transport plans. What they have funded are projects—in the case of East West the best BCR that has been published is 0.8. What that means is that for every dollar invested you get 80c back. That is their view of proper analysis. What we have seen from those opposite is the withdrawal of public from public transport, a withdrawal of engagement in cities, the Urban Policy Forum has not met, a withdrawal of rail freight projects with not one new rail freight project announced in the budget for the first time since 2006.

Mr Briggs interjecting—

Inland rail was in the 2009 budget with $300 million to commence this year. They do not have a single new project under construction. They have no ideas and no plans.

Jamie Briggs (Mayo, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I love September. September is the time of footy finals. This weekend the AFL footy finals begin and there will be some fantastic games. There will be a terrific game at Adelaide Oval on Sunday with Port Adelaide versus Richmond.

Mr Albanese interjecting—

I'm coming to you, Son! That will be a cracker at the great Adelaide Oval on Saturday. My Mighty Blues did not make the finals this year, unfortunately. There are, of course. local footy finals on, too, and the SANFL finals in South Australia. We will see the Mighty Double Blues this weekend playing against South on Saturday at Adelaide Ovals also. What happens at footy finals time, at the end of the season in September, is that many of the players on the sides who do make the finals—many who have been around and some have been absolute stars of the game, some have been dominant forces for over a decade—think about whether it is time to go on. They think about whether their body can handle another pre-season, whether their capacities can keep up to the modern standard of the game, whether they are able to make the effort yet again to push and get through to the start of another season and battle up, particularly if their side is not likely to make the finals for some time. They think to themselves, 'It might be time I retired, before it becomes really sad, that I am nowhere near the player I once was when I was the dominant play for a decade, maybe it's time that I retire. Maybe it's time to give someone else a go. Maybe it's time to think whether it is worth spending more time at home, away from the hard yards of the training track. Maybe it's time to retire. Maybe I can't do it again.' For people who are looking at this pre-season and thinking about it, if their side is not likely to make the final next year, the draft picks will not home, that they might go home over this break and think to themselves, 'Can I go on again?' The reality is, some players just lose it.

That happens in politics, too, would you believe. There is a parallel with politics. There are people in politics who did at one time contribute substantially to the national debate. At times they contribute to the national debate in a substantial way. In fact, they tried to save a government. There were some reflections in a recent book by Paul Kelly which talked about some advice which was given on a certain night in June, advice which should have been followed. He was a very smart political operator who understood that what the factions were doing that night would destroy two Prime Ministers—I think that is the exact quote. That was a time for a former senior player to think about whether it is time to retire.

We see the complaints desk on the other side, those who cannot bring themselves to accept the fact that the government changed 12 months ago, that they cannot handle the fact that a new government is getting on and delivering on infrastructure across the board when it comes to government. They really need to start to think about whether it is time to give another young, up-and-coming player the chance to have a go.

All we just heard from the member for Grayndler was from someone who has refused to accept the reality of what happened 12 months ago. We know the anger. We heard the screaming just then and all the anger coming through. We have heard the anger today where he is yelling at business leaders, 'You're too bloody polite.' We have heard about the phone calls to industry associations after the budget when they praised the government's infrastructure agenda, criticising them heavily about what they had said publicly about the infrastructure commitments made by this government.

The reality is the opposition have put themselves outside the mainstream debate. They are no longer relevant. It is absolutely clear that the Labor Party continues to take the tactical advice from geniuses like the member for Batman who put themselves completely outside the debate.

An opposition member interjecting—

You are the guy who refused Anthony's advice on the end of June 2010. You are the one who avoided Anthony's advice so let's go back to what Paul Kelly wrote this week.

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. The assistant minister, having come to the front bench, should know that he has to direct comments through you, that you have been doing none of the things he has been accusing you of, and he should refer to people by their titles.

Russell Broadbent (McMillan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Cunningham for her advice. The assistant minister should of course refer his remarks through the chair.

Jamie Briggs (Mayo, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What this government has done in 12 months is get on and deliver infrastructure for the 21st century, across the country. In the budget, there is a $50 billion commitment to infrastructure—new projects across the country that will drive jobs growth, that will drive productivity growth, that will ensure that we have a stronger economy. We have talked about many of them today. WestConnex stage 1, which we committed to in the election, is moving on at a rapid pace, and serious construction work will get underway soon. That is another project that the member for Grayndler is obviously opposed to.

Mr Albanese interjecting—

Because we are going through a proper process, Member for Grayndler, to ensure we get the best outcome. We brought WestConnex stage 2 forward by 18 months, with the use of the first ever federal government concessional loan. That is another project that will get underway in a real hurry. Serious construction will be underway next year.

This opposition has made itself so irrelevant to the debate. It is now opposed to all these projects across the cities. We will make it very clear to people in these cities that the opposition is opposed to the East West Link, that it is opposed to WestConnex. We have members from Victoria nodding their heads in furious agreement that they are opposed to the east-west project. When the Victorian government signs contracts in the coming weeks, they will know—

Opposition members interjecting—

Yes, they will. Don't you worry about that. They will sign contracts in the coming weeks and they will ensure that we have a fantastic outcome for the city of Melbourne, lifting productivity, lifting outcomes.

Mr Giles interjecting—

Craig Kelly (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for Scullin should be aware that, if he wants to interject, he should be in his place.

Jamie Briggs (Mayo, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This opposition has put itself so far out of the debate it is not funny.

In addition to that, we have had a Productivity Commission review into public infrastructure which found that the infrastructure system that this government was left with was broken. The best example of how it was broken is the NBN. The Productivity Commission goes through, comprehensively, what a disastrous series of decisions were made by the former government when it came to the NBN and the amount of waste that has been revealed by the Minister for Communications when it comes to that policy.

We are getting on with delivering on our commitments. We said we would build infrastructure, and we are getting on and delivering on infrastructure. We said we would stop the boats, and the boats have all but stopped.

Mr Snowdon interjecting—

We said we would fix the budget, and we are well underway, Member for Lingiari, with fixing the budget. It is breaking their hearts. It happens to all oppositions, but they have realised this week—after a year—'Hooley dooley; we're in opposition. The reality is: we're irrelevant.'

Pat Conroy (Charlton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Not for long if you're in charge!

Jamie Briggs (Mayo, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Charlton says, 'Not for long.' We will see. If you continue to behave as you do as an opposition now, you will be in opposition for a very long time.

The reality is, we have got on. We have stopped the boats from arriving, and the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection is to be given enormous credit for the work that he has done. He was told by those on the other side that you could not do it. Those on the other side, who broke the system in the first place, said: 'You can't do it. You can't stop the boats. What they're saying won't happen.' And we have delivered it.

We said we would fix the budget. We are working through our way fixing the budget. We have abolished the carbon tax, even though those on the other side desperately want to bring it back. And this week we delivered upon abolishing the mining tax as well. We are getting on and delivering infrastructure across the country. We are creating jobs. We are building a stronger Australia. What we will continue to hear from those who want to call names, who want to yell out, who want to try and knock everything, is complete opposition.

A couple of weeks ago the member for Grayndler said in a speech that, if the Labor Party is elected at the next election, he wants to put more money into public transport projects. Well, he is going to have to tell us which projects are going to go, which taxes are going to rise or how much more they are going to borrow.

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

This week is a year since the Abbott government was elected, and what a dismal year it has been for millions of Australians. Let us just have a look at where exactly so many Australians are at the moment. I want to draw the House's attention to a particular commitment that was made before the election by the now Prime Minister, in a press release on 4 September last year. The now Prime Minister said:

Within five years I am confident that our economy can deliver at least one million new jobs; and two million new jobs within the next decade.

As the member for Grayndler pointed out in his speech on this MPI, in the infrastructure sector there has been a complete and total failure of those opposite to meet the commitments that were made before the election. Twice today they have failed to be able to indicate one project that was actually commenced under them in government and is now under construction.

Let me take members to the reality of what has happened in the employment sector, and then I want to particularly touch on my own portfolio area, of vocational education and skills. We have seen unemployment now having risen to the highest level it has been at in a decade. In 10 years, we have not seen unemployment at 6.4 per cent. Now we do. How on earth could the Treasurer have made any sort of claim in question time today that that delivers on a promise to create a million jobs? There are people in communities across this country who are facing increased levels of unemployment. In particular, as the Brotherhood of St Lawrence has recently documented, young people are looking at increased youth unemployment. How on earth they could take any comfort from a government that promised a million jobs before the election and now thinks that having the highest level of unemployment in a decade is a good outcome I do not know.

They are now putting increasing expectations on people who are unemployed at the same time as they slash and burn the programs that provide the pathway for people to get into jobs. Let us look at the Youth Connections and Partnership Brokers programs, both well regarded—I am sure there are many of my colleagues who avoid, like the plague, people in their electorates who are running those programs, because they know that they are effective, well-designed programs delivering real pathways into jobs. They were slashed in the last budget.

Today I had the opportunity, with the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Canberra, to visit some apprentices at CIT at Fyshwick. At that place, we met a lot of apprentices who were studying in the first, second or third year of their apprenticeships. Around 20 per cent of them were mature-age apprentices who were actually retraining and looking at changing their long-term job future. Those apprentices have seen $1 billion ripped out of the support provided to them and future apprentices in the last budget—$1 billion, with no replacement and no view to future support for apprenticeships.

Fiona Scott (Lindsay, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That is completely not true.

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

I will go through it for the member opposite, who says that is not true. Are you saying to me that there was not $1 billion in the budget taken out of apprenticeship programs?

Ms Scott interjecting—

Okay, then I will outline for the member opposite what exactly you did: a $20,000 loan—I am sure apprentices are so thrilled! Let me tell the member opposite: you abolished the Tools For Your Trade—

Ms Scott interjecting—

Craig Kelly (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for Lindsay knows that if she wishes to interject she should be in her seat. The member for Cunningham has the call.

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

Stop encouraging the member to make a fool of herself, Deputy Speaker! Let me tell you: not only did you abolish the Tools For Your Trade program, but let me name the four other programs that you abolished in the budget for which there was no replacement. No. 1 was the Apprenticeships Access Program. I was out in Western Sydney as a minister visiting the Motor Traders' Association who ran the Apprenticeships Access Program, and they were busily telling me how important and significant it had been for Western Sydney to have that pathway for disadvantaged young people. Then the Apprenticeships Mentoring Program was abolished. The Apprentice to Business Owner Program, helping them to establish small businesses, was abolished. These programs were all abolished on your watch. (Time expired)

Josh Frydenberg (Kooyong, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Australian people do not have short memories; they have long memories. And when you come into this place and talk about broken promises, we must remind the Australian people of the broken promises of those on the other side during the six terrible years of the Labor government.

One of my heroes is Ronald Reagan, and do you know what he said about the Democrats? He said their view of government is: if something moves, they tax it; if it keeps moving, they regulate it; and if it stops moving, they subsidise it! Well, that could be said about those opposite.

So I want to give the House 10 graphic examples of broken promises by those opposite. No. 1 is the economy and the $667 billion worth of debt; after 400 promises that we would enter surplus, we never saw it. Remember when the member for Lilley came into this place and said, 'Tonight I announce four years of surpluses'? They never were.

We saw cheques to dead people—$900 cheques; 27,000 people living overseas received a $900 cheque.

Fiona Scott (Lindsay, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

How many dead people received them?

Josh Frydenberg (Kooyong, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Twenty-one thousand people—dead people—received cheques from those opposite. And would you believe: in 2012-13, a number of years after the global financial crisis, some 12,000 people kept receiving their $900 cheques.

There was the carbon tax on which the then Leader of the Opposition, Julia Gillard, went to the Australian people and said: 'There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead.' Then there was the mining tax, which we were promised would bring in $49½ billion and produced just $340 million worth of revenue.

Then there were the boats. We were told by those opposite that they would also stop the boats. They gave us an $11 billion budget blow-out when it came to the boats—there were more than 50,000 unauthorised arrivals and, tragically, more than 1,000 people lost their lives at sea.

Then we saw the red tape, when those opposite said there would be one in, one out. We saw 21,000 additional regulations from those opposite.

Then we had the NBN, which had just started—a $4.7 billion infrastructure project—and then we had an independent analysis find that it had blown out by $29 billion. After just six years of the Labor government, the rollout was only three per cent and less than 100,000 Australians had access to the NBN.

Then we had the free trade agreements which we were told would eventuate with China, Korea and Japan. None of them did, under the Labor Party. It took us to deliver the free trade agreements.

Then we had the commitment from those opposite that they would protect the defence of our nation and support our soldiers and our men and women in uniform. But, under the Labor Party, we saw defence spending fall to just 1.56 per cent—the lowest level since 1938.

Then we had the then Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, go to the Australian people and to the region and say, 'I will create an Asia-Pacific community, because this will allow me to grandstand and to promote my best interests at the expense of Australia's best interests.' And what happened? That never eventuated because those in the region were never consulted.

Then we had, in health, the commitment to 64 superclinics—

Fiona Scott (Lindsay, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

How many patients have they seen?

Josh Frydenberg (Kooyong, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Well, they were never developed, and never delivered. Then we had a broken promise on private health insurance. More than $4 billion was wasted. We had waiting times for elective surgery go up under those opposite, and then we had the deferral of putting medicines on the PBS just because those opposite had no care for the health of our nation.

Then, as for small business, 400,000 jobs in small business were lost by those opposite because they recycled their ministers for small business just like it was pass the parcel. There were six ministers for small business under those opposite. That is not a lot, when you compare it to the nine ministers for education that those opposite had, or the five ministers for regional development, or the three foreign ministers, or the three prime ministers.

We are very proud, on this side of the House, because we have repealed the carbon tax, we have repealed the mining tax, we have stopped the boats, we are on the way to budget repair, and we know that, with the changes through the Senate, we have been able to deal without the help of the Labor Party, and we have the best interests of Australia at heart and we have been able to deliver for the best interests of the Australian people.

David Feeney (Batman, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Justice) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

For 12 months now we have had a government in a shambolic state. They promised a government of no excuses and no surprises, and for 12 months we have been enduring surprise after surprise and excuse after excuse.

There is a miscellany of broken promises I could touch upon today, but I would like to begin by making the point that one of my favourite aspects of the broken promises is not so much the egregious breaking of the promises but a government that refuses thereafter to admit that it has broken a promise. Time and time again we have seen this government stand up before audiences of pensioners, veterans and others and insist to their faces that they have received no cut. Of course, all that achieves—and your action faces tell the story—is that the anger grows, and the anger will come and bite you.

Just last week in question time the Prime Minister contradicted the Minister for Veterans' Affairs with respect to the Australian War Memorial. Before the last election the Prime Minister was, of course, desperately keen to speak highly of the War Memorial, and said:

… the Coalition will take the action necessary to preserve, protect and enhance the Australian War Memorial.

Now, of course, the War Memorial well and truly wishes that you had never taken an interest in its business and that you had never taken an interest in its work because, after having taken an interest in its work, all you have done is slash and burn it. The Prime Minister said last week:

I want to stress that the $800,000 that he refers to has not been cut.

Has the $800,000 just magically disappeared from its budget as part of the great coalition fairy story of what happened to its commitments to the people of Australia? At the same time that the Prime Minister was at the dispatch box insisting that there was no cut, that the $800,000 was a made-up fairy number, we saw in the Senate the veterans' affairs minister talking about the funding cut and saying, 'I did not make this cut with any joy.' At least, in Senator Ronaldson's defence, he knows a cut when he sees one and he understood the bad news that he was delivering. The Director of the Australian War Memorial said:

… the Department of Veterans Affairs informed the memorial last week that it has found it necessary to cease funding the travelling exhibition program effective immediately …

So, a cut is a cut. The work of the War Memorial has been slashed. The Prime Minister, who came into this parliament desperate to associate himself with the work of the War Memorial, has stood here and managed to oversee an $800,000 cut in its business.

That $800,000 cut to the work of the War Memorial absolutely affects it, because those travelling exhibitions have now been cut. Those travelling exhibitions—belittled as they were by the Prime Minister, who described them as 'small exhibitions'—have accomplished great things for the War Memorial. They have been seen by over 3.8 million Australians in their 17 years of work. Those opposite, who insist time and time again that they represent regional Australia, show absolutely no interest in the fact that it is these travelling exhibitions that take the work of the War Memorial to regional Australia and to our classrooms. Now, of course, the coalition have thrown it overboard without so much as a 'by your leave'. This action, in the Centenary of Anzac, is an outrageous decision.

It does not end there because the broken promises spread much further. The veterans' community has been aghast at the blows inflicted upon it by this budget from this government. For a government that said, 'No surprises and no excuses,' our veterans have endured both because, after having insisted that you would look after veterans, after insisting that you would look after military pensions, what have we actually seen? We have seen the abolition of the MSBS superannuation scheme for our serving military, which is a remarkable decision that will go to the retention of our military people.

Worse yet, the pensions of some 280,000 veterans, a total of 310,000 payments have now been cut. After spending years and years in opposition lecturing us on this side of the House about the virtues of triple indexation, no sooner had you found yourselves on the Treasury benches than you defied your own rhetoric, you overthrew your own words, and you abolished triple indexation for our veterans. We know that only one year in 10 is CPI the superior calculation. So, in nine years out of 10, you have now made sure that our veterans get paid less. Year after year after year we are now going to see the living standards of our veterans suffer because of your mean-spirited and cruel budget. It is a mean-spirited and cruel budget that has, of course, been a surprise and an excuse to our veterans' community.

I could go on and talk about submarines, and about the fact that David Johnston promised to build and assemble 12 submarines in Adelaide. We have seen that promise turn to dust. (Time expired)

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

I only wish that the member for Batman had gone on to speak about submarines. He could not have got any lower than he just did in that speech. There was only one thing that the previous government had that was better than this one and that was the member for Batman.

Being here today is like watching tenants about to be evicted from the house. They have taken over a brand new, shiny, fully-paid-for house, and over the six years that they were in charge they have let it crumble down. The pink batts are smouldering in the ceiling, the children are huddled around the one laptop. Remember that? One laptop for every child. They managed to get about 25 per cent of them delivered before they became obsolete. They are looking around wondering what happened to the Fuelwatch and the GroceryWatch websites.

This MPI is about a party's wrong priorities, and what we saw with the previous government were certainly wrong priorities. From a television show on the ABC we saw a knee-jerk reaction when the live cattle trade was removed. We saw, not only a relationship with one of our most valuable neighbours to the north severely damaged, but the entire industry, an entire section of Australia, nearly wiped out economically because of their lack of priorities when looking after Australian industry.

We saw how the BER program worked in my part of the world at the school in Louth. It was a wonderful program as they now have a classroom for each child. We have four children, so they built another classroom. Unfortunately, one of the kids left, so now we have four classrooms and three kids, but it is a great program. A young contractor in Dubbo could not get paid because of the mismanagement of the BER program. He took his crane out on a Sunday and pulled down the shelter shed and took it home because of the mismanagement.

We saw the pink batts program, where every shonky and dodgy dealer within three or four continents converged on Australia and absolutely ripped off pensioners—mainly people who were too frail to go out and have a look for themselves. When the family member turned up, the batts were still bundled up and not even spread out. It was an absolute disgrace. We had Fuelwatch and GroceryWatch and we had a mining tax that came with $17 billion of expenditure and $600,000 of income. It was an absolute disgrace.

The member for Grayndler spoke in his opening address about breaking plates at a Greek wedding. What we saw with the previous government was a Greek tragedy. We saw the previous government take the strongest economy in the Western world and turn it into a Greek economy. What we saw was an absolute disgrace. The member for Grayndler asked, 'What about some projects where we can see some bulldozers in action?' I can take him to one: the Moree bypass. It was funded with $55 million when John Anderson was the minister and it was completely botched and squandered by the then Labor government in New South Wales. It was left to Warren Truss and Duncan Gay to come up with the funds for the Moree bypass. It was an absolute disgrace by the previous government.

This government is getting on and doing the job. Another example is the inland rail. We now have an implementation committee. We are now seriously building that link from Brisbane to Melbourne, which will be the 'steel Mississippi'. It will revolutionise not only freight transfer in Australia but also build economies through western New South Wales, Queensland and Victoria. We now have free trade agreements. So when that railway line is built, we will be able to export produce from western New South Wales straight into Korea, China and Japan. We now have a government that has a vision for the people it represents.

What about the carbon tax? Under the previous government, we had a tax that made everything that we produce more expensive than the products of our competitors—with Australian farmers having to pay more for their fuel, fertiliser and freight than their American counterparts—for no environmental gain.

Mr Conroy interjecting—

Don't talk rubbish to me. We have two Conroys in this place, and I am not going to say which one is the most clever. We have a Conroy who delivered an NBN and I do not think the other Conroy has much ability to do much more! This MPI is an absolute farce. (Time expired)

Terri Butler (Griffith, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Today's MPI is about the broken promises of the Abbott government in its first year—and what a litany of broken promises it is. The most famous of them all is the promise to be a no surprises and no excuses government. What an absolute rubbish, rubbish, rubbish statement that is. There have been plenty of surprises and nothing but excuses from this mob opposite, who want to turn up every question time and blame Labor. Well, news flash: you have been in government for a year, and it is time to start taking some responsibility and start talking about what you are doing for the Australian people.

And let's talk about what you are doing for the Australian people. What are you doing for the Australian people? Those are the surprises that we have been amply provided with by the Abbott government. Like the promise of no surprises and no excuses, there were some other very important promises made. They were promises that were made in an attempt to convince voters that they had nothing to be worried about in electing an Abbott government. Unfortunately, voters had plenty to be worried about in electing an Abbott government. There were promises like: there will be no cuts; there will be no cuts to education; there will be no changes to the pension; and there will be no cuts to higher education. Those promises were so ridiculous!

I might add that there were a few promises made in my by-election campaign earlier this year, and one of them was there was not going to be a GP tax—'We are not considering a GP tax.' I remember that pretty well. I was a candidate for a by-election and I had the Prime Minister and the foreign minister swan into my town to tell voters, 'There's nothing to see here; there ain't going to be a GP tax.' I was apparently scaremongering about it—and then what happened? Was there a GP tax? Yes, there was a GP tax—and it is a GP tax that is going to hurt people's ability to go to the GP and will see people not going to the GP when they should. And what is going to be the outcome of that? That will mean bad health outcomes for people in this country. It is reckless policy, and that mob over there ought to be ashamed.

What else have we seen from a government who promised before the election that there would be no changes to pensions? Today I got a message on my Facebook page and it said the following: 'Terry, will you please stand up for we pensioners today in parliament?' Yes, I will stand up for pensioners today in parliament, because no-one on that side of the House is going to stand up for pensioners. What are they going to do for pensioners? They are going to change the indexation rate so that every time the pension is indexed it gets harder and harder for pensions to meet the cost of living for pensioners—something which those opposite ought to be ashamed of.

So, not only are they going to slug pensioners with a GP tax and slug people with the petrol tax increase that they want to impose on people; they are also going to make it harder for pensioners to meet their costs of living. They are going to overturn a change that Labor brought out in 2009—a change to help pensioners meet their costs of living. That mob want to take it away from pensioners. We will stand up for pensioners. The people on this side of the House will stand up for pensioners, because we care about pensioners—unlike that mob over there, who think they are born to rule.

When you stand up in this House and say that Labor were a tenant of government—you are claiming that Labor were a tenant when we held government—the implication is that your mob are the landlords. Your born to rule mentality is exposed for everyone to see. You think you own government, but I have news for you: the Australian people are the landlords of government and they are going to pass judgement on you for these outrageous broken promises that you have made. You ought to be ashamed.

Sarah Henderson (Corangamite, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I am just reminding the member opposite that she needs to direct her statements through the chair and not by screaming 'you' across the chamber.

Craig Kelly (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Corangamite. I will remind the member for Griffith that she ought to direct her remarks through the chair.

Terri Butler (Griffith, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Deputy Speaker. With the greatest respect, Deputy Speaker, the Abbott government has broken its promises and is not standing up for the people of Australia. But, as I was saying, the Australian people own this place. The Australian people are the landlords when it comes to government—in this flawed analogy that was just raised in the context of this debate—and these broken promises will not sit well with the Australian people. What about the broken promise on higher education? What about that broken promise? We heard in question time today the broken promises of this government—(Time expired)

Karen McNamara (Dobell, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am proud to be a member of a government which is keeping its commitments to the Australian people. Sadly it has not dawned on the change of government deniers, Australia's greatest whingers who sit opposite, that we are doing what we have said we would do. We have scrapped the carbon tax, we have scrapped the mining tax, we have stopped the boats, we are building the roads of the 21st century and, most importantly, we are repairing the Australian economy, which was burdened with the greatest debt and deficit disaster this nation has ever seen. Australians are grateful to have a mature government that is delivering on what we said we would do and not addicted to the 24/7 media cycle. The people of Dobell are finally being treated with the respect they deserve.

Mr Conroy interjecting—

I knew I would get a reaction from the member for Charlton. I think he is becoming obsessed with me! Unlike the former government and the members opposite, this government is not ashamed to have the member for Dobell among its ranks. Unlike the former government, who are more interested in paying their legal bills than investing in skills and training, this government is doing everything it can to repair the damage in Dobell. The former government tried to forget about the people of Dobell and sweep our issues under the carpet. They hoped that, like a bad dream, they would awake from the Craig Thomson nightmare. Unfortunately for those opposite, the people of Dobell well remember the legacy bestowed upon them by the Labor government. And finally they have a decent member.

Ms Hall interjecting—

You can say that in here, but say it on the steps outside!

Josh Frydenberg (Kooyong, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker, on a point of order: that was a despicable slur and I would ask the member to withdraw.

Pat Conroy (Charlton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker, on a point of order: it was a factual statement; the member for Dobell has been a witness at ICAC.

Craig Kelly (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is no point of order. To assist the House, I ask the member for Shortland to withdraw.

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

I find it hard to withdraw something that is factual.

Craig Kelly (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I ask the member for Shortland to withdraw.

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

To assist the House, I withdraw.

Craig Kelly (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Shortland. The member for Dobell has the call.

Karen McNamara (Dobell, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The legacy bestowed upon the people of Dobell was above average unemployment; one of the highest levels of youth unemployment in Australia; only one in two students completing secondary education; and only 16 per cent of people engaging in tertiary education. That is a shame—and that is factual! The people of Dobell now have a government that is proud to stand by their side and fight for their needs. As the member for Dobell, I am committed to increasing local employment opportunities for our school leavers and job seekers—and that is a fact. That is why, prior to being elected, I fought for and secured $2.7 million of funding for new skills training centres. These centres will ensure school leavers in Dobell have every possible chance of securing an apprenticeship or traineeship with a local business and work towards long-term sustainable employment.

The new Work for the Dole scheme will see job seekers provided with an opportunity to work in the community and, while doing so, acquire the soft skills and work ethic necessary to break into the workforce. Earlier this year I gladly welcomed the Hon. Luke Hartsuyker MP, the Assistant Minister for Employment, to Dobell to launch the government's new Work for the Dole scheme. By launching this new and improved scheme in Dobell the government confirmed its commitment to the people of the Central Coast.

Ms Butler interjecting—

Will someone please put a tea towel over that and stop that squeaking! Our desire is to see more jobs and a more prosperous future. Unlike the former government, we have listened to the needs of the people of Dobell. We promised to deliver $3.3 million to restore Tuggerah Lakes to its former glory—and we have delivered. We promised $700,000 to complete the reconstruction of the Norah Head boat ramp—and we have delivered. We promised a $370,000 investment in CCTV equipment to keep our streets and community safe—and we have delivered. And our commitment to the Tuggerah sports precinct will deliver economic benefits to the Central Coast. This government is delivering, and we will continue to deliver. Those opposite just whinge, whinge, whinge, whinge. If they took the time to listen, they might understand something. It is about being a good member and delivering— (Time expired)

Alan Griffin (Bruce, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is an old saying that 'a week is a long time in politics'. Well, surely for those opposite, 12 months has been an absolute eternity. This has been the worst 12 months of a commencing government since Federation. They have walked away from so many of the commitments they made in the lead-up to the election and they have broken so many of the promises they made to the Australian people—where do I start? The only thing I can say for sure is that, if the Australian people take note of what the government has done in the last 12 months, they will be finished—of that, there is absolutely no doubt. Health, education, pensions—work through the list. It is one thing to say circumstances have changed, it is one thing to say there are issues the government has to deal with, but the bottom line here is that, since the election, this government has gone out of its way to offend the Australian people and walk away from the things they committed to in the lead-up to the election.

Today we spoke about education and the circumstances around the commitments made at Pyne Online. To say 'All we're doing is deregulating, and that makes no difference' shows absolutely no understanding of the higher education sector—or, alternatively, it is a deliberate attempt to lie. That is what they have done—they have lied to the Australian people. The fact is that, when you deregulate fees, you will see a situation where fees increase—although there may be movement around, you will see fees going up. It is also very clear what has been said with respect to HECS. It is one thing to say 'Yes, you can still pay it,' it is one thing to say 'It's still a lower interest rate,' but it is another thing to admit that you said you would not change it but you did. And it is another thing to ensure that you understand the feelings and the circumstances of the students out there with respect to what they will be dealing with in the future.

Just the other day I was in a parliamentary committee meeting in the member for Reid's electorate. We met there with a large group of year 11 and year 12 students. They were asked what they thought was important—what the issues were that they cared about. Almost every single one of them put their hand up when asked the question, 'Are you concerned about the government's proposals around HECS? Are you concerned?' They all put their hands up. Frankly, they put their hands up because they have genuine concerns.

It is all right saying that you can put it on a loan to the never-never and that it is okay—you will not have to pay it back for a long time, and only then if you earn an awful lot of money. But the bottom line point is this: it will have an impact with respect to who goes to university and it will particularly have an impact on students from disadvantaged areas because they will react to the circumstances around their communities, their peers and their families in making a decision to try to earn some money now versus trying to earn a degree to earn more money later. That is an example of where this government just does not get it.

Then you go on to other areas like health—no cuts to health. There is $50 billion in health cut away from state budgets. It is all right to say, 'We're not cutting it. Oh, the states can put it back in. Of course they can.' That does not work; it does not work that way and they know that.

Then you go on to things like the way they have gone on about pensions and indexation, and the continual chant from the other side, 'Pensions will keep going up.' Again, if you understand the mathematics at all of the nature of the way pensions are actually adjusted and consumer price index versus male total average weekly earnings—the nature of the difference in the movement of those two indicators over a 10-year period—you know that if you proceed with this measure what you will have done effectively is to cut the pension payments to elderly Australians, to sick Australians and to disadvantaged Australians for years and years to come. This is by figures estimated, over time, of up to $80 a week and if the same sort of movement occurred in those indicators as did over the last four years it could be as much as $1,500.

The bottom line is this: there have been broken promises by this government—there has been a litany of them. It is a litany of broken promises and they will need to go out there and explain them a lot better than they have so far, because we all know that this budget has been a disaster with respect to the attempts that have been made to try to sell it. Frankly, they have a lot of work to do in the next two years to try to recover this first 12 months. So, whether it is education, whether it is health, whether it is university fees or whether it is promises about a million new jobs—and I do not know where they are coming from—the bottom line is that this government has a lot to answer for.

I will give one thing that the Prime Minister said that I think will be true—I will go along with him on this: on Tuesday 3 September last year he said:

I expect that people will be very harsh on a new government that doesn't keep its commitments.

Well, Prime Minister, I think you got that one right. (Time expired)

Sarah Henderson (Corangamite, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to make a contribution on this MPI by reminding members opposite and the Australian people that we have had an incredible number of achievements in the first year.

We have repealed the carbon tax, a tax that in my region in Geelong and Corangamite was completely toxic. It was a tax that lost jobs, a tax that drained small businesses of confidence and a tax that caused a $1.1 billion hit on manufacturing. Members opposite know this.

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Sarah Henderson (Corangamite, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Charlton knows this; this was an insidious tax in a proud manufacturing centre like the city that I represent in part—Geelong. This was an extremely damaging tax and we have proudly repealed that carbon tax. The Australian people know that, come hell or high water, in the next election we will see the carbon tax return under Labor. Labor has made that clear and we are determined to fight those taxes that cause such damage to our economy and to jobs growth.

We have repealed the mining tax—another toxic tax so damaging for jobs, so damaging for productivity and so damaging to our economy. We have effectively stopped the boats. We have saved the Australian taxpayer billions of dollars in stopping the boats and we can see from the members opposite when the minister stands before them and talks about our achievements that it is an absolute and utter embarrassment to them. It is an embarrassment: the way in which they flip-flopped on that policy for six years. We said we would do it, we are doing it and we have done it.

We are building the roads of the 21st century. Our infrastructure Prime Minister knows how important it is to invest in local communities and particularly in the regions. And we are fixing the budget—and, oh boy, what a job that is! The member for Griffith invited us to take responsibility. We are taking responsibility, because as the member for Lilley said to Senator Carr, the situation that members opposite created when they were in government was 'fiscally ruinous'. 'Fiscally ruinous': they were the words out of the former Treasurer's mouth. Six hundred and sixty-seven billion dollars of debt; $191 billion of cumulative deficits after promising they would deliver four consecutive surpluses! Members opposite have failed fundamentally to—

Terri Butler (Griffith, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker Kelly, I rise on a point of order. The member well knows that it was actually the Treasurer who doubled the deficit, increasing the deficit to nearly—

Craig Kelly (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! There is no point of order. The member for Corangamite has the call.

Sarah Henderson (Corangamite, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is unfortunate that the member opposite does not understand the standing orders. That is not a point of order.

I just quickly want to touch on the broken promises we have heard about the carbon tax and the surpluses, and the promise for a company tax cut which, again, was another broken promise that we are delivering on. Again, this is so important for small business.

There were the cruel cuts. Look at what we are proudly doing in our budget. I heard a member the other day saying, 'Get rid of the budget.' Our budget is delivering the National Disability Insurance Scheme—

Pat Conroy (Charlton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We'll pay for it—

Sarah Henderson (Corangamite, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You are laughing! Absolutely—with the headquarters. Under your budget you delivered a $44.9 million cut to NDIS support packages, which we reversed in our budget. We funded it within the agreed funding envelope as well, all the way through until it is a $22 billion scheme. And we are very proudly hosting the NDIS headquarters in Geelong. It is a very good example of our government listening and caring and, yes, working with the previous government in a bipartisan way. But the scare campaign that members opposite ran in relation to the funding of the NDIS was an absolute disgrace.

The twisted priorities: we heard the member for Grayndler claiming today—twice, and claiming falsely unfortunately—that no infrastructure projects we announced have started, that there are no bulldozers. I want to correct the record and make members opposite aware, even though I think the member for Grayndler is aware, that the Great Ocean Road project, a fantastic project in our region, is underway with $25 million from the federal government and $25 million from the state government. That is a project that Labor opposed. They did not understand how important it is for tourism. Another project is the East-West Link, which is so important for our economy; it is creating 6,000 jobs. It is an absolute disgrace that you are standing in the way of a project that is so important for jobs for our region. (Time expired)

Craig Kelly (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The time for this discussion has concluded.