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

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

The devastating impact of Tony Abbott's budget of broken promises on jobs and the cost of living.

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—

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

This is the week that truth has caught up with the budget and caught up with the government. It is fair to say that the parallel universe that this Liberal regime inhabit is shrinking fast. Reality keeps getting in the way of their rhetoric. The truth keeps shining a light on their broken promises and lies. On five different matters this week the truth has mugged this lying government. Firstly, we have learnt about the GP tax, justified on the basis of an out-of-control health spending crisis that does not exist. Secondly, we have learnt that university fees will increase in a manner which will discourage many students from studying. Thirdly, we have discovered that the government has been systematically engaged in a wilful conspiracy to destroy the renewable energy industry in this country. Fourthly, we have seen that when it comes to keeping promises on building submarines in Adelaide this government cannot lie straight in bed. Furthermore, fifthly, we have seen warnings from the banking sector of Australia that this government has gone too far in deregulating consumer protection. They are five matters this week where the truth has uncomfortably reared its unwelcome head in government considerations.

The GP tax, an attack on the sick and the vulnerable, has been justified on the basis of out-of-control health spending. The government has said that the GP tax is being imposed because we have an unsustainable health spending system, yet they propose to put the money from it into a future fund for medical research and none of that money will be used to deal with the health spending crisis that they allege exists. This is a government that is addicted to scaring Australians and inventing false crises to justify unfair tactics. But the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare has blown a big hole in the logic and the rationalisation of the government. Federal government health spending is at its lowest in 30 years—its lowest. How on earth can you justify taxing the sick and the poor and the vulnerable on a rationale that does not exist? We have discovered this week that Australians are spending more on their own health care than Medicare is, and yet this is a government that wants to transfer more of the burden onto ordinary Australians. AMA president Brian Owler has belled the cat. He says that this research makes 'a mockery of the fact that the government's been claiming that health care expenditure is out of control.' He goes on to say simply and purely and unequivocally on behalf of the patients of Australia, 'there is no justification for a GP co-payment.' Look at those government members opposite—their heads are bowed; they are not arguing back because they know the truth when they hear it.

There is a second truth this week that has embarrassed the government. Education is essential to our future. Going to university should depend upon your hard work and your good marks, not your parents' wealth. Letting universities charge what they like will mean crippling debts and higher fees. People are worried—not just young people but families and mature age students. The Minister for Education visited the United Kingdom recently. You would have thought he could have discovered that fees are trebling under the system he advocates. He challenged us this week to look at what some of the university groups have said, and then he had the cheek—what a cheeky fellow this Minister for Education is—to accuse Labor of selectively quoting. We have discovered in the Senate submissions that no-one universally and unanimously supports all these recommendations. Frankly, we cannot get enough of this out-of-touch, arrogant fellow because we selfishly want Australia to see what this government is like. Never hide Christopher Pyne—keep bringing him out. We love him, but the people of Australia don't.

We have discovered this week that the University of Western Australia has said that medical degrees will cost $100,000. Fantastic, Christopher Pyne—the worst Minister for Education we have ever had is introducing the highest fees we have ever seen in Australian education history. They can put that on his tombstone. The cost of doing a science degree is going up 82 per cent, and economics is going up 56 per cent. This government have a plan to create a two-class Australia, and they cynically keep arguing that the people who have not been to university should be presented with a bunch of flowers by the people who have gone to university. Christopher Pyne is so out of touch it is breathtaking. I know not what planet he lives on, but it is not the one the rest of us live on. When he says that parents and grandparents who have never been to university somehow begrudge their children and their grandchildren going to university, he is being so shockingly arrogant it is a disgrace.

It is not just universities—there is also the renewable energy target. This week se have seen the government continue to do everything it can to destroy an industry. Let me quote John Hewson, Tony Abbott's former boss. He has said it well, thus proving that even a stopped clock can be right twice a day:

You're asking people to make long-term investments and then you change the policy in the middle of that and you reduce the value of those investments.

Ann Sudmalis (Gilmore, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What—the mining tax?

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

Be careful—he even says more. Former Liberal leader and Abbott boss Hewson goes on:

This is a government that says it's open for business. For Christ's sake, what business are you open for?

It is certainly not renewable energy.

Then, of course, we got the broken promises on submarines. I thought the performance of the Acting Prime Minister in question time today was outrageous. We put to the government a very straightforward statement. David Johnston, the little-known defence minister, who was being stalked by Mathais Cormann and his faction in the Western Australian Liberal Party—I would not want to be in the same party as that chap—fronts up at the Australian Submarine Corporation. No shame. He is right in front of where they build the subs—we know Liberals love being photographed with the military; it is just what they will not do for military equipment that is so outrageous—and on 8 May says: 'We will build 12 submarines in Adelaide.' He did not say what that Truss fellow said just before. He did not say, 'Well, the bulk of the Australian work will be done in South Australia.' No, he did not say that. He said: '12 submarines in Adelaide'. We just asked them a simple question today. If any of the backbenchers have any courage at all they should get up and say, 'Will the Liberal Party of Australia keep its promises on submarines?' Just keep your promises on submarines!

Ms Gambaro interjecting—

Come on, Teresa. You have a crack at it. Keep your promises. Let me quote the Governor-General and former CDF , Sir Peter Cosgrove. Right before he became Governor-General, he said:

Whenever I am asked why we should build submarines in Australia, my short reply is that we can’t afford not to.

Of course, what would the former CDF compared to all the Colonel Blimps over here know? Then there are the financial changes that the government is making. The government is so out of touch with the truth that it is recklessly deregulating consumer protections for people who consume financial products to a point where even the banks have said, 'You've gone too far.' How you can get outflanked on the left by the big banks of Australia defies me. It sets new land speed records. It is not only that the government have been outflanked by the banks where even they think the government is going too far in drinking the drug of deregulation and exposing people to further financial risk; it is that they lied about it.

So this week we have five different matters where this government continued to lie—despite the truth. It does not matter if it is jobs and renewable energy. It does not matter if it is jobs and submarines. It does not matter if it is out-of-control health spending—a confected crisis where they are scaring Australians to justify their rotten GP tax. It does not matter if they want to make it harder for working-class kids or kids from the bush. Wasn't that a classic answer from the Leader of the Nationals? His own party has said it is a bad idea. Of course, the Liberal Party has got its hand so far up that chap's back that he does not even remember the bush anymore.

What I saw today and what I have seen in the last couple of days with financial protections is that even Innes Willox, the spokesperson for the Ai Group, the Australian Industry Group, spelled out the lies of this government. Remember the dirty deal the government did with the Palmer United Party to wreck the retirement savings of millions of Australian? Innes Willox said:

… we wouldn't expect wages to rise to completely offset the postponement of the superannuation guarantee …

This mob promised real solutions, but all they are is part of the real problem of Australia.

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

Once again we hear the ranting and the railing of the Leader of the Opposition as he stands in the chamber and attempts to portray that this government has somehow not done the right thing by the Australian people. Once again we hear the bluff and the bluster as the Leader of the Opposition laments his concern about jobs, his concern about renewable energy targets and his concern about defence. He says that it has all gone to potash since the coalition was elected. But the extraordinary thing and, in fact, the subject of the debate of the MPI this afternoon deals with, is the very clear indication of the track record of our performance versus Labor's performance.

The Leader of the Opposition and the Australian Labor Party come into the chamber and say how concerned they are about the cost of living and how we as a government have not stood by our election promises. This is coming from a Labor Party who, when they were in government, implemented policies that oversaw electricity increases—perhaps the single biggest input cost into every household and into every business across the country. The Australian Labor Party oversaw increases in electricity costs of 101 per cent from the December-quarter of 2007 until the September-quarter of 2013—a 101 per cent increase in electricity prices over that period and they have the gall, the audacity, the hypocrisy to come in here and lecture the coalition about how we do not do the right thing in terms of cost of living.

Bear in mind that this is the Australian Labor Party, which, under the stewardship of the former Prime Minister who said 'There'll be no carbon tax under a government I lead' introduced a carbon tax. It was in direct contrast to what the Australian Labor Party said they were going to do. It was a policy, which, at its core, was about driving up the price of electricity. As a consequence of this policy there were stories in the Daily Telegraph about pensioners unable to turn on their heating in winter because of the cost of electricity. Yet the Australian Labor Party—highlighting just what hypocrites they are prepared to be—come in here and say how we have the policies wrong and how Labor had the policies right, when Labor pursued an aggressive form of pushing up energy prices as much as possible. It was not just confined to electricity. We saw utilities increase by about 89.1 per cent and gas by 71.4 per cent.

But it is more than that; it was also Labor's active pursuit of policies that ran directly contrary to what was in the interests of Australians overall. Who could forget when Labor promised that they were going to end the double drop-off? We remember how the then minister stood up and said: 'No more Australians have to do a double drop-off. They will all be able to be co-located at schools and it will make it so much easier for parents.' Not only did that not happen; we also Labor's sop to the unions in their attempt to channel as many workers as possible into their union base to prop up the Australian Labor Party. We saw the consequence where childcare costs increased by more than 50 per cent as a direct result of Labor's policies. Then they say to the coalition, 'You should be more concerned and more focused on the needs of working women,' when we, the coalition, are attempting to provide women with a replacement wage, and we, the coalition, are prepared to put money into Australian women's superannuation, in stark contrast to Labor's policy, which offers only a minimum wage and no superannuation. So, once again, we see just how plain it is that Labor are prepared to display their hypocrisy when it comes to, for example, childcare costs and what is in the best interests of Australia's working women.

The other interesting thing when you were listening to the Leader of the Opposition's contribution to this debate was that he railed about sovereign risk and how we were jeopardising investments with respect to the renewable energy target, because we as a government undertook a review. Bear in mind that it was a legislative review. Bear in mind that we took it to the last election that we would undertake a review. Bear in mind that all we have had is a report to government and not a report of government. But that does not stop the Leader of the Opposition from attempting to make hay trying to maintain that things are very bad because we have billions in investment threatened.

Let us compare and contrast this to Labor's performance. What we see is the example of the Australian Labor Party having not one, not two, not three, but four iterations of the mining tax. There were four combinations and permutations of the resources superprofits tax, which became the mining tax, which actually did drive down investment in our resources sector. It actually did result in job losses in Australia's resources sector. It actually was a completely failed policy. It had some $17.2 billion of expenditure tied to it but raised a paltry couple of hundred million dollars.

So we continue to see examples of where the Leader of the Opposition stands up and makes all the right sounds and just hopes and prays every day that the Australian people conveniently forget Labor's track record. Labor's track record on the cost of living is appalling. Labor's track record when it comes to sovereign risk is appalling. And Labor's track record when it comes to making sure that we provide Australian children with a better tomorrow than they would otherwise have today is the worst example of all.

We on this side of the House know that we will pursue policies that do put downward pressure on the cost of living. There is no clearer example of that than what we did with the abolition of the carbon tax. The government has worked constructively and methodically with those cross bench senators who were willing to take notice of the mandate the Australian people gave us at the last election. We followed through on our promise and delivered the repeal of the carbon tax. We did likewise with respect to the mining tax. We said we were going to do it and we delivered. Not only did we deliver on our promises, but we actually delivered real savings back to Australians, with expected electricity price reductions—not increases but reductions—of nine per cent.

I saw recently an example in Queensland that occurred as a direct consequence of the coalition's abolition of Labor's failed mining tax. Queensland Premier Campbell Newman announced that public transport fees were going to be frozen this year, and next year they would decrease by five per cent. This is happening as a direct consequence of the abolition of a complete failure of a policy from the Australian Labor Party.

The final point I draw upon, which the Leader of the Opposition made reference to, was health spending. I have to say that I continue to be amazed at how the Australian Labor Party can stand up with a straight face and run the complete mistruth that if Labor was still in power there somehow would be billions of dollars of extra funding going towards health and education. The real facts are very straightforward. There was no money being set aside for health and education by the Australian Labor Party. Not one single cent had Labor actually been able to materialise and put aside for additional health and education funding. In fact, with respect to education, under the coalition there is an additional $1.2 billion being provided in education funding that Labor was going to rip out in a sneaky little announcement they made just prior to the last election—$1.2 billion ripped out of education funding in the Northern Territory, Queensland and Western Australia. Yet the Leader of the Opposition stands up here with a straight face and says how outraged he is that we would be looking at reducing Gonski funding, when we in fact are delivering real funding increases each and every year in health and education, unlike the Labor Party. I will not tolerate for one moment—none of us on this side will—being lectured to by the Australian Labor Party about how we do not take decisions in the long-term interests of Australian children, when we are the only side in this chamber prepared to stand up for the next generation of Australians, because Labor wants to finance their futures to pay for today's spending and to pay for their measly promises as they attempt to run around the country and promise all things to all people. We reject Labor's approach. The Australian public reject Labor's approach. We have seen the consequence of Labor's failure. (Time expired)

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I want to weep at the contribution from the member for They will be the first generation that we leave worse off than previous generations. That is what we are giving to our children. We are giving them less in environment, less in the economy, less in education and less in health. You talk about a better tomorrow. You should hang your head in shame.

This Abbott government is full of broken promises and cruel cuts that are reaching from cradle to grave. But the ones who will be most impacted are our children and their children. Every one of us in our maiden speech talked about creating a better future, a better world. You are not doing that. You are creating a worse world. We have a prime minister who said there would be no cuts to education, no cuts to health, no changes to pensions, no changes to the GST and no cuts to the ABC or SBS. All of those things have come true. He has hidden behind each barefaced lie. He has lied, and he has hit and hurt the Australian public. He is driving up costs and he is pushing up unemployment. This is not for a better, brighter future; this is for a worse future.

In my electorate of Chisholm, I will see people footing an extra $5.5 billion in out-of-pocket healthcare costs, and I have an electorate that does not have a huge bulk-billing rate because of the socioeconomic demographic I represent. But I have an ageing population. Thanks to the GP co-payment, many in my electorate will not see a doctor. We have heard that the president of the AMA, Brian Owler, has said that its report confirms there is no need for a GP tax. This makes a mockery of the fact that the government has been claiming healthcare expenses are out of control. They are not. They are at their lowest level ever. The government has used this as a narrative in terms of the lead-up to its federal budget, saying healthcare expenditure is out of control. It is being used it to justify the introduction of the GP co-payment. There is no justification for the GP co-payment. There is no justification for getting rid of universality of Medicare, something that is the envy of every other country in the world.

In my electorate of Chisholm, home to two of the largest universities in the country where 53,000 students studying on campus and tonnes more study off campus at Monash in Clayton and at Deakin in Burwood, they are facing the prospect of massive student loans. They are facing the prospect of not going to university. We will see students in my electorate making the decision that it is too costly to literally walk across the road to the Clayton campus to go there. We have seen this at a time where unemployment is at its highest level in Victoria in 15 years. We are going to take away this opportunity and drive people out of education.

At the other end of the scale, we have seen a reprieve for 12 months with childcare fees. But we have also seen them taking the axe to family day care. This is going to hurt in my electorate. This week, Monash Council is deciding whether they will scrap family day care altogether. This will impact 54 educators—phenomenal members of our communities—and 314 families. This includes people like Laura, who has been in touch with my office. She is devastated that, after 20 years of providing family day care, she will be thrown on the scrap heap. She will not be able to support those children who need this kind of service—children like Mason, a child with autism, who was rejected from all the other centres because, at three, he did not have any language. Now he is a thriving four-year-old, the chattiest in Laura's care. You stand condemned.

Tony Smith (Casey, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Leader of the Opposition has moved his matter of public importance. This is something that he and his office and his team would have been planning all day. In it went just before 12 o'clock and the Speaker chose it. It is an MPI about jobs and the cost of living. But we did not hear the member for Chisholm mention the cost of living. She might have mentioned jobs once or twice in a cursory way. The first half of her contribution was relevant to yesterday's MPI on the environment. I have actually checked. I checked with my colleague here next to me. Someone wrote this MPI and Bill Shorten signed it. But he did not mention jobs or the cost of living. He did not mention the cost of living once. And do you know why? Because along with those opposite—

Mr Conroy interjecting—

You are back. Are you rostered on? You are fantastic. It is this involuntary babble. That is why you are here. That is what we heard from the Leader of the Opposition for 10 minutes: a jungle of gibberish. It was a mixture of insults, corny jokes and populism. If there was one thread that held the Leader of the Opposition's speech together, it was pretending that budget surpluses do not matter, pretending that runaway deficits and debt do not matter, pretending that he can be populist, pretending, as we saw over the course of the last few months, that he can create jobs where he knows there are none—just pretending and hoping that he can stir up enough populism on any issue to get himself through. This is no substitute for serious policy.

We know that the whole time he was a minister—he was an Assistant Treasurer at one point—he and the former government at first pretended that the budget situation did not matter and then pretended for years that they would return the budget to surplus. The Leader of the Opposition, along with a few others in the opposition, actually declared at one point that the budget had returned to surplus. He put it out in a newsletter and said Labor had returned the budget to surplus. But, as the Treasurer pointed out during question time, we had more than 500 pledges of a surplus, but no surplus. Now, confronted in opposition with a runaway debt situation, their deep thinking has led them to pretend that it does not matter. We see it on policy issue after policy issue.

They have put in a matter of public importance mentioning the cost of living, and clearly what has happened is after it has been submitted they have thought, 'Hang on, we don't want to talk about that because we are the kings of cost of living pressure.' They were the kings of the carbon tax that racked up cost of living and racked up costs for business and for families. We went to the last election on a clear pledge to abolish it. We have abolished it against the opposition. And what do they want to do? They want to bring it back. They have the hide to put in a matter of public importance on cost of living when they do not even have the courage to mention it in the House of Representatives. That is the situation we face with those opposite.

We have heard them talk about higher education and pretending, like on the budget, that we do not need any reform. They have been pretending, even, that the Hawke and Keating reforms were not worthwhile. We even had the member for Wills wanting to roll back the Hawke and Keating reforms on higher education. When I was at university as a Liberal student I supported the Hawke and Keating reforms. But the problem is that all of those opposite have had their fingers crossed behind their backs the whole time they have been in public life. Now here they are in opposition and they will not confront a serious policy issue in any area.

The Minister for Education rightly pointed out that Paul Kelly in The Australian had this to say:

Labor has opted out of serious engagement, yet again.

Anyone following policy and looking at the need for reform knows the budget needs to be reformed, that higher education needs to be reformed and that tough and difficult decisions are necessary today for a brighter future tomorrow. But those opposite will just keep pretending, and the Leader of the Opposition is quickly making himself the great pretender— (Time expired)

Andrew Giles (Scullin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What a telling contribution that was from the member for Casey, because in his five minutes he failed to address the impact of the broken promises of this government on rising unemployment, insecure work and the cost of living. He had nothing to say in defence of the government, and that is wholly unsurprising—so, well said, Member for Casey, as ever!

I also want to touch on the contribution of the parliamentary secretary. Unfortunately—or, perhaps, fortunately—I only caught the very end of it. He said something quite interesting, I thought. He said that he would not tolerate lectures from Labor. At one level, what a hubristic and arrogant statement that is. But, secondly, it led me back to a contribution on the part of the Prime Minister. We know all about the broken promises around 'no cuts to health, no cuts to education and no changes to pensions', but there is a more fundamental promise that has been broken by this government and this Prime Minister. I would like the parliamentary secretary to have regard to that promise, not any lectures from me. The Prime Minister said on election day:

I now look forward to forming a government that is competent, that is trustworthy and which purposefully and steadfastly and methodically sets about delivering on our commitments to you, the Australian people.

…   …   …

… in a week or so the Governor-General will swear in a new government.

A government that says what it means, and means what it says.

A government of no surprises and no excuses—

well, that bit we all remember—

A government that understands the limits of power as well as its potential.

And a government that accepts that it will be judged more by its deeds than by its mere words.

He went on to say:

I give you all this assurance—we will not let you down.

A good government is one that governs for all Australians, including those who haven’t voted for it.

A good government is one with a duty to help everyone to maximise his or her potential, indigenous people, people with disabilities, and our forgotten families, as well as those who Menzies described as ‘lifters, not leaners.’

We will not leave anyone behind.

What fine words! Lets take him and the rest of his government at them and judge him by his deeds.

Today, I am proud to join with the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Chisholm in this matter of public importance to talk about the devastating impact of the Prime Minister's budget of broken promises on jobs and on the cost of living. Earlier this afternoon, we heard the Treasurer and the finance minister try to blame Treasury estimates on Labor. What we did not hear from them was a reiteration of their pledge that the coalition would achieve a surplus in their first year in office and in every year of their first term. It has been quite the reverse, in fact, with a doubling of the deficit. All this government do is make excuses for their bad behaviour and blamed the Labor Party for everything. They are still an opposition in exile.

There was the supposed budget emergency that existed. It exists when the Treasurer is here and full of bluster, but not when he goes overseas to tell the truth. But it is not just the Treasurer doing this. Think about the $80 billion that is being ripped from health and education in Australia, specifically in health. Yesterday's report found that growth in health funding is at its lowest level in decades. Think about the impact of the GP tax. The most important issue to my constituents in Scullin is the end of universal health care. Far from no cuts to health, we are seeing a massive cost-of-living impact as well as quality-of-life impact from these broken promises in health.

We have heard about education from the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Chisholm. It is hard not to see—although members opposite seem to struggle with this—the cost-of-living impact of this doubling or tripling of university costs. Far from enabling people to maximise their potential, this government is curtailing life choices.

The Minister for Social Services continues to spread the untruth that this government are not cutting pensions when their own budget papers show this. They bank the savings and yet swear blind in here that there are no cuts. Is this really a government that says what it means and means what it says? Of course not. They have no sense of the importance of security and dignity in retirement. When I think about the cost of living, I think about insecure work. I think about the unemployment rate that the Treasurer will not and cannot talk about. I think about inaccessible and unaffordable child care, compounded by decisions in this parliament at the moment. I think about the GP tax. I think about the attacks on primary health care. I think about the petrol tax. National Party members might wish to raise that issue and that broken promise. I think about the cutting of public transport support and, indeed, the junior minister mocking the costs of congestion. I think about the consumer protection changes. This government has launched into an all-out assault on the cost of living for Australian families and has broken trust in doing so. (Time expired)

Ann Sudmalis (Gilmore, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is no wonder those opposite did not actually address their own matter of public importance on jobs and costs of living. In 2007 Australia had no national debt, a budget in the black and a surging mining industry. We had a national piggy bank of many millions of dollars. From that point forward our economy and jobs took a nosedive. At the time of the election in 2013 our youth unemployment had increased by a whopping 30 per cent and the long-term unemployment jumped by 25 per cent. On news.com.au in August 2013 the director of employment and education for the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry was quoted as slamming the then Labor government for cutting $242 million from subsidies for trainees and apprentices. Those opposite should not lecture this side of government about unfair cuts to jobs and work opportunities until they have had the decency to research their own destructive and economically debilitating policies.

Really, changing the pay rates for apprentices who turned 21 years old was the most destructive action possible to prevent regional youth from gaining an apprenticeship position. Seriously, did you think beyond the headline for this ridiculous change? I have a constant stream of young people complaining bitterly as they cannot get work. They wish to take up an apprenticeship and they have offered to work for half pay in order to secure an apprenticeship. The employer, sadly, is unable to accept this offer.

We on this side of House know that there is no instant fix. The problem we have took six years to develop. There is not going to be an overnight cure. We have reinstated financial incentives: there is $2,500 for a young person now without a job if they get one and keep it for a year and there is another $4,000 if they keep it for another 12 months. There are incentives to move from work of up $3,000, depending on the criteria they meet.

In Gilmore, we have the opportunity to facilitate the revamped Work for the Dole, giving our young people the chance to be with other volunteers, build their self-confidence and learn skills and work ethics that provide a stepping stone to paid work. We have begun the Green Army rollouts, where teams of young people can gain environmental qualifications and increase environmental amenity, as well as learn the skills, confidence and work habits that have no dollar value but—more importantly—have human capacity value. This government even has work incentives for our mature jobseekers, worth $10,000 over two years for people over 50.

Did those opposite even consider the effect of the carbon tax on small business? Did they not realise that increasing the expenses for a small business, like huge electricity bills, reduced employment opportunities? One of my local small businesses, a bakery, received their first electricity bill since the carbon tax was axed into oblivion. It was $900 less this last quarter. Yes, I did say $900 less.

Did those opposite not realise that the weekly grocery bill for every single Australian would be increased after the carbon tax was introduced? Electricity is used to both chill and freeze. This meant that prices for dairy, fresh fruit, vegetables and meat all went up. If people wanted to stay healthy, it was going to cost more. Talk about cost of living increases! There seems to be a chronic disconnect for those opposite, who are developing poor policy, as to the impact on the everyday Aussie.

Today, those opposite rabbit on about changes to universities. You must be kidding! Under Labor, they cut $6.6 billion from university funding with no avenue for the universities to survive financially. Do you want our students to go overseas to get a degree? Today, we hear selected excerpts about university comments. This is both misleading and untruthful—stop it. I say that you and your ridiculous rhetoric just shows your economic ineptitude. It is no wonder we have so much national debt. University students in Australia pay not a single dollar up-front. Shame on you!

We will fix the budget, we will fix the economy and we will encourage our youth. We repealed that disgusting, damaging carbon tax. We have strengthened the ACCC to challenge noncompliance on cost reductions. We get it. We understand policy and fiscal connections. We have the will to fix this mess for our national future.

Kelvin Thomson (Wills, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am glad that we are having a debate about jobs. We do not do it often enough. Unemployment is way too high. We have over 750,000 people unemployed, with unemployment at over six per cent. Our youth unemployment is much higher again. Long-term unemployment is growing. Regional unemployment is way too high. There is widespread, under-acknowledged underemployment. Unemployment is serious and it needs a lot more focus than it is being given around here.

Today, I signed the Australian shipbuilding industry pledge organised by the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union, who were at the front of Parliament House. This pledge asked that parliamentarians commit to supporting our shipbuilding industry and the high-tech manufacturing jobs that are part of this sector. The Leader of the Opposition, Bill Shorten, is supporting the Australian submarine industry and its workers.

Last Thursday, 18 September, TheAustralianFinancial Review had ago at him for it in an editorial, which applauded Tony Abbott for:

…finally saying no to the foreign-owned car companies.

In the very next sentence, it disapprovingly referred to:

Bill Shorten's rally of submarine workers, with its little disguised xenophobia.

That was in the very next sentence! TheAustralianFinancial Review felt entitled to throw around the ugly word 'xenophobia' in the next sentence after sneering at the car companies as being foreign owned.

Over the years, I have grown accustomed to double standards in political debate, but normally those who practice it have enough of a sense of shame to put a bit more space between their contradictions. This hypocritical attack on the Leader of Opposition occurred in the context of an editorial having a go at the former Treasury secretary Dr Ken Henry. Dr Henry had said that we are following a policy of maximising exports at any cost, which he described as Australian mercantilism. He said that no matter what the situation, Australian mercantilism will always prescribe the same treatment: to cut business costs, especially wages and taxes, and to cut government spending.

He expresses concern that Australian national attributes—such as incorruptibility; respect for the rule of law; safe working conditions; a concern with environmental sustainability and animal welfare; institutions that support social harmony, economic and social opportunity; and tolerance—are all potentially on the chopping block if they add to business costs. I think Dr Henry made some important and valid points. I am concerned that we are narrowing our economic base, are too dependent on mining and energy exports and are running out of options for our future prosperity. We need to have a broader economic base and to be more self-sufficient. How do you do that? You do it with support for education, science and research; support for university students and support for manufacturing.

That is the very opposite of what this government's budget has done. You do not do it by chloroforming the renewable energy industry and the rollout of the National Broadband Network. You do it by learning from successful overseas examples like Norway, with their sovereign wealth, free tertiary education and low unemployment. Our children will not thank us for our greed and short-sightedness. They will thank us if we pay more attention to Ken Henry. They also will not thank us if we continue to run the massive migrant worker programs in the face of the highest unemployment for over a decade in the last couple of months.

The ACTU president, Ged Kearney, says:

Unemployment has hit a 12 year high yet instead of tightening up requirements to import labour – the Government is trying to help employers bypass local workers in the Northern Territory under new designated area migration agreements.

Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union National Secretary Michael O'Connor says:

With the construction boom in the resource sector coming to end we will have thousands of construction workers looking for work, but the Government seems intent on destroying the job opportunities of locals while allowing the exploitation of overseas workers.

Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation Federal Secretary Lee Thomas says:

… the 457 visa scheme was initially created as an emergency stop-gap measure used to address critical skills shortages.

"We find it unacceptable that instead of employing locally-educated nursing and midwifery graduates, employers in some health sectors continue to employ increasing numbers of workers from overseas – the current rate is 3,000 to 4,000 annually, a staggering 400 per cent increase since 2005.

"The Government must act, otherwise more than 3,000 nursing and midwifery graduates who still cannot find jobs will soon become a lost generation of highly trained health professionals who are unable to deliver quality care …"

The tragic reality is that we have a government which does not believe in full employment and which is not genuinely committed to Australian jobs. (Time expired)

Matt Williams (Hindmarsh, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I was somewhat disappointed by the contributions of the members for Scullin and Wills, although the member for Wills actually got on track towards the end when he discussed education and research. Let us look at research and health research. The medical health research fund is a ground-breaking $20 billion initiative. I am sure that the member for Wills would agree that that is where this country needs to go, but did he mention it? No. There was not iota of it in his speech. I was recently at the South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute for a visit. They have around 150 highly educated postgraduate employees among their 400 employees. That is because of federal government money—only $200 million of it. Member for Wills, imagine what $20 billion could do! In case he was not listening during question time, the head of Universities Australia, Belinda Robertson, said in the Financial Review this week:

It is simply not possible to maintain the standards that students expect or the international reputation that Australia's university system enjoys without full fee deregulation.

That is right. The body for universities across Australia endorses full fee deregulation to make our universities better and give them a fighting chance against the competition from overseas.

We heard no new ideas raised and no solutions proposed by the opposition, but that is nothing new. We have been through that before and hear it every week in the House. We are after solutions, especially for my state of South Australia, where youth unemployment is around 40 per cent. The carbon tax has not helped at all. It has not helped jobs but it has increased the cost of living. Qantas had a $100 million bill and Virgin had a $20 million bill. Earlier this week I was talking to a major employer. They said they had a $20 million bill from the carbon tax. Imagine how many employees we can add to the payroll of major employers and small businesses with the removal of the carbon tax. We are on the right track. The bills are going down and are looking better. Since the carbon tax has been removed electricity prices in my state have fallen by about nine per cent and gas prices have fallen by about five per cent. That is not inconsequential. It helps small businesses. It helps medium sized businesses. It helps households and consumers. What do Labor want to do? We know their position. They want to bring it back—higher taxes, higher costs.

What else have we done? Let us touch on the free trade agreements that we have signed over the last year following some great work by the Minister for Trade, Andrew Robb. We have signed one with Korea and one with Japan. The South Korea free trade agreement equates to $5 billion in additional income. It means more jobs and more capital investment. Around 15,000 jobs are expected to be created from the Korean free trade agreement after years of operation. When one in five jobs in Australia is linked to trade this is a significant step forward. Local exporters, small businesses, want to reach out to the growing Asian middle class, and the growth in Asia is so important.

Let us have a look at our record on jobs. Over the last year we have created jobs at three times the rate that the Labor Party did in their last year in government—that is over 100,000 jobs. That is a great result. What were Labor doing in their last year? We know that they were changing Prime Ministers from Gillard to Rudd and changing small-business ministers as well. We are reading in the papers each week, with the release of each new book, about their infighting and instability. No wonder they were unable to govern the country properly when they were fighting among themselves, working out who was backing whom, who was jostling for which position and which promotion. If they had got on with the job of governing Australia we would be in a far better place than we are now. As usual, we need to fix up their mess.

I will finish on a couple of other positive initiatives. In my state, South Australia, and in Victoria we have the $155 million innovation growth fund and we have the infrastructure for South Road. Defence has been a topic for today: we are committing to almost $1 billion worth of defence procurement in South Australia in this year alone. There are 44 separate acquisition projects. There is $34 million in funding for the future submarine project—it is high-end work. We have close to $80 million for the future frigates. That is a significant commitment. We are committed to jobs. We are committed to a strong ship-building industry. We are going in the right direction on a number of items. We got rid of the mining tax. We are producing the jobs of the future. We are doing a far better jobs than our friends on the other side of the chamber.

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

It was really interesting to listen to the contribution from the member for Hindmarsh, who talked about jobs and the creation of jobs. Jobs are going only one way in South Australia—out. The member for Hindmarsh, as with all members on the other side of the House, fails to take any responsibility: it is always Labor's fault. The member for Hindmarsh needs to know that he has to take responsibility and needs to accept the fact that his government has had an enormous impact on the car industry and submarine contracts going to Japan.

Why isn't he standing up for his electorate when it comes to those contracts going overseas?

This week the Abbott government has demonstrated very graphically to the Australian people its contempt for them—broken promises based on lies. This is a government that said one thing before the election and another thing after the election. Before the election, the government said, 'No cuts to health'. They are pushing a GP tax of $7, which will affect X-rays and blood tests as well as going to your GP and going to your specialist. It will have a dramatic impact on the cost of health services in this country. It will really affect people's costs of living.

Greg Hunt (Flinders, Liberal Party, Minister for the Environment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Rubbish!

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

Someone on the other side says, 'Rubbish!' That shows just how disconnected they are from their electorate. Rather than coming to this House arguing for the people they represent in this parliament, they are happy to hit them with a GP tax—and a GP tax that, as it has been shown this week, is based on fallacious facts. Figures released this week have shown that health costs are at a 30-year low. That is why AMA President Brian Owler was forced to say:

That makes a mockery of the fact that the Government has been claiming health care expenditure is out of control.

a mockery. And those on the other side of this parliament are prepared to perpetuate that myth. Again, in Brian Owler's words:

The Government has used this as a narrative in the terms of the lead-up to its Federal Budget, saying health care expenditure is out of control. It has used it to justify the introduction of the GP co-payment. There is no justification for a GP co-payment.

no justification for hitting Australians with this GP tax.

And what other broken promises are there? No new tax: well, we have had the petrol tax. And pensions: 'No changes to pensions.' Well, we have already seen legislation passed through this House that will dramatically decrease the pensions people will receive into the future. Those on the other side of this parliament stand up, speak in favour of that legislation and vote for it and then go back to their electorates and face the people they represent. To be quite honest, I do not know how they can, because these are changes that are going to dramatically affect the cost of living of people they represent. Broken promises: one thing before the election and another thing after the election.

Also, there are health and education cuts. This government really does stand condemned for its ineptitude, its broken promises that hit those people who can least bear the brunt of the government's cruel, harsh cuts and broken promises—the sick, the poor, the elderly. This government has justified its broken promises on health by saying it wants to make the health system sustainable in the long term. Well, I have already demonstrated that that is a fallacious point of view. And members of the government, particularly the Prime Minister, have stood up and said that they are the best friend Medicare has ever had. This government is a government of broken promises. This government is a government of lies, and the members of the backbench of this government need to go back to their electorate and explain to the electorate why they support the government's broken promises and lies. (Time expired)

Luke Howarth (Petrie, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am very interested to talk on this MPI, and it is really interesting to hear the member for Shortland and the member for Chisholm and every other member over on that side who just spoke—apart from the member for Scullin, as a new member—saying that there are broken promises. These members are the same members who went into the last election, in 2010, and said there would be no carbon tax. And the people in the gallery and the people reading this at home know exactly what happened there. They went into the 2007 election under Kevin Rudd and said they were economic conservatives. They said they would not change the Pacific solution. And what did we see? Mass changes.

But we know that every time the opposition gets the chance to have an MPI they come into this place and want to talk about the budget, they want to talk about jobs and they want to talk about costs of living. I am just amazed when the opposition wants to talk about budgets. One of the things that inspired me to run to represent the people of Petrie and make a contribution in this place was the disastrous six years of Labor and the six budgets they delivered that left billions of dollars in deficits that Australian children will have to pay for generations to come. And they want to talk about budgets in their MPI!

We have the opposition leader, Mr Bill Shorten, who says in his newsletter, 'We're delivering surpluses'. Yet today in question time, what did we hear? There was not a surplus; there was never a surplus under Labor. In fact, the current Treasurer revealed today that there was a $48.5 billion deficit, after Labor promised time and time again that there would be a surplus. So, if you want to talk about budgets, we are happy to talk about budgets. We promised the Australian people a strong, prosperous economy and a safe and secure Australia, and we are working towards delivering surpluses. And we are working not just towards delivering surpluses but also paying off Labor's debt, and that is what we will continue to do. Part of our plan with that, of course, revolves around jobs and revolves around cost of living. We know we want to create more jobs, and that is what we are endeavouring to do.

In my electorate of Petrie, where we have a higher level of youth unemployment. That is why in our last budget one of the great things we did was bring back Work for the Dole, after Labor once again scrapped it. And why did we do that? I will tell you why. I have been out visiting our Work for the Dole sites in the last couple of weeks, and the reason we did that is that there are people who are out of work and cannot get a job, and one of the things they say to me is, 'I go for an interview and people want some experience'. Employers are looking for someone who is proactive and actually wants some experience. Work for the Dole should be looked upon in a positive light, not a negative light. I would say to every member opposite that if you have a Work for the Dole program in your electorate I would encourage you go out and visit the people involved in that program. Talk to them. Find out what it is that they want to do in life and encourage them to achieve it, to do their best.

I was recently out at the PCYC in my electorate. There were five or six work-for-the-dole participants there. They were building a new deck, they were painting the walls and they were installing a new kitchen. I said to them, 'This is great stuff, guys, really positive, because at your next job interview, you can say to that future employer: "I have not been sitting around at home and applying for jobs; I have actually been helping not-for-profit groups and updating my skills. I am learning to build a new deck and picking up carpentry skills and I am learning cabinetry skills by helping install a new kitchen."'

So there are a whole lot of things we have delivered in this budget, including working for the dole and reducing red tape—because we understand that it is businesses that employ people in this country. We have the Restart program for older workers. We will continue to be positive. We have restored defence spending as well. I noticed that members opposite talked about defence spending. The member for Brisbane came in and said that, when they were in government, they cut defence spending. You are dead right, Member for Brisbane—you cut it by $16 billion! They cut defence spending by $16 billon, yet they want to talk about building boats in Adelaide—$16 billion would have gone a long way towards that. The coalition will continue to deliver a strong, prosperous economy and a safe and secure Australia. I urge the opposition to support our policies for the benefit of this nation.

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

Order! The time allotted for this discussion has now expired.