Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

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

The Government promising innovation and cutting education.

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—

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

This week we have seen something that is long overdue and quite unusual. This week we have actually seen a couple of members opposite express that they care about what happens in our classrooms and that they have some concerns about the challenges that are facing our schools. Unfortunately, the members opposite have failed to identify what is the biggest challenge that is facing the Australian school system—that is, this government's policies. If those members opposite really cared about the education that Australian children are receiving, we would hear them speaking up, we would hear them speaking up more often, and we would hear them speaking up about the fact that their own government intends to rip $30 billion out of Australia's school education system. We know that they are cuts that will have a savage impact on every school's ability to improve literacy and numeracy in the classroom. We know that the greatest challenge to Australia's education system is improving to become world class in spite of the fact that this government is intent on delivering the biggest cuts to school government funding in Australia's history.

The simple fact is that the Prime Minister can talk as much as he likes about innovation. He can talk as much as he likes about how important innovation is for Australia's future. But the simple reality is: we cannot be an innovative nation of the future without investing in ensuring that we have a world-class school education system. Whilst the Prime Minister likes to talk, when we actually look at his actions when it comes to innovation, they are all actions which will have a negative impact on Australia's ability to be the innovative nation that we want for the future. This is a Prime Minister who promised an ideas boom but has delivered an education bust. The Prime Minister says that he supports innovation but his cuts to education will rip $30 billion out of our schools. Every school and every student will be affected.

The Prime Minister says that he supports innovation but he is still committed to $100,000 degrees, to university funding cuts and deregulation. The Prime Minister says that he supports innovation but his government is sacking hundreds of world-class researchers at the CSIRO. This Prime Minister can talk as much as he likes—and we all know that he does like to talk—but he is a Prime Minister who ultimately will be judged on his actions, and his actions undermine Australia's innovation on every single occasion. You cannot have innovation without investment in education.

The government's actions say it all when it comes to priorities. We know that their $30 billion cuts to our schools will lock Australian students into inequity and will mean that students who need the most help will just be pushed further behind. To put it in context, the $30 billion that this government is proposing to cut from our schools budget is about the same as cutting one in every seven teachers or stripping $3.2 million on average from every single school across Australia. Investing in innovation starts with a properly-funded education system. Investing in innovation starts with investing in every young Australian to get the school education that they deserve.

On this side of the House we know that you cannot talk about innovation without talking about education. Whilst the Liberal Party have no vision for the future of our education system, we have a comprehensive plan to invest in our children's future. Our plan for education is about schools but it is not just about schools. Ours is a plan that is about jobs, it is about economic growth, and it is about Australia's future. Our schools policy will start by undoing the damage that has been caused by the Turnbull government's policies, but it will go beyond that. We will honour the six-year needs based school funding agreements that were signed with the states and territories and that this government went to the last election promising that they would honour—before walking away from them. And we will go beyond that. We will provide long-term certainty for schools by reversing the government's school cuts across the next decade.

This is a policy that will invest targeted resources in the students of today so that we can have the growth, the jobs, the strong economy and the innovation that we need for the future. This is about a permanent change in our education system. Needs based funding will make sure that it reaches the students who will need it the most. This includes making sure that students from low-SES backgrounds are adequately supported: Indigenous students, students with disability, students with limited English and students in small schools or in regional, rural and remote areas whom the National Party have gone absolutely silent on and have stopped fighting for. For every single child it will mean a strong focus on that child's needs. It will mean more individual attention for students. It will mean better-trained teachers. It will mean more targeted resources, better-equipped classrooms and more support for students with disability and special learning needs.

There are important reasons why we believe that this is so important for Australia's future. If you actually have a look at the facts you can see that we are a country that cannot afford to stick with the Turnbull government's school education policies. We know that, worldwide, our national performance is slipping. We need to front up about this. In the year 2000, only one country outperformed Australia in reading and maths. In 2006, only two countries outperformed us in science. Today, 16 countries outperform Australia in maths, nine countries outperform us in reading and seven countries outperform us in science. Right now, students with disability in Australia are missing out on opportunities that are taken for granted by students overseas which they deserve and must be granted. Students in country schools, on average, are up to 1½ years behind their city peers in science and two years behind in maths. And we know that every challenge faced by students from the bush is magnified for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students.

The OECD has found that, if Australia can equip all our secondary school graduates with the basic skills needed for the global economy by 2030, that is the equivalent of adding 2.8 per cent to our GDP. In today's dollars, that would add $44 billion to our economy. So, perhaps if those opposite do belatedly want to stand up and talk about problems in our schools, if they want to stand up and express some interest in ensuring that Australian students get a great education, these are the issues that they should be focused on and they should start by telling their Prime Minister and Treasurer to reverse their $30 billion in cuts.

Labor's 'Your Child. Our Future' policy will provide certainty for schools. It will meet the needs of individual students so they can achieve their best. It includes clear goals. It will ensure that all STEM teachers are tertiary qualified by 2020. It will ensure that    digital technologies and computer science—coding—are taught in every school by 2020, because we know how important it is to our future. It sets a target of 95 per cent year 12 completion by 2020, because young Australians need to finish school to have the greatest opportunity to succeed in life. It also sets the target of returning Australia to being in the top five countries in reading, maths and science by 2025. This will mean targeted investment to improve teaching and the students results.

Unless we can make sure every student in every school gets a great education, we simply will not be able to improve our international scores, and our economy and our country will be held back. We need to prepare our workforce for the challenges of the future. We need to prepare our children for the jobs of the future. We need to prepare our economy for the challenges of the future. If we do not build a strong education system, our children and our country will be left behind and we will not achieve what we deserve. We cannot sit by and wait for the future to come to us. We need a positive plan for the jobs and skills of the future.

Labor has put forward that plan. Labor has put forward a fully costed, fully funded plan to reverse the cuts, to undo the damage that this government has done after they betrayed everything they promised the Australian public. They went to the last election promising a unity ticket and holding up banners saying you can vote Liberal or Labor and you will get exactly the same amount of funding for your school. We have seen that that was blatantly untrue.

Senator Bernardi said: 'I think our schools should be talking about reading, writing and arithmetic. Literacy and numeracy numbers are declining right across the board.' Perhaps he should focus on the biggest challenge to literacy and numeracy in our schools, and that is his own government, his own Prime Minister's cuts, and the fact that they are completely silent in the party room when it comes to standing up for students. I am not surprised that the Prime Minister sold out students this week when he rolled over to the right wing of the Liberal Party—because he has done it every day of his prime ministership. (Time expired)

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Assistant Minister to the Deputy Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Labor cannot be believed when it comes to education. Labor cannot be trusted when it comes to much at all. I will take the shadow minister up on a couple of things. She talked about Labor's funding policy. This parliament governs for a nation, this parliament governs for the Commonwealth. But, when Labor left office, its half-baked education funding policy did not take into account Queensland, Western Australia and the Northern Territory—

Ms Kate Ellis interjecting—

You've had your go, so just be quiet. Over the next four years, this government is putting almost $70 billion into schools. This government is putting $54 billion into higher education and $13 billion into skills. Each and every year, this government spends more than $9 billion on science and research—record investment. In government, Labor cut $1.35 billion from its own policy designed to encourage students to take up mathematics and science. In government, Labor promised 2,650 trade training centres but delivered just over 300. In government, Labor cut $1,000 million from apprenticeships. In government, Labor spent $2.1 billion on a productivity based training program which one in two people failed to finish—and, of those who did finish, only one in five found a job. In government, Labor made $6.6 billion worth of cuts to higher education and research funding and left significant research infrastructure with absolutely no funding whatsoever. Shame on Labor!

But today is an exciting day. When we talk about innovation—and that is what the shadow minister's matter of public importance debate was about—we talk about the defence white paper. I listened very carefully in question time today and I noticed that question after question from our side was about the defence white paper. But what did we see from the other side? Not one question was asked about the defence white paper, the most significant defence white paper that we have had—and the first to be fully costed, I might add. But what did we see? The only thing Labor was interested in about Defence today was to question, shamefully, the appointment of the member for Bass as chair of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security. The member for Isaacs said:

Bipartisanship is put at risk by Mr Nikolic, who has made his political career out of being a highly partisan, highly aggressive battler for extreme right wing views.

And he continued:

What we see here is Mr Turnbull again, regrettably, pandering to the extreme right of his party; and if it be the case that Mr Nikolic becomes the chair of this very important committee, what we will be seeing is in fact turning a national security matter into a political plaything of internal machination.

'Political plaything'—that is disgraceful! The member for Bass has done more for national security, more for the Australian Army, more for the Australian Defence Force than the member for Isaacs could ever hope to. Shame on the member for Isaacs! I cannot believe that he would even call into question the member for Bass's credentials for this important committee.

The member for Bass once headed the Australian Army Recruit Training Centre at Kapooka. He was the first to come through the ranks in 1979 as a soldier recruit to then reach that high elevation to command that important base—that important base, I might add, which is going to receive significant funding under the Australian defence white paper announced by the Prime Minister and the Minister for Defence, Senator the Hon. Marise Payne, this morning. The member for Bass has every credential. As a member of the Army he completed three postings to the Middle East, as UN team leader in Israel, Syria and South Lebanon; chief of staff and deputy commander of Australia's first contribution to Afghanistan; and the first Australian national commander in southern Iraq—and I could go on.

For the member for Isaacs to question his credentials to head up that important committee, I find disgraceful. But that showed typical form by the member for Isaacs. The member for Isaacs should come into this chamber and he should apologise. If anybody treated national security as a plaything it was Labor. When it came to defence, Labor did not give a ship—did not give a ship about defence.

Opposition members interjecting—

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

Order!

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Assistant Minister to the Deputy Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Not one ship did they order.

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

Order! The Assistant Minister for Defence will not use such language and he should withdraw that word. I do not intend to repeat it for him; he knows what it is.

A government member: He said S-H-I-P.

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Assistant Minister to the Deputy Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They did not build one ship.

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

Sorry; I misheard. I thought you were using another word. I apologise.

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Assistant Minister to the Deputy Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Labor did not build one ship. On its watch, under six years, Labor did not build a ship. Labor put defence spending as a proportion of gross domestic product down to its lowest level since 1938—and we all know what happened in 1939. I listened carefully in question time today, and we did not hear too many questions about defence from those opposite. But I listened carefully to the Minister for Veterans' Affairs.

Ms Chesters interjecting—

The member for Bendigo should be quiet. I acknowledge that the Bushmaster, that wonderful Australian invention, comes out of her electorate, but there is so much more in the Australian defence white paper and there is so much more for the regions.

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

Hear, hear!

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Assistant Minister to the Deputy Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I heard 'hear, hear' from the member for Herbert. He knows how important the Australian defence white paper is going to be for the regions. The member for Bendigo should be quiet and listen to just how important the defence white paper is going to be.

We heard the Minister for Veterans' Affairs talk about Melbourne based Marand trailers and how they are going to be able to put jet engines on those Australian invented trailers. That is significant. That company is going to grow from 250 jobs to goodness knows how many. We heard the Prime Minister talk about the $16 billion cut from defence by those opposite. We heard the Minister for Foreign Affairs talk about what the United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has said about the greatest threat to stability and peace that we face as a globe. That is why the defence white paper is so significant. That is why the defence paper is so important. But do those opposite care? All they did in question time today was mock and knock. You could see it. When the member for Wright stood to ask his question, they just laughed disgracefully. They do not care one iota about the defence white paper—but they should, because we are in troubled times. We are in times where our national security, unfortunately, is at risk. That is why the defence white paper is so important.

We heard the minister for immigration talk about the 12 new offshore vessels which will be ported in Darwin, in the member for Solomon's electorate—so important. Those opposite just think that the Navy was there to help them stop the boats. But, unfortunately, that did not stop the boats, and 800 of them came here unauthorised during their watch. The Minister for Industry, Innovation and Science talked about the high-tech manufacturing which will come as a result of the defence white paper. He said that 'defence industry is a pillar' of our defence capability—our defence capability which is so very important.

There is an additional $29.9 thousand million going to be put into defence over the next 10 years—a fully-costed 10-year integrated investment program; $196 billion to be invested in defence capability over the next decade; $26 billion to upgrade defence bases—almost a billion of which will go to RAAF Wagga at Forest Hill and the Army Recruit Training Centre at Kapooka, which the member for Bass so capably and so honourably led from 2003 to 2004; $19 billion to operate and maintain the defence estate—taking in many, many areas throughout the regions that the National Party and the regional Liberals so proudly represent; and $5 billion in enhancing defence's critical ICT—which, at this morning's announcement, brought a rousing cheer from those wonderful ADFA cadets present, those wonderful young people who are the future. When we talk about defence capability we are not just talking about machines and weaponry; we are also talking about the people who will drive innovation. There will be more of them under an Australian Defence Force funded by the coalition—funded by this government, which recognises the defence white paper and the importance of it. It is time Labor got on board.

Amanda Rishworth (Kingston, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Health) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think the Assistant Minister for Defence missed the talking points. We all got the talking points this week. You are meant to be talking up the 'innovative Australian economy'. You are meant to be talking up the 'agile nation that we live in'. We know that the Prime Minister loves to talk about innovation. 'Innovation' is his new buzz word.

Unfortunately, while he talks a lot, he does not walk the walk when it comes to innovation. Anyone serious about an innovative future for this country would not exclude education from that conversation. We know that education is the building block for an innovative future. Unfortunately, the Prime Minister has missed that important point in his talk about innovation. If he did understand it, if he did pay attention to it, he would not be cutting $30 billion from our schools and billions of dollars from our higher education system. In fact, what we have on the books, in the budget, is a 20 per cent cut to our universities. The only thing standing in the way of that 20 per cent cut is Labor in the Senate. If those on the other side had their way, they would have pushed through a 20 per cent cut to our universities—not very innovative thinking.

The Prime Minister thinks he talks about education when he says, 'I'm friends with David Gonski.' That is the extent of his statement about education—'I am friends with the guy that wrote the education policy.' It is now time that the Prime Minister actually becomes more than friends and listens to Mr Gonski, and funds years 5 and 6 of the Gonski agreements. That is the only way we will ensure that we can lift our standards in our schools so that we are globally competitive and continue to grow our economy through an innovative future. The clear evidence that the Prime Minister does not understand the importance of education is that he moved the 'minister for cuts to education' into the position of minister for innovation. If you do not understand the link to education and innovation, of course that sums it up, I think.

To be honest, it would be good if the Prime Minister actually got out to some schools. Often we hear the Prime Minister say that resources do not make a difference to schools and that resources do not improve school attainment. He should get out to be member for Bendigo's electorate. I was out there with the member for Bendigo, and the message was loud and clear: resources make a difference. Our classrooms do need that investment. Our classrooms need different support, different investment. Schools know what they need on the ground. It is time to support those schools. The Prime Minister should get out to some schools and actually start talking to teachers, students and parents on the ground.

While he is at it, it is O Week this week. Perhaps the Prime Minister could go onto campuses and explain how his plan for $100,000 degrees is going to improve innovation in this country. All of the evidence indicates that attaining a higher education degree is so critically important to the future of this country. In fact, two-thirds of jobs in the future are going to need a bachelor degree level of education. If the Prime Minister were serious about innovation and serious about an innovative agenda, then he would reverse cuts to universities, reverse cuts to our schools and, while he is there, reverse the billions of dollars of cuts to research.

It is an election year. It would be remiss of me not to say that there is an alternative out there. The clear alternative is Labor's plan for education. We have plan for all levels of education—investing in our schools, investing in our TAFEs and investing in our universities. It is costed. It is a plan that has been endorsed by the education sector. It is one that will drive an innovative future not just for today but for the future. This is what the Prime Minister fails to understand. If we are going to have long-term success and prosper in this country, we need to invest in the people of tomorrow—the citizens of tomorrow. They are our young people. It is time that the Prime Minister actually paid attention to that. He should get out a little more. This week is O Week. He should get onto campuses and go out to schools. The message that we hear on this side of the House is that our plan is the one that actually invests in the future and delivers for our economy. Those on the other side are completely ignoring our education system.

Melissa Price (Durack, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am very pleased to have the opportunity to speak today on this matter of public importance, especially on the day of the unveiling of the Turnbull government's defence white paper. This is, indeed, a hallmark day in Australia's defence history. We know that the defence white paper is more than just the Turnbull government delivering on an election promise. Indeed, it is much more than that. It will set out Australia's long-term plan to keep the country safe and secure. Needless to say, this is something which those opposite will never understand. They had many years to deliver, many years to understand what was needed and they never did it. So that is probably the reason why they are very quiet today.

I am in a good mood today and I do not want to get off to a bad start. I want to tell you why I am excited. My electorate is going to have a raft of improvements to infrastructure. To my constituents, you need to know that you will be better looked after following the release of this defence white paper and that the north-west of Australia will never be better resourced. This is why I am excited. The Royal Australian Air Force's Curtin air base in Derby and the Learmonth air base in Exmouth will be upgraded to support the RAAF's new strike and air combat capabilities, such as the new F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter and the KC-30A air-to-air refuelling aircraft. The upgrades to these investments are around $190 million to the RAAF Curtin airbase by 2025, with an additional $30 million in the decade between 2025 and 2035. There will also be an investment of around $190 million in improving the RAAF Learmonth air base—which is at Exmouth, for those who are interested—up to 2025 and an additional $200 million in the decade between 2026 and 2035. This is fantastic news for the communities of Derby and Exmouth, as these towns have been waiting for increased defence spending for longer than I care to recall. It is a fantastic investment. Derby Shire President Elsia Archer and Exmouth Shire President Turk Shales are both, as you would imagine, over the moon. They warmly welcomed the news that I could personally share with them earlier today.

The additional funding does not end there for Exmouth. The Harold E Holt communication facility in the town will be upgraded to support very important enhanced space situational awareness and communication capabilities, involving about $200 million in planned investment out to 2025 and a further $30 million by 2035. As they say, wait and there is just a little bit more good news. North of Derby, there is a plan to undergo redevelopment of the Yampi Sound Training Area facility in the decade up to 2025, representing an investment of around $60 million, with a further planned reinvestment costing around $20 million in the decade from 2025 to 2035. This government's defence white paper will drive jobs and innovation in our country for many decades to come, just the same as the Industry Skills Fund is doing through the four grants allocated through my vast electorate of Durack. Science and innovation are the future of Australia and Australian jobs, and this is why I am very proud of the Turnbull government's record $9 billion investment in science and research.

We have heard a lot about what Labor would do, but what did they do when they were running the show? We know that when Labor were in office they cut a massive $1.35 billion from their own policy, which was encouraging students to take up maths and science—shame on you. That is right; Labor cut over $1.3 billion from their own maths and science education policy.

Talking more about education, this government is increasing funding to Western Australian schools by $619 million over the next four years, which is a massive 42 per cent increase.

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Melissa Price (Durack, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am not quite sure what the other side are bleating on about. With the youth allowance reform legislation passed late last year we will see more regional, rural and remote students able to further their education at a tertiary level. We are also providing a record $16 billion for universities, which has led to a record number of enrolments. This government is committed to science and innovation. We know this because there will be an additional $1.1 billion over four years to support research collaboration, incentivise innovation and entrepreneurship, and reward risk-taking. This government is backing hard-working Australians, creating a sustainable economy, and funding at record levels science, research and education together with building a world-class defence force.

Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on this matter of public importance because it is it is on something very close to my heart: education. I started teaching about 30 years ago.

Mr McCormack interjecting—

I will take that interjection. I was not 15; I had just turned 20. In fact, back then, there were Gestetners, chalk and the teacher was the holder of all the knowledge; effectively they were a sage on the stage. You taught geography by drawing maps on the board. There has been something called the information revolution since then. Now if I talk about geography or a place in the world, my seven-year-old can take me on his iPad to that spot and show me a Google streetscape of Keppel Bay, so things have changed. We are no longer the sage on the stage because, in this age of technology, the teacher is more of a guide on the side, helping people through.

If we look at technology, the digital revolution is the greatest potential boost to productivity since Gutenberg developed the printing press, I would suggest. Putting aside cat videos and some of those other things, the digital revolution will change and transform so many of our occupations and how we approach knowledge including education.

Ms Butler interjecting—

I have nothing against cat videos, member for Griffith. However, productivity is the most important judge as to whether or not an economy is humming along.

When Labor came to office on 24 November 2007, productivity was measured at zero. In fact, when you look at productivity—I know it is a little bit volatile as a figure—there has not been the heavy lifting needed for about 20 or 30 years. Sure, if you want to sell off assets and if you have got money pouring into Treasury coffers because of the high cost of coking coal and iron ore, you can use that money to give tax cuts—tax cuts that Labor copied which, as a marginal seat holder at the time, I was not against—but in hindsight those tax cuts were perhaps not the wisest thing for boosting productivity and looking after the country's future. Middle-class welfare like the baby bonus showed that the Howard government was the most profligate government in the history of Australia—the IMF said that. Those opposite did not boost productive infrastructure; instead, they wasted that money.

What did Labor do? We understood that technology would be the productivity boost for the future. We invested in the NBN. Those opposite said they agreed with this. The shadow communications minister at the time, Mr Turnbull, the member for Wentworth, said, 'Yes we agree; productivity will be boosted by the NBN.' But what have we seen under him? Since the Prime Minister was instructed by the former Prime Minister—before he was knifed—we have seen the cost of the NBN double. They have doubled the rollout time and they have halved the internet speed. This is under the former communications minister and now Prime Minister, who I think actually invented the internet.

Labor has a fair dinkum policy. We believe in a fair dinkum NBN because that would be not only a boost for education but also a boost for productivity on the farms, in schools, in defence, in all sorts of areas. I saw that the white paper today talked about the boost that will flow from investing in technology and manufacturing.

Also, we believe in Gonski education funding. So Labor's 'Your Child. Our Future' plan, like Gonski the banker recommended, will focus on every child's needs. It will be great for the country and for the National Party. People like New South Wales education minister Piccoli got it. He got it up front. I notice the minister opposite, the Assistant Minister for Defence, is quiet on this because he gets the bush. As the Nationals have always understood—going back to Black Jack McEwen and a few other people—Labor's education policies are great for the bush. And coming from the bush myself, I know that Australia's best and brightest—be they Indigenous, be they from rural and remote areas—need to have a chance. That is the best investment. So we have gone from Gonski unity before the election to now, where we do not have unity. We just have unicorns and nothing else. It is disgraceful.

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

I rise to speak on this matter of public importance. I think that it is absolutely ridiculous that the opposition is so out of touch and so out of sync with the Australian community and the issues that are facing the country that it has nothing to offer except for distractions like this so-called MPI. They are trying to give themselves some relevance.

I agree with the Assistant Minister for Defence. He says that you cannot trust Labor, and I agree with him. You cannot trust Labor. Labor do not give a 'ship' about defence. Labor did not give one ship in six years. It is absolutely disgraceful. Meanwhile, the coalition continues to do its best to turn around the mess of six years of Labor. Every single day the Turnbull government is out there growing the economy, developing the foundations of the country for the future, crafting the building blocks that will drive growth and prosperity for every Australian man, woman and child for the generations to come. More than $1 billion into innovation; about $70 billion into schools; $54 billion into higher education; $13 billion into skills; $9 billion into science and research. That is the story of this government, which is committed to getting the country back on track and stabilising the future.

We saw another example of that today with the release of the 2016 Defence white paper. While the members opposite sat there whingeing and carping, this government has released a generational plan, a comprehensive and responsible long-term blueprint that will safeguard Australia's national security and will bring with it considerable economic, educational and innovative spin-offs that will drive growth, prosperity and jobs as well.

Mr McCormack interjecting—

That is exactly right, Assistant Minister. For my electorate of Solomon, the white paper is a mighty document. This represents decades of government expenditure—billions of dollars in the area of defence alone. It will mean education and training opportunities for kids in Darwin and Palmerston and indeed the rest of the Northern Territory. It will be a bulwark for small business and, as they plan for the future, it will be jobs for mums and dads.

With a time limit of only five minutes, I will not be able to outline all the benefits that the Northern Territory will receive, but I would like to put on record a few. We are going to get around $70 million of additional investment which will be spent updating facilities at Robertson Barracks near my home town of Palmerston in the next 10 years. In the decade of 2025 to 2036, additional investment of up to $800 million will be made for facilities at Robertson Barracks. Around $1.2 billion will be invested in infrastructure upgrades at HMAS Coonawarra and Larrakeyah Barracks in the decade 2025 to 2036, with an additional investment of around $2.1 billion towards future long-term facilities and requirements in the decade between 2025 and 2036. There will be investments of around $200 million for airfields and facilities at RAAF Base Darwin over the decade 2025 to 2036. There will be around $5.6 billion invested in the decade between 2025 and 2036 to enhance air base capacity in the Northern Territory. There will be significant investments in new infrastructure and facilities over the next 10 years to support the ADF's strike and air combat capabilities. This includes upgrades to RAAF Base Tindal to support the introduction of the Joint Strike Fighter. Bradshaw Field Training Area will be upgraded to support our land force capabilities, representing an investment of around $20 million in the next 10 years and a further $350 million in the following decade.

Defence information networks will be upgraded to provide the capability to store, manage and process large amounts of intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance data. Intelligence capability enhancements will support existing intelligence capabilities based in the territory. This government will also upgrade and enhance the Jindalee Operational Radar Network over the next two decades, including facilities near Alice Springs.

This is just a snapshot of how the Northern Territory will benefit from the defence white paper plan that we announced today. It is small to medium enterprises like RGM in Holtze, just out of Palmerston and only 15 minutes out of Darwin's CBD, that will stand to benefit from Australia's defence security plan. This is how the Turnbull Government is going to continue to build the Australian economy, despite the efforts of those opposite.

Michael Danby (Melbourne Ports, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Dr Johnson had some good advice for the members for Durack and Solomon. That was that patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel. The member for Durack undermined herself in her speech, beating her chest with patriotism, when she mentioned Curtin air base, named after a certain Prime Minister on our side of politics. You should realise, member for Durack, that there is a sincere support for the security of Australia on all sides of parliament, and it ill behoves any member to question the support for national security on this side.

Let us stick to education. Promising innovation but cutting education is not an example of the Prime Minister putting the cart before the horse; it is an example of him taking away the horse. Promising innovation but cutting education is like giving someone a fancy car, but not before removing the steering wheel. It is like giving a kid a whizzbang computer—one with all the apps and all the speed and bells and whistles—but not handing over the password. In short, promising innovation but cutting education is disingenuous. It is sneaky. And do you know what? It is not an election winning strategy.

This Prime Minister, with his affected, debonair air, thought the power of sophistry would fool the Australian people. He thought that by speaking about innovation and exciting times he would pull the wool over our eyes. He thought he could sell us a new show bag while offering the same old Liberal contents as last year.

Let me tell you something. In spite of the member for Wentworth's affected bonhomie, it has never been a more exciting time to be in opposition—never. Here we are, a few months out from an election, with polls at fifty-fifty and improving, a government at sea on tax policy and an Australian people increasingly aware that absolutely nothing has changed since the Abbott days. There is no policy difference. New show bag; same contents. Instead of economic leadership we get scare campaigns. Nobody, he said during question time, would invest because of our negative gearing proposals. What a laughable argument by exaggeration! On top of that, we get these education cuts—$30 billion, as the shadow minister for education, the member for Adelaide, explained in her remarks.

Contrast that with the Leader of the Opposition's support, and the opposition's support, for the agreed plan that the government went to the last election with: six years of needs based funding, also agreed with all the states. I repeat: the government took to the last election that there would not be a cigarette paper of difference between us and them.

How does the Prime Minister expect our next generation to innovate without the foundation that can be provided by an excellent education system? In my view and in the view of the opposition, the challenges that Australia faces—challenges made worse by the environmental policies of those opposite—can only be surmounted by a well-educated Australian public. Unlike those opposite, all on this side of the House believe that every Australian has the right to, and should have the benefit of, a properly funded quality education system. But while the Prime Minister tells us that he thinks innovation is of vital importance, he pulls the rug from under the education system that will produce the next generation of innovators.

The Prime Minister has supported, and now leads, a government which has effectively removed $30 billion from the education system. This is short-sighted. This so-called saving for the budget bottom line leaves an education budget that will fail even to keep up with the historical trend in education costs, much less produce a crop of innovators. Education is not a cost; it is an investment. The country will reap what it sows with regard to investment in education. As the shadow minister pointed out, if we stick to the proposed education reforms and fund them it will be a $44 billion net benefit in added value to the Australian economy.

That is why Labor will provide for coding to be taught in Australian schools—providing kids with the tools they need to innovate. That is why Labor will fund and implement the agreed educational reforms which we call 'Your child. Our Future'. These reforms drive opportunity, innovation and economy through education. They will help Australian kids, no matter what their background is, to get a better start in life and to leave school with the tools needed to succeed in our rapidly-changing economy and changing world.

Of course these changes are expensive, but they should not be seen merely as a cost. The cost for the $160 million plebiscite on marriage equality, the outcome of which is already known and which will have no legislative impact, is simply a cost. It is not an investment that will bring future prosperity. Surely this government of merchant bankers can tell the difference between a cost and an investment? (Time expired)

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

I welcome the MPI today, because my city is the embodiment of innovation and education. It is the embodiment of those because we are a forward-looking people, we are positive people and we want to be involved in this space.

Just last week—on Monday—I had the Prime Minister in Townsville. He spoke to kids at Kirwan State High School and we went to Calvary Christian College and also to the Combat Training Centre. The Combat Training Centre is the place where we challenge our soldiers' best. It is where we get them continually to adapt and we get them continually to overcome, and it is where we are never satisfied with the status quo. We look continually for ways to improve performance.

The beauty of moving in this space at the CTC is that it opens the idea of what we do and how private enterprise works with government. There is Cubic, coming in with their laser equipment with which they can track people. They can do all this training stuff there. They can alter the scenarios around which they have to operate and can continually challenge, because your enemy is always challenging.

The ADF is using university education to further make sure that we are getting the best possible officers coming through—making sure that they are the best trained so that we can make sure we have the smartest, most adapted and most agile Defence Force we can possibly have in this space. This is just so hugely important.

Damian Hill is the colonel in command at CTC. I asked him about how to keep it fresh—how to make it fresh. He said that you have to challenge yourself continually. That is what you have to do in innovation and that is what you have to do in education.

The problem we have with those opposite is that they think it can all just be quantified with money. It cannot be just quantified with money; it has to be quantified with attitude. The defence white paper that we have released today is a case in point. This morning there were a number of people walking around this place saying, 'What's in it for my electorate? What's in it for my city?' I see the member for Bendigo sitting over there, saying that if we do not do this there will be all hell to pay, demanding answers and that sort of thing. What is my city doing? My city is looking at the things that came out of the white paper and asking, 'Where are the opportunities for our city?'

I was talking to the head of the computer centre at James Cook University this morning. He said, 'We need to be in this space. How do we get into this space? This is an exciting document; this is an exciting time to be in this space. My university wants to be in this space.' So we are talking to those sorts of guys.

Central Queensland University in my City of Townsville is talking about how they model with VET and how they can make sure that they segue into VET that leads onto diploma and degree courses. They are so hugely important in my area.

When it comes to the defence white paper, we are talking about the Indo-Pacific area of the world. We are moving into making sure that we are helping other nations to develop their capacities. That is what is important here—developing capabilities and being able to be more self-reliant in places like Papua New Guinea and all around the Melanesian world, all the way around to Fiji. They should be able to come through to Townsville, get their training and then go back better educated and as better officers—better people in the PNGDF. For all the armies and all the defence forces in that region to be able to work in that space is hugely exciting.

It is about being in that space and being able to assist people all the way from Indonesia, India, China and Japan to work on innovation and improvement. How do we make the best of those things? That is what my city is doing today and that is what my city should be doing. Too many people here are walking around this place with their begging bowls and saying, 'Give us the money and away we go. That is what we have to do.'

When it comes to defence we must also be very cognisant of what those opposite have always done with defence. Those opposite always speak of the game when it comes to defence but they never actually deliver. Their last budget had defence spending at the lowest percentage of GDP since 1938. Since 1938! They did not alter anything and had two failed white papers. Our white paper is fully funded and fully costed. It is a 20-year plan, with Defence actually on side! We have in our government a Minister for Defence who actually cares about defence. Their last ministers for defence—how many did they have? Nine hundred of them? Not one of them cared about defence.

What we are doing in this space is to make sure that it is innovative, that it is agile and that it is adaptive. We are making sure that education is at the forefront of this debate, because that is where we have to be. It is vitally important in my region to make sure that we are making the best of it—not just in here but all around the Asia-Pacific—making sure that we are pushing forward. (Time expired)

Lisa Chesters (Bendigo, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have to ask: are this mob opposite serious? They have spent this entire MPI, which is about the government promising innovation but cutting education, talking about their defence paper. Here is a newsflash for those opposite: if you want to build a sub, you need an engineer. If you want to build a sub, you need a few tradespeople. Nobody in this country is born an engineer. Nobody in this country is born as a tradesperson. You actually need skills. Unless the government wants to import workers through a 457 visa system, you need to train people.

I know this because in my electorate we build the Bushmaster. In my electorate we build the Hawkei. That contract that the minister was so proud to promote today was built by Australian men and women in Bendigo who have skills. They are people who went to La Trobe University, based in Bendigo, but guess what has happened to that university? This government has cut its funding. People who helped build the Bushmaster and the Hawkei went to the Bendigo TAFE to help get their apprenticeship, but what has this government done? It has cut funding to the Bendigo TAFE. In fact, it has cut $1 billion from skills, so it is a bit hard and a bit rich for them to stand up here and rant about how great their white paper is when they have got no capacity to ensure they have people with the skills to do those jobs. If they are that serious about all the innovation going on in the white paper then they had better start turbocharging their investment in education, not cutting it.

That is all we have seen from this government. They have cut vital funding from schools, and schools in the regions will be the hardest hit. Our schools in the regions, our small schools, our schools with low-SES communities and our schools with high proportions of children from non-English-speaking backgrounds or Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander backgrounds would have been the biggest winners, yet this government has cut the critical years—years 5 and 6—from that plan. This government has cut the resources that they need to ensure that their schools have the tools and the resources to ensure those kids have a future. This government today in this parliament is simply ignoring the fact that, to have defence capability, you need people who have the skills and the education. This government has cut those critical steps and pillars that ensure that Australians will get those job opportunities.

We want to make sure that we have a world-class education system where every student, regardless of postcode, gets a good education so they can choose a career in a number of areas. Maybe someone wants to go into defence. Good on them. But maybe somebody wants to become a scientist working for the CSIRO. Maybe they want to get actively involved in climate change. Maybe they want to help our farmers understand climate change so that they can have crop rotation that suits our climate. Under this government their chances of doing that have been diminished because of the savage cuts the government has made to institutions like the CSIRO and critical areas of research.

If you watched this parliament today, you would think there was only one responsibility of federal government: defence. It is important but it is not the only role of federal government. We are not currently in a situation where we only have defence as an opportunity in this country. We have an amazing community with a lot of opportunity out there, and in our communities we need to make sure that our schools have the resources that they need to do a good job.

We have schools in the Bendigo electorate that are making the tough choice between a teacher aide and watering their oval. That is what has happened because of the cuts from this government. We have students right now choosing which university they will go to and working out where they will stay. O-week is this week. They are struggling to find the resources and enough money to enrol and invest in education like they want. There is a question about whether the next generation of university students will actually be able to qualify and have the skills they need in our universities.

This government's plan is failing schools. They will stand up here and rant day in, day out about how great they are at defence but will not have an honest conversation with the Australian people about how their children could get those opportunities. This government needs to reverse its funding cuts to schools and higher education. It needs to get serious about skills and invest in the next generation. (Time expired)

Andrew Hastie (Canning, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It has been a long afternoon and, true to form, those opposite have come at us with red herrings. We have heard about unicorns and John Curtin—who, by the way, I think did a pretty good job during World War II. We have had quotations from Dr Johnson, obfuscation and distraction. I thought this MPI was about education, but, seeing as they have raised same-sex education and defence, I will continue and go for the free-for-all like those opposite.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. As the Prime Minister noted in question time, not one question was asked about the 2016 Defence white paper, which is a very sound document that has left this government well placed to deal with the challenges of the 21st century. As you know, innovation is at the heart of the defence white paper. I suggest there are two types of innovation. One is intellectual innovation as expressed in our strategic and defence outlook. This government is positioned to continue to build the US alliance, maintaining peace and order in the Indo-Pacific region. We are also well positioned to continue our fight against Daesh, or Islamic State, in the Middle East. We are going to continue to disrupt, degrade and defeat Islamic State.

Contrast that with Labor's six years in government. I will take your minds back to 2011, when the then Minister for Defence, the member for Perth, midway through the war decided to launch a book called An Unwinnable War: Australia in Afghanistan. In the middle of a war, that was the extent of his intellectual innovation when it came to policy for Afghanistan.

We are also innovating in industry—our defence industry particularly. The government has announced $1.6 billion towards innovation over 10 years. We have a centre for industry capability which is being funded to the tune of $230 million, we have a next-generation technology fund for $730 million and we have a new virtual defence innovation hub for $640 million.

The government has, of course, allocated funding for all of this, unlike Labor, which is yet to fund any of their promises. We are looking at $29.9 billion over 10 years, amounting to a total expenditure of $447 billion, which takes Defence spending back up to two per cent of GDP. My colleagues have reminded everyone today, but I will do so again, that under Labor Defence spending was taken to its lowest point since 1938—pre-World War II expenditure, which is unacceptable.

Another important element when it comes to defence strategy is having the right leadership in place. Under the Prime Minister, we have a sensible, measured, considered, calm, clear-eyed leader—someone used to making decisions, managing risk and balancing priorities; and someone who, incidentally, is also engaged with the history of the region and strategic policy. The question the Australian people will have to ask this year is: who do they want at the helm guiding this country? I suggest that the Prime Minister is the man for that job.

Contrast that with the current Leader of the Opposition, who, on 20 January 2016, could not make up his mind whether or not to support freedom of navigation in the South China Sea. In fact, he refused to back his own defence spokesman. When asked whether he would like to see a unilateral exercise by Australia, the Leader of the Opposition said he was not going to start running the Navy. 'I'll leave that question to the Navy,' he said. Rather than quibbling, Australians prefer a bit of leadership. It appears the Leader of the Opposition could not even make up his mind on that subject, but, more importantly, it hints at a deeper problem, which is that it is the role of political leaders to make decisions on behalf of the Australian people and the Defence Force. In fact, it is absolutely critical—it is part of your job. I say to those opposite: welcome to the big league. This is where the decisions are made about the defence of our country. If the Leader of the Opposition cannot man up, I hope that the election is called sooner rather than later so that we can just get on with governing this country. I should remind him of a book worth reading, Supreme Command, by Eliot Cohen, which goes into detail about this. One of you opposite should buy it for him. It will help him out.

Finally, from the point of view of the state of Western Australia, I am proud to see that there is going to be a lot of investment—significant investment, in fact—including a $200 million redevelopment of Campbell Barracks. In addition to that, we are going to see HMAS Stirling invested in and an upgrade of the wharf facilities, which will make it a better fit to receive US ships.

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

The time for this discussion has concluded.