Mike Freelander (Macarthur, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker, I congratulate you on your appointment.

I speak on the budget appropriation bills, and this is a very good time for me to talk as this is the eighth anniversary of Wayne Swan's stimulus package, which prevented Australia from entering the global financial crisis. This is my first contribution to the work of the Federation Chamber and I am grateful for the chance to say a few words on these very important bills. In keeping with what I understand to be conventional practice, my remarks today are intended to encourage and persuade, rather than confront. If that means that, at times, I am a bit off message, I can only apologise to my colleagues in advance and say that I am sure it has something to do with the proximity of this chamber to the Senate and with the spirit of the late John Button, an icon to me and one of the Hawke government's sharpest ministers, but one that, even as government Senate leader, could not help publicly testing ideas that others occasionally wished he had stuck in the bottom drawer.

The labour force statistics for September 2016 are due out next Thursday, so now is as good a time as any in the context of these budget bills to have a look at how the Australian job market is travelling and see if we might do better than present trends suggest. I am old enough to remember the 1960s, when an unemployment rate above two per cent was nearly enough to get a well-entrenched federal government unelected. I am also old enough to recall that, more than once in the last 40 years, unemployment has been a major blight on our country. In some ways, and for many people, it still is. From experience, we know that when the unemployment rate climbs, it climbs steeply, and when unemployment falls, it does so slowly. It can take anything from five to 10 years to make up for the jobs and jobs growth lost in six to 12 months of downturn and recession. We can easily forget how a recession plays out. Many older workers are retrenched, never to find employment again. That is what we are seeing now. Those trying to enter the job market find it incredibly hard to gain a foothold or permanent employment. Savings soon disappear, and families and individual lives are destroyed.

That is why we should be grateful to those, such as Wayne Swan and the Labor Party, who piloted our economy through the global financial crisis and left us with a job market that was the envy of the OECD. That is also why we should be none too comfortable about living with an unemployment rate that has edged close to the wrong side of the OECD jobs ledger. Australia's unemployment rate has been pretty much stuck at around 5.5 per cent to 6.1 per cent since February 2013. According to Treasury's budget and pre-election forecasts and projections, that rate is likely to persist until 2019-2020. That is if everything goes reasonably well and economic growth continues uninterrupted at a solid but uninspiring rate of between 2.5 and three per cent. What that means is that, even if 25 years of uninterrupted economic growth stretches out to 28 or 29 years, we will still have close to a million Australians who want work in 2020 and cannot find it, and that is a tragedy. That is an unemployment rate three to four times higher than back in the era of fixed exchange rates, of centralised wage fixing, of higher tariffs and pre financial market deregulation.

It is not that we should return to a time when dinosaurs, John McEwen's Country Party and unabashed protectionists last roamed the earth. Far from it. Beggar-my-neighbour trade policies and protection all around might make for a simpler world, but it would be a far poorer world too. However, we are overdue for a frank re-evaluation of our economic thinking and priorities. As with many Western economies, 'business as usual' looks a poor option for ensuring a better and more secure life for all Australians. We need to identify policies which, at the very least, will better cushion Australian families, however defined, from the next economic shock when it comes.

An unemployment rate mired at around 5.5 per cent or higher comes at a significant social as well as economic cost and is bad for the budget bottom line. Unemployment strikes at the heart of social justice and social cohesion. Invariably it falls most heavily on the poor and the weak. It represents waste in every sense of the word—wasted opportunities, dashed hopes and, too often, lives scarred by chronic ill health and tragically cut short.

As a doctor working for over 30 years in Sydney's south-west, I saw almost every day the misfortune and misery that had its root cause in unemployment. So when I say that I think we need to be more honest with ourselves when pondering the failings or shortcomings of economic and employment policies, I am saying that we need to think beyond the headline monthly figures and challenge policymakers to, at the very least, keep their eye on the ball. We must also not pretend that the unemployment problem is either too hard or too elusive to solve. It might constitute a good start if government were not quite so self-congratulatory whenever the number of Australians in work rises. Yes, that is a good thing but, no, it is not necessarily cause for breaking out the champagne.

For unemployment rates to fall, the number of new jobs must at least match population and productivity growth. But history tells us that employment levels may rise even if unemployment is rising too. Jobs growth of a few per cent a year is situation normal; it is not situation spectacular. Let's also not be overly confident that, when national growth rates pick up, all boats will rise on the tide. They might, but it is not always the case that everyone finds a job when times improve. Good macro-economic policy and a strong economy will not magically return us all to full employment, even if it is the best way of getting us most of the way there, and monetary policy alone will not do the trick either.

I note the Treasurer's recent comments regarding the diminished effectiveness of monetary policy, which pretty much bring him and the government into line with what the Reserve Bank and many others have been saying for some time. It is pleasing to see him on board. The question that he has yet to answer, though—the really hard question for whoever holds the economic levers—is: if the limits of monetary policy are exhausted, what are our remaining options? And for those who might think that that is an argument for a dose of budgetary austerity, think again. Better still, just have a quick read of any of the statements and speeches made by Reserve Bank governors in recent times. There is no support whatsoever for another round of budget tightening or fiscal self-mutilation.

The first step to better labour market policy is to try to better understand what the headline rate of unemployment actually signifies. Is 5.5 per cent good, bad or indifferent? Stripped of its context, 5.5 per cent of anything is just a number.

I have already touched on the history, so now I will turn to how we have been doing against those economies we usually like to compare ourselves with. How well is our labour market positioned in comparison to those countries to withstand the next economic shock? Unfortunately, the answer is: not as well as we once were. Australia is now squarely in that block of advanced economies whose employment rate has either flatlined or deteriorated since the GFC. Immediately post 2009, Australia was ahead of the game. Now, though, most of the countries we like to compare ourselves to—the US and the UK in particular—have not just caught up, they have zoomed by.

Our relative position against the majority of OECD countries has deteriorated in the last three years, and that is despite our falling dollar and record low interest rates. The unemployment rate here has been barely treading water since 2013. At 5.6 per cent, Australia had the eighth lowest unemployment rate of the 34 OECD countries in 2009. Now, in 2015, at 6.1 per cent, it has only the 13th lowest unemployment rate. Australia is one of the 14 OECD countries that recorded a rise in their unemployment between 2009 and 2015—19 OECD countries recorded falls in unemployment. From 2009 till late 2015 the US unemployment rate fell from nine per cent to about five per cent and, in the UK, from 7.6 per cent to 4.9 per cent. I am not the only one to notice this—many economic commentators have already noticed it.

The picture is no rosier if you drill down to the headline rates of unemployment and look at Australia's performance in four critical measures—underemployment, long-term employment, youth unemployment and labour force participation, and employment and training to population ratios. Youth unemployment currently stands at around 13 per cent, which is shocking. Similarly, for the 20- to 24-year-old cohort, the proportion in work or training has continued to decline since 2008. Our long-term unemployment figures are also terrible. By July 2016 about 22 per cent of those unemployed were classified as long-term jobless. These are very depressing figures, because those remaining out of work for periods of 12 months or more have a very high propensity to suffer scarring and psychological and physiological damage. They are also subject to statistical discrimination from potential employers—for example, they cannot get a job not because they are unemployable but because they are unemployed.

In underemployment we are also doing badly. Both labour underutilisation and underemployment rates are two to 2½ points higher now than they were in 2012. A higher proportion of the workforce wants more hours than employers can give them. The proportion of persons in paid employment has also deteriorated and is now lower than before the GFC and lower than three years ago. It is also much harder to find a job. Recently published National Institute of Labour Studies research shows that the transition from university to full-time employment is becoming more perilous. Between 2008 and 2014 the proportion of new university graduates in full-time employment six months after course completion had fallen from 89 per cent, which was reasonable, to now only 67 per cent. At the other end of the market, the prospects were even worse, with those who do not complete secondary education having far higher rates of unemployment.

This seems to be part of a wider picture and raises the prospect of a growing mismatch between job vacancies and persons with the right skill sets to fill them. In my own electorate of Macarthur the position is pretty much on a par with national trends, although our youth unemployment is a little higher. I see some aspects of this seemingly intransigent problem most days that I work in my practice, and it seems a lot, lot worse to me than any numbers can tell. I see people I have looked after since they were babies now as young adults being unable to find meaningful work, sometimes for years. That causes long-term social harm.

As I suggested in my opening remarks, I am not here to apportion blame. I am not trying to be uppity and pretend that I know it all or that I am an economist. What I want the government to do is have a fresh look at the jobs market and then ask itself whether it is sensible to simply continue along with its present policies. By that I do not mean embark on another campaign demonising the unemployed or trying to reintroduce Work Choices-type arrangements or harsher work tests via the back door. Australia does not have a problem with a lazy or ill-educated labour force, excessive wages growth or even a lack of workplace flexibility. You only need to look at the amount of unpaid overtime being worked to refute any of those myths.

To conclude, the core fact remains: on any number of labour market indicators we are not doing as well as we might. We could do a lot better. We are also doing a lot less well than we once were. We are performing poorly in comparison with many other OECD countries. On measures such as labour utilisation, youth unemployment, long-term unemployment, ease of transition from education to work and income growth we are highly exposed if the world economy stalls or domestic growth rates falter. It is all contributing, via lower economic activity and higher welfare payments, to a bigger budget deficit.

However, to end on something of a bipartisan note, one thing worth recalling is that change is possible and there is often plenty of credit to go around. Federal Treasurers from Keating and Costello to Swan—we could each anoint our own personal favourite—all improved the level of economic discourse in Australia. They took people with them or they tried to. They explained. Principally under Paul's Keating stewardship even the quality and readability of the budget papers improved. We went, as he called it, to a Rolls-Royce standard. Even busy doctors like me became semi-economic literates. It helped, too, that more and more Australians had a background in business, finance or economics, and that we had a crop of first-class popular—but not populist—economic commentators like Alan Kohler and that national treasure, Ross Gittins. Most significantly, the people stuck with it too. And that is in no small measure because there was always a sense that the policymakers stayed true to the one principle. That principle was that, ultimately, jobs and the protection of people's welfare were what mattered most. Increased flexibility and economic reform, under Labor in particular, was about ensuring that there was always enough work to go around, even if the nature or the type of work changed very much over time. Neville Wran's famous words at the Hawke government's National Economic Summit still resonate with me: 'Economic policy is fundamentally about three things—jobs, jobs and jobs.' No government or opposition should forget that, and I am trusting—although some may think there has been the odd memory lapse or policy misfire along the way—that no-one has forgotten that.

Rowan Ramsey (Grey, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2016-2017 and the related bills. Mr Deputy Speaker, the Grey electorate is a place I know you hold fondly in your heart, having grown up in the great small city of Port Augusta. To speak of that area, the whole of Australia knows that the South Australian economy is under siege—with the highest unemployment rate in the nation, the highest electricity prices, and business investment dragging along the bottom.

In Grey, one of our biggest employers, Arrium's Whyalla operation, is fighting for its survival. I am very pleased with the government's work in this area thus far: I would particularly like to thank the Prime Minister, and the Minister for Industry and Innovation, Greg Hunt, for their personal interest and involvement in providing support which on the one hand enhances Arrium's saleability yet on the other does not set up an endless stream of government subsidies—which almost always prove counterproductive in the end.

Australia is aware that steelmaking in Whyalla is facing an existential challenge. For those not familiar with the steel industry in Whyalla, it was originally developed on the back of Australia's first iron ore mine at nearby Iron Knob by BHP. In 1998, BHP spun off its steelmaking enterprises in Australia and the company Arrium was formed. Along with some east coast assets, including steelmaking and electric arc furnaces, rolling facilities, distribution and sales networks, the portfolio included the iron ore mines and tenements near Whyalla which, with the traditional coke-powered blast furnace, formed the integrated iron-steel production platform in Whyalla. Since that time, the fortunes of the integrated operation have waxed and waned. The highlight was the investment in Project Magnet in the early 2000s, when after the refurbishment of the blast furnace it was supplied with magnetite instead of hematite, thus freeing up the significant hematite supplies for direct export. The Whyalla port was redeveloped to facilitate barging of iron ore for loading onto Cape class vessels. This just preceded the peaking of the iron ore market, and its subsequent retreat. Arrium had borrowed hundreds of millions of dollars on developing the new Southern Iron operations some 400 kilometres away, and when iron ore fell below $50 a tonne they were forced to close that particular operation, costing the company in excess of $100 million for the shutdown procedure. The seeds of ruin were well and truly sown. These decisions coincided with longer-term underinvestment in the steel plant. Arrium reported in early April that the company was going into administration, and it was soon revealed that the company had accumulated debts in excess of $4 billion. Certainly, some parts of Arrium have more value than others; unfortunately, their assets based around Whyalla are at the wrong end of that spectrum. However, it is in Whyalla that any possible closure of capacity would have a disproportionate impact.

Whyalla was simply a supplier of iron ore to Newcastle until the 1940s, when a blast furnace was commissioned and the shipyard established in 1941. The Morgan-Whyalla pipeline was opened in 1943 and the town grew quickly through the fifties and sixties. Whyalla's population peaked in the 1970s at about 33,000 people. The shipyards were closed in 1978. The result was catastrophic for the city, and over the next 20 years the population shrank to 19,000. They were tough times indeed. During the early 2000s, the population recovered somewhat to about 23,000, on the back of the relining of the blast furnace, with Project Magnet, which I spoke about earlier, and the goods times in the resources sector resulting in a direct iron ore export port being developed in Whyalla and the development of the northern mines, which I mentioned earlier.

However, the tough times of the eighties and nineties pale into insignificance compared to the possible impact of the withdrawal of steelmaking and possibly the current mining operations today. The steelworks employs about 1,600 people directly, and the mining venture, which supplies about two million tonnes a year to the blast furnace and eight million tonnes a year for direct export, employs around 700. Given even a modest multiplier effect, it is not difficult to extrapolate that well in excess of 50 per cent of the Whyalla workforce depends on the survival of the integrated operation.

Consideration to Whyalla's isolation must also be given. Whyalla is not based in a thriving agricultural region. It is surrounded by good-quality outback grazing country, the type of country where a family might need a couple of station workers to operate a property bigger than the whole of the Adelaide metropolitan area. In most of the world, this land would be described as desert. Consequently, Whyalla is a custom-designed city built to service one industry. If there is no iron and steel industry in Whyalla, there is little reason for Whyalla to be there. The sad reality is that, should the iron-steel industry close, many of those who live there would lose their jobs, whether or not they be directly employed by the industry, supply industries or industries as diverse as education or retail. If they were at the stage of their lives where their biggest investment is their house, then as prices crash—and they have already fallen significantly—they are likely to feel as though they are marooned in the city.

However, federal government action on this very important issue is strong. In April, the Prime Minister came to Whyalla and announced the bringing forward of the re-railing of the Adelaide to Tarcoola line, operated by the government owned Australian Rail Track Corporation—1,200km of single rail and over 70,000 tonne. The order has been won by Arrium. As a sign that the government is focused on moving quickly, three weeks ago—in fact, it is probably five weeks ago—I witnessed the signing of an agreement and watched as the first of the rail moved out of the OneSteel-Arrium railway terminus in Whyalla. One of the chief drivers of profitability in the plant is achieved by maximising the throughput. Essentially, much of it has a high fixed cost and so throughput reduces costs.

The Turnbull government has also made significant moves in the area of antidumping, with more than 70 per cent of Arrium output now covered by some form of action. Last year, in the 44th Parliament, I led an inquiry into circumvention of antidumping rulings, and it is good to see the government's action since the delivery of that report. It is worth remembering that, like many other areas of government legislation, almost as soon as alterations are made, some of the smartest lawyers in the business are working out ways to avoid the intent of the legislation. However, this government is up to the task in this area and will continue to make reforms. The government has also announced a huge investment in South Australian naval shipbuilding, and the $80 billion investment over the next 40 years will require huge amounts of steel. Initially, the first steps, which will be the huge expansion of the facilities at Osborne, will require thousands of tonnes of structural steel—just the kind that Whyalla makes. For those of you familiar with Adelaide Oval, the planned shed for submarine construction will be bigger and taller than that whole area.

The next step came in the commitment by the Turnbull government during the election period to provide a low-interest loan of $49.2 million to Arrium for the construction of a new beneficiation plant in the mines of the Middleback Ranges, close to Whyalla. This will lift profitability of the OneSteel Whyalla operation by $50 million per annum by allowing for stockpiles of lower grade ore to be brought up to export standard—a huge shot in the arm for the business. And it has not stopped there: during the election period we also committed to a $20 million innovation and investment package for the Upper Spencer Gulf, and I look forward to this fund coming on line, hopefully, around the end of the year. Additionally, Minister Hunt has provided a letter of comfort to possible purchasers of the Arrium business indicating the government is open to further support, particularly in helping establish cheaper clean energy options and ensuring that a foreign investment would receive support from the government. For its part, the state government has said it will provide a grant of up to $50 million for specific projects when the new buyer is identified. This, of course, cannot progress until we have reached the point where a buyer is identified, whereas the Commonwealth contributions are already having a very positive effect on the operations.

In another piece of excellent news, upon reconsideration, the workforce at the steelworks have agreed to a new EBA which includes a reduction of wages of 10 per cent. I commend the workers for this action. In effect, they have made a commitment—a contribution, if you like—not just for and from themselves but on behalf of the whole community, doing what they can to ensure that everyone in Whyalla keeps their jobs. It is not an easy thing to put your hand up for a wage decrease, and I know this has been a difficult time and I compliment them all for going back and reconsidering this issue. When the penny dropped that so many people around them—so many of their friends and families—relied on them to keep their jobs and keep this business open, that was probably the turning point in this decision. Now, in itself it is not enough to turn a plant that had been bleeding red ink into a highly profitable exercise, but, given the other savings that have already been made in Arrium's time and now by the administrator, KordaMentha, it is a significant contribution. In effect, everything that can be sensibly done to ensure Arrium's Whyalla operations find a new owner, one that can identify the opportunity this presents on many levels, is being done.

Unfortunately, in recent times it has not been all plain sailing, and the calamitous loss of power to the South Australian electricity grid on 28 September has caused tens of millions of dollars of losses to Arrium over the last two weeks. Power was restored fully yesterday, I think, and production is back in full swing. It is hard to see a silver lining in an event like this because this has caused significant damage to the company. In fact, those kinds of losses, for a company that is already struggling, are astronomical. As I said, it is difficult to see the silver lining in that event, but perhaps if there is one it is that it has focused the attention on the electricity grid in South Australia. This is an issue that I have been raising for some time. What happens if you lose your baseload capacity? Over a long period of time, the South Australian government have pursued with some vigour the Commonwealth legislated subsidies that flow through from the renewable energy target. One could say that this is a very smart move by the South Australian government, and good on them, because they have got investment in South Australia on that basis, but during that time I have been warning that, if you are overly reliant on an intermittent source of electricity, you are likely to be setting yourself up for a nasty fall—and that, unfortunately, is exactly what has happened.

We have reached a point in South Australia where 41 per cent of our electricity is now delivered by the wind network. In fact, 50 per cent of Australia's wind generation is situated in South Australia and, of that 50 per cent, around 60 per cent, or 30 per cent of the Australian total, is within the electorate of Grey. That in itself is a good thing because we are all in favour of renewable energy, but unfortunately the channelling of the subsidies into the wind farm operations came to a point where it made the Alinta northern power station at Port Augusta unviable. They closed down in late April this year—it may have been early May. Since that time, the wholesale price of electricity in South Australia has more than doubled. This is a rolled-gold disaster, let me tell you. We could talk about the damage from the storms and the outage in South Australia, which, as I have said, has cost tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars. But the fact that we are now selling electricity that is twice as expensive as the rest of the Eastern States is a long-term issue for South Australia that will cost us very dearly.

To put this into context, if the price of wholesale power prior to April was, say, 5c a kilowatt hour and it is now 10c or 11c a kilowatt hour, it has effectively doubled and gone up by around 5c to 6c cents a kilowatt hour. For a household consumer that is on 30c a kilowatt hour already, it is not going to go up by a hundred per cent; it is going to rise by that 5c or 6c cents per kilowatt hour, which is around 15 to 20 per cent. But for the big businesses—the big users that employ people in our economy—the rise is around 80 per cent. And if you are paying $10 million, $20 million or $30 million a year for electricity, this is a serious down issue. As far as the security of the grid is concerned, it has been tested. I am very concerned about what is to come for us this summer when people turn on their air conditioners and the wind stops on certain days.

Emma McBride (Dobell, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

During the recent election campaign, my team and I knocked on tens of thousands of doors and we held countless telephone conversations with residents in the electorate of Dobell. Often during these conversations, people told me they expect members of parliament to work together—if the best interest of our community can be found, we should agree on it.

This is my first contribution to parliamentary debate. To meet the expectations the community expects of me, I would like to place on the record that I am prepared to work with the government to deliver for Dobell. During the recent election campaign, candidates and political parties had a platform to outline their priorities for the Central Coast. As a Labor candidate, I was pleased to have the opportunity to describe how a Shorten Labor government would deliver benefits for Dobell if elected. Likewise, the Liberal candidate and former member for Dobell made a number of commitments before and during the campaign.

Whilst Labor's priorities differ and, in some instances, markedly from those of the government, the people of Dobell expect this government will deliver on those commitments made by representatives of the Liberal and National coalition before and during the election campaign. These commitments include: $3 million to support environmental management of the Tuggerah Lakes estuary; $12.3 million to complete local road upgrades; close to $4 million to support the redevelopment of local sporting facilities; and $100,000 for desperately needed equipment for the emergency department at Wyong Hospital. It is only reasonable and fair that my constituents in Dobell should have the government keep its promises and deliver on its commitments for our community.

Labor have a proud record of driving renewable energy growth. We created ARENA and we created the Clean Energy Finance Corporation. The goal of ARENA was to make renewable energy more affordable and increase the supply of renewable energy sources. ARENA funding supports early research development and precommercialisation of emerging renewable technologies. Alongside completed projects, there are currently hundreds in the pipeline. For example, an ARENA grant of more than $2.8 million supported the design and construction of a catalytic hydrothermal reactor facility at the Licella plant located in Somersby on the Central Coast. This is a unique process where inedible plant material is converted into a biocrude oil, which can then be refined to produce biofuels and renewable biochemicals. To have a leading technology developed on the Central Coast is something our region can and should be very proud of. To have it happen as a result of our vision and support for ARENA is something that Labor can be rightly proud of.

As part of the omnibus bill, Labor negotiated a package that would allow ARENA to continue this vital work. Importantly, this will bring some much-needed certainty to a sector that has suffered years of attacks under this coalition government. This is an example of the way in which Labor will work with the government, and I am pleased with this constructive approach.

There is much more work to be done and it is no more obvious than in the area of public health. Under this government we have already seen a failed GP co-payment proposal that would have put an end to bulk-billing in this country; an attempt to freeze the Medicare Benefits Schedule for six years, putting bulk-billing in many practices in my community and across Australia at risk; and the ploughing ahead with changes to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, which would increase the price of medicines for general patients by $5 and for concessional patients by 80c.

As a pharmacist who has worked in health and public health for almost 20 years, I have seen too many patients and those who love them have to make tough decisions that nobody should have to make about not filling prescriptions, not getting the vital medication that they need and when they need it. This should not and must not happen in Australia today. The cuts from pathology and diagnostic imaging will mean that patients will pay more for vital preventative and diagnostic tests, such as MRIs, X-rays and CT scans. We know that when cuts are made at this point in the health sector it means that there are delays and that people miss the chance of early intervention, early diagnosis and early treatment, which means costs to their health and costs to our health systems. It is not in the interest of the patient, it is not in the interest of those that care for them, and it is definitely not in the interest of our national budget to act in this way.

In my region, the state Liberal government is also pursuing a dangerous agenda to reduce public hospital services. They recently announced their intention to enter a public-private partnership for the Wyong Hospital upgrade. In question time on 15 September, Minister Skinner made an announcement that nobody in our community was prepared for, that nobody in our community had been consulted about and that nobody in our community supports: to ask for expressions of interest for a public-private partnership for our community hospital. As someone who has worked at this hospital for almost a decade, I am deeply concerned about what this means for patients, for the dedicated staff who care for them and for our community. There had been no mention of private sector involvement in this hospital, despite two election campaigns in which these plans could and should have been taken to the community.

We are talking about the largest employer on the Central Coast. Close to 18,000 people are employed in health care locally. Health workers are dedicated and hardworking, and many are on very modest incomes. They work to save and improve the lives of people in our community each and every day. They do not deserve this uncertainty. When Wyong Hospital opened in 1980, it was a result of a long community campaign. For around 30 years, local people banded together, fundraising and working tirelessly to establish Wyong Hospital. In 1956 the first public committee meeting was held for the formation of Wyong Hospital. It was not until 1 September 1980 that the newly constructed 100-bed hospital that had been desperately needed for decades by our community was opened.

I will joining my community this Sunday 16 October to support them in keeping our community's public hospital in public hands. I commend my Labor state colleagues—David Harris, David Mehan, Kathy Smith and Yasmin Catley—and Senator Deborah O'Neill for their unwavering support for our community hospital, for public health and for our community. This is our hospital. This hospital belongs to our community and its future should and must be in public hands.

This week I delivered my first speech in this place. In doing so, as with my colleague Milton Dick, I pledged to use this platform so that those living with mental illness and those who love and care for them will live better. I have worked as a pharmacist and mental health worker for close to 20 years. I know that it is impossible to separate mental illness and mental ill health from the circumstances in which we are born, in which we live, in which we work and in which we age. It is a fact that there is also an overrepresentation of people with mental illness and mental ill health in our justice system. There are better ways to approach mental health and sufferers of ill mental health. Early intervention and genuine support may prevent vulnerable people from ending up before the courts.

Too many times this government has displayed an attitude to policy development that ignores the importance of these social determinants—housing, education, health, public transport. Their repeated attempts to undermine Medicare would affect all patients, especially those needing mental health services. Their insistence that young jobseekers should wait for social security payments for any length of time will lead to severe financial hardship and affect the health and wellbeing of those who can least afford it.

Recently I received a phone call from a young woman who was desperate. She experiences lifelong enduring mental health issues and has been able, with good support, to be able to secure a job and a modest income that helps to support her and her wellbeing. She has recently found out that, due to changes, she may be ineligible for Newstart or other payments. This woman is in a desperate situation. Her mental health and her wellbeing are now vulnerable, having been triggered by a harsh measure of this government. Nobody experiencing mental illness or ill mental health should have their mental wellbeing threatened by the actions of a government that should, and must, act in their interests.

Their dogged pursuit of a plebiscite on same-sex marriage provides a platform for harmful sentiments to flourish. As a mental health worker I have seen first-hand, and I know, that what we say and how we say it matters. We need a new perspective, and it needs to start here. Right now there is an alarming lack of resources available to public hospitals and community support teams working in mental health. I first started working in mental health 20 years ago and, 20 years ago in the UK, there was a well-designed, well-resourced and well-functioning community mental health sector. I worked very closely with community mental health nurses at community health centres, and what we were doing then—20 years ago—is being reversed in Australia today. We need to make sure that the modest gains we have made—the small increase in funding, the slight change in stigma—are kept; that there are not any changes that put those gains at risk.

Patients are increasingly cared for in the community, but if the support services are not in place to cope then patients, their carers and the community will continue to suffer. There were many mental health nurses who worked on my recent election campaign—Di, Helen, Nat. These are people whom I have worked with for over 10 years at our local hospital. They worked on my campaign because, as nurses, they could not stand by, could not be idle, while this reckless government was making changes that would threaten the health and wellbeing of patients whom they care for. There is nothing cost-effective or compassionate about making it harder for people to see their doctor. There is nothing cost-effective or compassionate about making it harder for people to see their psychiatrist. There is nothing cost-effective or compassionate about making it harder for people to see their mental health worker. There is nothing responsible about withholding basic income support to young people who find themselves out of work.

Recent job figures show that 16 per cent of young people on the Central Coast today are unemployed, and recent high school retention rates indicate that one in two young people on the Central Coast does not have the chance to finish high school. This is shameful in our community on the Central Coast, where job opportunities are so limited and where one in four of the people who are working is travelling outside of the Central Coast each day to work. We need to make sure that there is basic support for young people who are motivated, who are talented, who want to work, who want to contribute—but because of structural barriers are limited from being able to participate and have active and full lives. I, with my colleagues in this place, will make sure that we will always stand up for young people.

Young people—wherever they live, whatever their postcode—should have the same opportunity. The fact that a young person on the Central Coast today has only a 50 per cent chance of finishing high school is shameful.

Our state Liberal-National government is gutting the TAFE sector so that young people, like my brother Eddie, who would choose a pathway to a trade or a trade certificate or an apprenticeship are not just limited but are stopped from doing so. My brother Eddie was one of those practical, smart, capable people in our community like so many thousands of other young people. He wanted to be a plumber. Twenty years ago on the Central Coast he could do his training locally, he could be supported locally, and he could stay within our community and be part of our community. Recently, to upgrade his qualifications, he has had to travel to Sydney. This is a man who has his own business and who has a family with two young children but for the last six months has been travelling two nights a week to Sydney to get basic accreditation that he should be to get locally.

We should use our role in this place to help people, not harm them, as we seek to remove the discrimination wherever and however it exists. It is one thing to ask people to put their trust in you and elect you as their representative in this place but meeting their expectations is another. It gives me great pride as a new MP to speak today on my first official parliamentary business. There is a reason why people want this parliament to function and why they want they both sides to work together: they want us always to put people first.

Milton Dick (Oxley, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to follow on from the member for Dobell in her first parliamentary debate contribution. It is an honour to follow her words of wisdom and experience, particularly in the health sector, which is important not only for my electorate but for every electorate in Australia. Today as we deal with these appropriation bills, I will be focusing on the first 100 days of my election and that of the Turnbull government. The member for Dobell explained the importance of the parliament not only working together but working.

I gave my first speech yesterday in the House of Representatives and then it was only a matter of hours later that we saw once again this government and this parliament fall apart. This is week 3 for the member for Dobell and I, day 10, of a so-called new government, and we witnessed yet again the government fall to pieces on the floor of the parliament. You could say one strike was bad enough in the first week when government members, ministers and senior ministers thought it more important to catch aeroplanes to fly home, to leave their job. In my community, you do not leave work early; you do not just put your feet up; you do a full day's work because that is what you are employed to do, just as we are employed to pass legislation—like for marriage equality.

The important issue related to these bills today is we saw a senior economic minister, the person charged with the responsibility of delivering outcomes, the person charged with the important responsibility of looking after our finances not knowing what she was voting for but more importantly not apparently caring what she voted for either. For the first time since Federation, we saw a coalition government voting with the Labor opposition to deliver our amendments. This is pretty serious stuff. The government today is simply saying well, it is just one of those things. One of those things we have also witnessed in the first 10 days of representing our communities is $107 million slipped off as part of a package. Another of the things we have also saw was the Senate running out of work to do. And of course we also saw the government lose control on the floor of parliament. So I would particularly say to the Minister for Revenue and Financial Services: pay more attention to your job because our nation's finances are in your hands. Sadly they are in her and this government's hands.

Today I will be focusing on a couple of important issues as a part of the appropriation debate, particularly in the areas of infrastructure; the delivery, or lack of delivery, of the NBN; and accessible and affordable health care. On the issue of infrastructure, in my first contribution to this chamber I will be putting fairly and squarely on the agenda the issue of the Ipswich Motorway upgrade. This is a critical issue for my local community. I spoke about it in my first speech to the House of Representatives, and each and every day I will be championing this issue. Looking at the facts on the table: the former federal Labor government invested around $2.8 billion to complete the Dinmore to Darra section. When you drive around my community, the record speaks for itself. Only Labor has invested in real infrastructure. For 12 or 13 long years we had inadequate representation in our community, with Liberal representatives doing absolutely nothing on the Ipswich Motorway. It took the election of a Labor federal government, working hand in glove with a Labor state government, to deliver the real economic and infrastructure reforms that our communities have needed.

Labor committed to this upgrade in 2013, but, of course, the incoming Abbott and Turnbull governments failed to advance the project. And there was a little bit of time during that when we had a terrible experience, which was, of course, the Newman government in Queensland. That toxic experience was rejected, quite rightly, by the community. It had one of the largest majorities in Queensland's history and it only took 36 months—36 months too long—for the Newman government to be wiped out, as it should have been, for refusing to deliver on infrastructure commitments, for refusing to deliver for my community. If it was not bad enough that they were not delivering on infrastructure, they also took an axe to frontline workers, health workers in particular, and our community suffered for it.

Thank goodness the Palaszczuk Labor government and the transport minister, Mark Bailey, have championed this issue, alongside my colleagues the member for Moreton and the member for Blair, Shayne Neumann, who has long been an advocate for infrastructure delivery for the south-west corridor on the outskirts of Brisbane, right up through to Ipswich city. Labor is committed to this important, vital infrastructure project.

We are putting this Turnbull government on notice: it is now time to deliver. We have got to see that bottleneck end, that valve relief. I know, living in a suburb near the Ipswich Motorway—my friends, my neighbours, the people I work with, the community groups I serve, they all tell the same story: they are sick and tired of sitting in traffic day in, day out. They want to be home with their families and businesses want to be able to get around a lot quicker, so this is an important, critical piece of infrastructure. The Labor record will show that it delivers important projects like the Redcliffe rail project—this was championed by a former federal member of this place, Yvette D'Ath, and opened a matter of a week or so ago—under the stewardship of Wayne Swan, who allocated those hundreds of millions of dollars to deliver that project. The Turnbull government is very good at cutting ribbons, taking selfies, catching the train and perhaps having people talking to the Prime Minister—or not, as was the case most recently—but we know, when it comes to delivering projects, it is only this side of the chamber that actually gets on, allocates the funds and delivers those projects.

Another issue I will be focusing on today in my first address to this chamber will be the failure of the Turnbull government to hear the message about Medicare. It has been 100 days since we saw a pretty bad performance by the Prime Minister on election night—more like a tantrum—saying that the Australian community had got it wrong. I know, in my own community and sitting in the parliament now, we have had lectures from the health minister and ministers from the Turnbull government saying that it was all a scare campaign. It was all scary and it was somehow mischievous. I will tell you what is scary: what this government is doing in this budget to the healthcare needs of my community and every other Australian. There are major cuts to frontline services, cuts to medicines and cuts to services that my community relies on. I am sick and tired of having lectures from those opposite, because the proof is in the pudding. I know that in my community, right throughout the election, I had GPs contacting me; GPs campaigning by my side; and health professionals right across the electorate on election day, in surgeries, in practices across the Oxley electorate, who simply wanted a fair go for their patients. Those opposite in the government simply say, 'Well, we're not going to listen to that message.' You would think, looking at the chamber now with all of those members lost on the other side of the parliament—with fantastic new members like the member for Dobell, who championed as a health professional herself and who is now serving in this parliament—that they would hear that message. But, sadly, they have not. We will continue to fight for a fair go for constituents and a fair go for GPs and hardworking professionals.

If you are listening to the government, mate, they like to say: 'GPs are wrong. The health practitioners are wrong. The community is wrong. The AMA is wrong'—but they are right. They need to start really listening to the concerns of those residents out there, residents who contacted me during the campaign and who continue to contact me about their concerns about the shambles that this government is creating in health care in this country.

On the issue of the NBN, this is a sad story that the government is refusing to acknowledge. In my community, where we are seeing that digital divide, I have spoken to small-business operators. I have spoken to young families who are moving into one of the fastest growth corridors in the nation in my electorate, through the Greater Springfield development. They just want a fair go when it comes to NBN. They want to make sure that the commitments that have been made by this government are met. We know we were promised a lot by the innovative Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbull, who promised that we would have it cheaper, we would have it quicker and it would be faster—failure on every account. We know that, because our communities are telling us that message. The business community is telling us that over and over again—inferior technology delivering an inferior outcome. We know that the issue of faster, quality broadband is not just a way of life for many younger Australians. It also connects some of the seniors in our community as well to make sure that they have the opportunities.

It is bad enough that this government keeps outsourcing and privatising with their agenda, ignoring the warning signals from whistleblowers within Health and Human Services who are now saying that times for claims for Medicare are blowing out. We have shut down Medicare interface offices. I know in my electorate that has occurred. We are now pushing people to go online. We are now pushing more and more people to use online services. The facts are that there are a large number of Australians who simply have not caught up and who do not have access to quality internet services—made worse by those not delivering on their commitments on the NBN, I may add. But they know that they need those services put into place.

The NBN rollout and faster and accessible broadband is critical for access to quality health services, for young students completing their senior studies and for studying online. We know that frustration from so many young Australians because they do not have access to quality services. Our internet speeds now are completely collapsing under this government. They keep dropping, year in, year out. I only wish that this government would actually hear these messages, particularly around the NBN.

In the rollout in my own community, there has been delay upon delay. We know it is a critical piece of infrastructure. I am going to keep championing this as a major issue in my own local community because the business community has asked me to do this. The education communities and the health services community have also asked me to make sure that this is a priority.

It is a privilege to serve in this place, but it is more important that all of us ensure that we keep this government to account when it comes to its budget. We know that we have seen the budget deficit blow out under this government. The centrepiece of the budget was, of course, a $50 billion tax cut, giving wealthy individuals earning over $180,000—around the top three per cent of income earners—a tax cut to their marginal rate. I know those opposite. That is their priority. Their priority is to always look after the top end of town and to make sure that those at the high income levels get a tax break. I am here to tell them—through you, Mr Deputy Speaker—that my job here is to make sure that we have budget repair with fairness. We have to make sure that the budget repair is done with fairness. It is bad enough that this budget is cutting $30 billion from schools. There are $100,000 university degrees, the plan to increase the cost of medicine, a plan to have the world's oldest pension age, and also the lack of reform in child care and education. I will keep fighting for these issues because that is what the Oxley community has sent me here to do.

Rebekha Sharkie (Mayo, Nick Xenophon Team) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The automotive manufacturing industry in Australia is dying, and I think it is a needless death. With the closure of Mitsubishi in South Australia in 2008 and the closure of Ford in Victoria last Friday, we are no longer making Territories. Holden is now the last major player still operating. In 2017—in just one year—it, too, will shut its doors. While the Holden plant is not in my electorate, my electorate will sharply feel the pain of its closure. We are witnessing not just the death of the iconic Australian-made car but the end of thousands of Australian jobs. Thousands of families have been, and will be, affected. Many have suffered, and will continue to suffer. Many of these families come from the more disadvantaged communities in Australia. The tragedy of Ford's closure in Geelong is immense. While the carbon fibre research facility at Deakin University promises to be a job creator in that region, it will be too little, too late.

After the death of the Falcon comes the death of the Commodore—both icons of Australia. This tsunami of job losses is coming for South Australia next. It is going to devastate the entire northern suburbs of Adelaide and its effects are going to reverberate throughout the whole of the state of South Australia. This is not just a tragedy for the Australian manufacturing sector; it is a tragedy with a human face. Whilst more than 1,400 workers at Holden will lose their jobs when the factory closes, Professor Spoehr from the University of Adelaide estimates that the total loss will be approximately 12,000 jobs across 500 automotive components suppliers and the other businesses in the community that depend on their prosperity to survive.

My heart reaches out to the families that will suffer and struggle when the jobs are gone. My heart goes out to the people who have worked at Holden for a generation and will be forced to go back to the drawing board—who will be forced to start again. My heart goes out to the shops and the corner delis that rely on the economic affluence of their community in order to keep their doors open. And my heart goes out to the families who will end up struggling to pay for their kids' Christmas presents next year and will struggle to pay for ordinary bills—their rates and their electricity bills.

Perhaps globalisation and international competition have made this whole process inevitable. Some say Holden could never have been saved. But this is not progress. Whilst it may be too late for the Holden factory itself, it is not too late for the businesses, the workers and the families who have been depending on that factory for their livelihoods. I repeat, it is not too late, and we cannot give up on them. When a change of government policy leads to adjustment costs that create great social suffering, the government needs to step in and make the transition for those who are affected as easy as possible.

Free trade may be well and good, but we must always remember that behind every economic transaction there is a human story. The removal of protection for the car industry might have been a long time coming, but it is no less painful for those who are affected. Not everyone has capacity; not everyone is as agile as they might like to be. So many families will be focusing week to week—and have been for years—on paying their mortgage, on paying rent, on making sure their children get to school. Finding a new career in, possibly, a new industry is a very high bridge to cross.

I am calling on the government to step up and do more to help those who are affected by the closure of the automotive industry. I am not seeking to blame anyone; I am seeking solutions—and that is the job of every person in this place. Automotive producers and service providers can apply to access the Automotive Transformation Scheme. This scheme has $2.5 billion of funding, and just under half of the scheme—a whopping $1.24 billion—remains underspent. The scheme is an excellent idea in principle, but there are so many automotive industry businesses that cannot access those funds, simply because the eligibility criteria are too strict. Currently this scheme only allows a successful applying business to spend money on capital and research related to the automotive sector. However, the closure of Mitsubishi, Ford and Holden means that many automotive businesses will not be able to remain in the industry.

The eligibility criteria also require businesses to meet strict production quotas in order to access the scheme. This sounds good in principle but stops producers of small-volume but high-quality products from accessing the scheme. For example, Supashock is a small business in Magill, just outside of my electorate, that currently employs 25 staff. Supashock producers high-quality, specialised shock absorbers. Since launching their product in 2012 they have grown by over 150 per cent per year. They have outgrown their current facilities and need to expand. They estimate that they are currently able to support around 100 Australian jobs just through their supply chains. After supplying to the V8 supercars, Supashock now supplies to all of the top-rated racing cars in Australia, and they are even starting to branch out into commercial vehicles as well. Supashock has signed contracts with both Defence and mining, where their technology will be used to prevent rollovers and to save the lives of both soldiers and miners. With these added contracts, Supashock will have the scope to expand to at least 120 full-time jobs. They also have an undergraduate job experience program with Flinders University, and the best students are then employed into the business.

However, despite all of their innovation and agility—'agility', the word of 2015-16 in this parliament—Supashock cannot access the Automotive Transformation Scheme. This is because they do not produce enough of their high-quality components to meet the eligibility criteria. The threshold is 30,000. Supashock is ready to be turbocharged. They could take on some of the automotive workers about to lose their jobs with the closure of Holden, saving some of them from the tsunami and devastation to come. Supashock could be a small but important part of the solution, and yet, because the eligibility criteria are too strict, Supashock and other businesses like them cannot access this capital and, therefore, they cannot even expand as they would like to and quickly take on more staff.

The multiplier effects are stronger in manufacturing than in other sectors because they have more developed and elongated supply chains. According to work done by the Australia Institute, the job multipliers in specialised high-technology manufacturing operations can be as high as 10 to 1. Even if this number were overstated, it demonstrates that for every job we can save or create when Holden closes we can save more jobs in other shops, trades and businesses across South Australia. Many of the current automotive product and aftermarket product providers still have time to diversify and adapt, if only we can provide them with access to assistance from the Automotive Transformation Scheme. If these businesses can survive and grow we can build at least some of the levees against that tsunami.

We can also rescue some of those who have already been hit. Not all businesses will be able to continue in the automotive industry but many may be able to transform themselves into new businesses, such as exporters of design, engineering services, engineering products and even high-quality food production, which is a big part of my electorate. Other existing automotive businesses could become other advanced manufacturers. Beverage manufacturing is the largest manufacturing sector in Australia, and in South Australia we grow the best food in the world and we make some of the best beverages, much of it in my own electorate of Mayo.

I am thus proposing two changes to the eligibility criteria for the Automotive Transformation Scheme: firstly, that the required thresholds for both quantity and value of the scheme are reduced significantly and, secondly, that funds from the scheme can be used by current automotive industry businesses to diversify, retool and transform into other industries. Imagine: if we could turbocharge these industries, we could provide jobs so that many of those who will be losing their jobs when Holden closes will have a new life. Enhancing access to the Automotive Transformation Scheme by broadening the eligibility criteria will help the South Australian economy make the transition with as little pain as possible.

Again, while it might be too late for Ford and Holden, it is not too late for the businesses, the workers and the families who have been depending on the factories for their livelihoods—we must not give up on them. I thus appeal to the government to make it even more accessible for businesses and use the remaining $1.24 billion in the Automotive Transformation Scheme so that we can turbocharge them through this difficult transition. The livelihoods of so many Australians are depending on us.

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

I am very pleased to have the opportunity in the chamber today, under the broad discussion of the appropriation bills, to canvass some of the issues in my local area that have occurred during the election campaign and since then.

Sadly, over that period of time we have seen the Liberal Party's absolute disdain for the Illawarra, again demonstrated in the 2016 election campaign. Again, our area was completely ignored by the Prime Minister and the Liberal Party. In fact, in each and every electorate campaign it has been the same story. I can report to the House that in 2004 they did not make one commitment to the Illawarra; in 2007, not a single commitment; in 2010, not a single commitment; in 2013, not a single commitment; and this year it was a case of history repeating itself in the 2016 election campaign in my seat—not one commitment for my area. As the member says, they are not in the least bit interested in the Illawarra. It is like groundhog day for us: during each election campaign we wait for the Liberal Party to make some sort of commitment and we wait in vain.

It was not just the people of the Illawarra who were left out in the cold, although I have to acknowledge that it was during the long and dismal winter election campaign that the Liberal Party cut billions of dollars from our local schools. They make it harder for people on low and fixed incomes to survive, they make it harder for parents looking for child care and they make it harder for people to get the skills they need to find a job. I would point out to the chamber that the Liberals did not have one policy in support of TAFE or apprentices during the election campaign. They did nothing on child care except to make sure it was more expensive, and they did nothing on higher education except to try and implement an American-style user-pays higher education system, which clearly would result in $100,000 degrees. They did nothing to grow the local economy and generate jobs, despite that being the theme, supposedly, of their campaign. I have to say, clearly the only jobs they were interested in were their own, or those of some of their big business mates who were targeted for the $50 billion tax cut. They did nothing to help. In fact, their actions would have hindered and very badly affected people who were sick. Their policies would have gutted our health system as we know it and forced Australians to pay more for their health care.

I point out that just this week in the parliament government MPs voted against a guarantee to keep Medicare in public hands as a universal health insurance scheme for all Australians. They voted against a guarantee to protect bulk-billing, so that every Australian can see their doctor when they need to, not only when they can afford to. They voted against reversing the harmful cuts to Medicare by unfreezing the indexation of the Medicare Benefits Schedule. They voted against reversing the cuts to pathology that will mean Australians with cancer will have to pay more for their blood tests. They voted against reversing the cuts to breast screening, MRIs, X-rays and other diagnostic imaging, which will mean Australians will pay more for these vital scans—indeed a shame. They voted against abandoning plans to make all Australians, even pensioners, pay more for vital medicines. They voted against developing a long-term agreement to properly fund our public hospitals, so Australians do not languish in emergency departments or on long waiting lists for important surgery. This is a critical issue in my area, where the Baird Liberal have now listed Shellharbour Hospital, a great public hospital, for privatisation. So we see this agenda playing out across conservative governments.

At least 27 times during the election campaign, Malcolm Turnbull said that he would never outsource Medicare. But the truth was revealed this week when he would not bring himself to guarantee that it would be kept in public hands. Labor, as always, remain committed to supporting the services that people need, particularly in our area and investing in our Illawarra region. By contrast, I would like to indicate to the House the commitments that Labor made to our area during the last election.

The member for Whitlam and I put forward a number of commitments for the Illawarra. Firstly, just before the election commenced, we had a visit by the Leader of the Opposition to announce our steel industry plan. This is critically important for our region obviously, with the Port Kembla steelworks so significant as an employment driver and, just as importantly, its flow-on effects through the steel fabrication and manufacturing sectors. We produced a significant plan that will give real viability to the long-term prosperity of the steel industry.

We also made a $50 million commitment to commence the building of the Maldon Dombarton rail link. This is a vital freight infrastructure link between the port at Port Kembla and the western and south-western Sydney region. This work has stalled since this government was elected. In 2013, Labor committed $50 million to commence the process to find a public-private partnership to get this very important piece of infrastructure built. The Abbott government abolished that $50 million commitment. We are very concerned to see that there is a renewed focus on that piece of infrastructure. We made a $50 million commitment in the election campaign and I will continue to pursue commitments from this government to progress that project.

We also made a $50 million commitment to improve the safety of the Appin Road. The day after that commitment was made, the Prime Minister gave a commitment for the same amount. The problem was his commitment only covered the road up to the point where it bordered my electorate. Our commitment was for the entire length of the Appin Road, including the part in the seat of Cunningham. But that was not repeated by the minister, as my colleague the member for Macarthur indicated, as he borders the other end. That is a very important piece of road infrastructure and we will continue to press to get that delivered.

A very important commitment from the member for Whitlam and I was an improvement in the funding for our Illawarra legal service, a $300,000 commitment. These front-line legal services provide support and assistance to some of the most vulnerable in our community and they have been under a great deal of pressure. They do a fantastic job and they struggle to cover all that they are required to cover as it is, and to face this sort of significant funding cut is very detrimental. So I was pleased we were able to get that commitment.

We also gave a commitment of $200,000 towards the extension of the Bulli Surf Life Saving Club, a great local community organisation doing important work. We gave a commitment to three very significant disability employment service providers in our area, Greenacres, Flagstaff and the Disability Trust, to ensure the ongoing viability of Australia's disability enterprises. That was very important to many of our locals who rely on those organisations, and do great work and are very proud of their employment at those places.

An ongoing issue in our area has been the access to a permanent full-time judge for the Federal Circuit Court, particularly in cases of family breakdown and resolving those issues. These are extremely stressful times for people, and we have had a real problem with extensive backlogs and with people being referred interstate to get their cases heard. We gave a commitment to a permanent full-time judge and we will continue to press the government to address that issue.

Part of the Gonski commitments of years five and six would have meant another 59 million in funding for schools in our area. I want to make it clear that this was not an unusual or new thing; we have in fact invested in our region significantly whenever we have been in government. There was a $135-million investment in the University of Wollongong over our period in government and in significant research and teaching facilities such as the Australian Institute for Innovative Materials Processing, the Sustainable Buildings Research Centre, and the SMART Infrastructure Facility and, the most recent one, the Early Start facility. We have put over $100 million into our local schools and TAFE.

We have put $140 million towards supporting the BlueScope Steel Structural Adjustment Programme, and nearly $29 million to progress the Maldon-Dumbarton rail link, plus the $50 million I referred to earlier. We have put $42 million in upgrades to the Mt Ousley Road and $4 million for a Mt Ousley truckstop to make the journey safer for truck drivers, and for the road users who share the roads with them—and I have to say, building has just now finally commenced—as well as $4.6 million on improvements to the Picton Road. We put nearly $3 million into the Blue Mile project to make a beautiful part of our area so much more usable for locals and more accessible, in particular for people with mobility issues, but also to make it into a great tourist attraction, and nearly $5 million into the refurbishment of the Wollongong mall.

We had the early rollout of the National Broadband Network. I spend so much of my time now dealing with complaints about the second-rate system that people are getting with fibre-to-the-node. They are very, very unhappy with what they are getting with that technology. We put $12 million into an Illawarra Cancer Care Centre at Wollongong Hospital and $5 million towards a clinical teaching and training facility at the hospital. There was nearly $16 million in black spot and infrastructure commitments on local roads, $6.6 million for community infrastructure such as parks, footpaths and cycleways, and some great local tourism projects—$863,000 for the North Beach Bathers' Pavilion, a great historic facility; $100,000 for the Sumatran tiger exhibition at our wonderful Symbio Wildlife Park; half a million dollars to refurbish The Snakepit, our famous basketball centre; and $4 million for Southern Youth and Family Services and Youth Off The Streets for homeless and at-risk young people. The commitments we made at the last election follow on from a strong record of Labor delivering for my region.

It is also important to acknowledge that at the state level, it has been New South Wales Labor governments who have also committed to the region. We have had investment in the Northern Distributor, the building of the wonderful Sea Cliff Bridge, a free commuter car park in Wollongong, the free Gong Shuttle which gives locals better access to public transport, $140 million in upgrades to the Port Kembla Steelworks, the establishment of the world-leading Innovation Campus at the University of Wollongong, and a state-of-the-art police station for the Lake Illawarra Command. We have given commitments to accessibility lifts at the Unanderra Station, to upgrading the local hospital and TAFE, to building the Western Grandstand and the Northern Grandstand at WIN Stadium, and to the $170-million expansion of Port Kembla Harbour. In particular, we have committed to saving Bulli Hospital and to $100 million in investment in the Wollongong Hospital. These have been important commitments for state Labor and, I have to say, in those areas great work continues by our local colleagues Ryan Park and Anna Watson along with some important and significant commitments by our candidate in the Wollongong by-election, Paul Scully, who is an extraordinarily good candidate. I hope people will get behind him in the by-election in November, because he will do an outstanding job for locals.

Across the region the story is consistent. It is very frustrating. Our region is an important regional driver of jobs and economic growth. We have wonderful opportunities for diversification. We have the challenges that many regions have in terms of the existing employment sectors and supporting them in their capacity to continue to employ. In particular, obviously steel and manufacturing are very important parts of that story, but we have expanding and developing opportunities in education and tourism. Only this week I met down here with Nieves Murray and the Illawarra Retirement Trust group, who were down here doing some visits to ministers and shadow ministers. The aged-care sector is another one where there are real opportunities for jobs and some leading national organisations like IRT have grown out of the Illawarra. So the things that you need a region to do in its own best interests we are doing.

I want to finish by acknowledging the great work of Destination Wollongong in getting the first visit by the Radiance of the Seas, a major tourism boat, into Port Kembla at the end of this month. There was a great community campaign rallying around making that visit a real success so that it continues to develop jobs and opportunities in our region. We are doing what we need to do as a region. Labor governments at state and federal levels have supported that. Liberal governments have been very disappointing.

Jane Prentice (Ryan, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Social Services and Disability Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2016-2017, Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 2016-2017 and Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2016-2017. The combined total appropriations being sought by these supply and appropriation bills is just under $100 billion. This is an important budget, but it is also a budget unlike others. This is a budget that has been put before the people of Australia at the last election. Notwithstanding the deliberately dishonest scare campaign by Labor and their union bosses, on any quantitative measure this budget has been endorsed by the majority of Australians.

Let us put this clearly on the record. Bill Shorten and Labor did not win the election. Labor has 69 seats in this House while the coalition has 76 seats—a clear majority. We may not always agree with the way our fellow Australians vote, but we must always respect the collective statement of intent by the Australian community through the ballot box. Clearly there will be some qualitative differences on certain budget measures; but, simply put, Australians do not want the government to spend more than Australian taxpayers can afford.

We all have a moral responsibility to restrain spending, boost investment, encourage economic growth and guarantee a strong social safety net. Today's budget position is not what it was when the Howard government lost office, and it will take some time to reign in public spending in a responsible way. There are some important truths we must acknowledge, and we need to cut Australia's suit according to our cloth. Labor's magic pudding economics that underwrote year-on-year promises of a non-existent budget surplus resulted in increasing deficits and left disappointed Australians genuinely concerned about our economic future.

The last time Labor delivered a budget surplus was in 1989, 27 years ago. Instead of delivering a secure economic future to Australian taxpayers, all Labor offers now is their most-appropriately-named leader—short on vision, short on policy and short on integrity. While I recognise the current Labor leader wants to run the government like a union, Australians do not want their government to spend their money like a union boss with a union credit card. More debt is not the measure by which I want future generations of Australians to judge us. The parliament must work for Australians now and, especially, for future Australians. I reflect on a saying attributed to St Francis of Assisi which seems appropriate given the enormous challenges facing the 45th Parliament of Australia: 'Start by doing what is necessary, then do what is possible, and suddenly you are doing the impossible.'

For government, money to make things happen can only come from three places: increased taxes, increased borrowings or savings. The critical importance of adequately funding the National Disability Insurance Scheme is especially important to me. In May this year I spoke on the National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment Bill 2016, noting that the website of the member for Jagajaga claimed that the NDIS was properly funded when Labor left office. This was simply not true. Savings that Labor claimed were to be directed to the NDIS were simply returned to consolidated revenue. They were not set aside for the NDIS. You simply cannot direct the same funding if it has already been used.

My colleague on the other side the member for Lilley promised a surplus many times. And that, he claimed, was where additional disability service funding would come from. So, despite distributing campaign brochures claiming they had actually delivered a surplus, let me just remind you once again: Labor has not been capable of delivering a surplus since 1989, 27 years ago.

On the other hand, the coalition government takes our financial responsibilities to the NDIS very seriously. Those with disability, their carers and individuals and organisations involved in the provision of services within the disability services sector depend on adequate funding for the NDIS. To meet the future costs of the NDIS, we are establishing an NDIS savings fund, which will hold unspent funds from the NDIS, as well as the proceeds of savings measures from better targeting our welfare spending. These funds can then be reinvested back into delivering the NDIS and can contribute to filling the existing funding gap.

Let me now turn to my electorate of Ryan—this special part of Australia. I want so much more for my electorate than what I could justifiably ask for at a time when responsible government demands that we rein in spending. But in this budget I have many things to celebrate, including a never-ending pipeline of innovative projects and exciting and inspiring local entrepreneurs to champion.

Our National Innovation and Science Agenda will create a modern, dynamic, 21st-century Australian economy that will transition the Australian economy from a winding-down mining boom to a burgeoning ideas boom. With one of the world's leading universities, the University of Queensland, now ranked 55th in its academic ranking worldwide and second in Australia, there has never been a more exciting time to be the member for Ryan. Already in the top 10 in the world for commercialisation, the University of Queensland is well positioned to leverage Australia's natural strengths in science, innovation and technology to secure Australia's future prosperity and high standard of living.

In my previous role as a local councillor, I was part of the team from Brisbane City Council that put forward a very effective way to deliver first-rate internet services for South-East Queensland, especially in Brisbane. In effect, the whole of Brisbane would have had fibre-to-the-premises services by now if it were not for the previous Labor government's arrogance, incompetence and spite. While I understand that residents are disappointed that the roll-out of the NBN has not occurred sooner, the use of HFC network and fibre-to-the-node and fixed wireless are part of the government's multitechnology mix approach to building a network which uses the most appropriate technology to deliver the NBN sooner and at less cost to taxpayers.

Also, as part of our Mobile Black Spot Program, new mobile base stations in Mount Crosby and Karana Downs will bring a much-needed boost to mobile coverage, providing benefits to emergency service operators, businesses and residents. These areas were overlooked by mobile network operators due to commercial factors, and the former Labor government refused to invest in fixing mobile black spots in regional and remote Australia.

In this special part of Australia, small things do lead to bigger things. Who here has not tried some of the fine jerky products produced by Geronimo Jerky? Starting their business in 2011 as a side project of four friends, Geronimo Jerky now turns over literally tonnes of beef each month to produce large quantities of the product in eight different flavours that fill orders with the Australian Defence Force and various mine sites and in more than 400 locations across Australia. As a local business resident in Blackwood Street, Mitchelton, Geronimo Jerky—along with other traders—is also benefiting from the coalition's announcement that they will be providing $208,000 for CCTV in the area. This project, committed under the coalition's $40 million Safer Communities Fund, was secured through an ongoing campaign by the Blackwood Street chamber of commerce and will enhance security of patrons and businesses.

Another great success story of innovation and entrepreneurship in the Ryan electorate is that of Opengear—an innovative leader in the next generation's smart solutions to protect and manage critical ICT infrastructure. Starting in 2004 with just two employees at ilab in Toowong, Opengear now employs 64 staff worldwide and has offices across Australia, the USA, the UK and Europe. From humble beginnings, Opengear now boasts many international customers, including tier 1 companies, DFAT and Queensland Police, and has been recognised with many product and technology awards.

Governments can never hope to fund the literally millions of hours of work, care and support provided by tens of thousands of volunteers. The Ryan electorate not only has some of the smartest and brightest people in the world; it also has some of the most truly beautiful souls who continue to warm our hearts with regular acts of human kindness. I would like to again say a big and very public thank you to the dedicated network of Meals on Wheels volunteers, who pride themselves on providing more than just a meal to some of the most frail and vulnerable residents living in our neighbourhoods. We have some of the most inspiring community-spirited volunteers in our electorate. Every day of every week volunteers from the western suburbs—Kenmore, Ashgrove and Mitchelton—Meals on Wheels organisations ensure that members of our community who are sick, elderly, frail and disabled benefit from this valuable community service.

Recently, I had the pleasure of also paying tribute to three members of the Wests Junior Rugby League football club. Erica Quinn and Ron Raper were recognised for their tireless contribution to the club with an oval named in their honour and, with more than 40 years of association and still being an integral part of the club today, Margaret Carl, who has held the position of president, secretary and treasurer, has also been recognised with an oval named in her honour. The contribution of so many volunteers in the Ryan electorate is humbling. Indeed, actions do speak louder than words.

Since coming to office, the coalition government has honoured our strong commitment to building Australia's future defence capabilities while also recognising the enormous contribution and personal sacrifice made by our veterans to our country. As most members know, the federal electorate of Ryan is home to the Gallipoli Barracks and one of the largest populations of serving Australian Defence Force personnel. We are a community that supports our defence force personnel, past and present, and we are committed to recognising the significant contribution of our veterans in protecting and enabling the way of life and the quality of life we all enjoy.

Current and former defence force personnel and their families have welcomed the coalition's decision to reverse Labor's cuts and to increase defence spending by $29.9 billion over the next 10 years. This marks a significant contrast between what a coalition government will do and what a Labor government did not. Indeed, it would be difficult to find any serving Australian defence service personnel or veteran who would consider the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd government anything but the worst in our nation's history in this area. While Labor increased non-defence spending sharply over its six budgets, the defence budget was slashed by 10.5 per cent in 2012-13—the biggest single cut since the Korean War. In that one year Labor ripped $18 billion out of the defence budget and cut defence spending to its lowest level since 1938. This resulted in 1,200 job losses in the ADF alone and delays to 119 defence projects, then another 43 projects were reduced and eight projects cancelled. Not surprisingly, Labor's defence budget cuts, deferrals and procrastination, and a growing lack of opportunity for local suppliers meant our local defence industry also shed more than 10 per cent of its workforce.

Only a coalition government will ensure Australia's national security and economic prosperity both now and for decades to come. In doing so we will maximise the opportunities for our defence industry to participate in our historic shipbuilding programs.

In closing, I repeat the phrase attributed to St Francis of Assisi, which offers some guidance for all members and senators in this 45th Parliament of Australia:

Start by doing what’s necessary; then do what’s possible, and suddenly you are doing the impossible.

I commend this bill to the House.

Kelly O'Dwyer (Higgins, Liberal Party, Minister for Revenue and Financial Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would like to thank everyone who has contributed to the debate on these bills. Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2016-2017, Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 2016-2017 and Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2016-2017 form the principal bills underpinning the government's budget. The provisions in the bills seek authority for appropriations broadly equivalent to seven-twelfths of the estimated 2016-17 annual appropriations plus budget measures. Together with supply acts, these bills provide appropriations for the full year of 2016-17.

Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2016-2017 seeks authority for meeting the expenses of the ordinary annual services of the government and approval for additional appropriations from the consolidated revenue fund of just over $49 billion for 2016-17. Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 2016-2017 seeks approval for appropriations from the Consolidated Revenue Fund of just under $9 billion in 2016-17. This bill provides for non-ordinary annual services of government, including capital works and services and payments to states, territories and local government authorities. The purpose of Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2016-2017 is to provide funding for the operation of the Department of the Senate, the Department of the House of Representatives, the Department of Parliamentary Services and the Parliamentary Budget Office. This bill seeks approval for appropriations from the Consolidated Revenue Fund of just over $147 million. Details of the proposed expenditure are set out in the schedules to the bills and portfolio budget statements previously tabled in the parliament. I commend the bills.

Mark Coulton (Parkes, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the bills be now read a second time.

Question agreed to.

Bills read a second time.

Debate adjourned.