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

It gives me great pleasure this evening to rise to speak on the appropriation bills for 2018 and 2019. I'd like to start off on the subject of university funding and the recent case of Professor—or now Doctor—Ridd. I'll start with the comments about what John Stuart Mill wrote back in the year 1869 in On Liberty:

The peculiar evil of silencing the expression of an opinion is, that it is robbing the human race; posterity as well as the existing generation; those who dissent from the opinion, still more than those who hold it. If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth: if wrong, they lose, what is almost as great a benefit, the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error.

It is that belief that is the reason why we fund our universities with taxpayers' dollars so that they are the bastions of free speech, places where free and open debate are welcome. They become places where dissenting opinions are welcomed, not frowned upon, where alternative views and theories are listened to and tested. The idea of gagging scientists, of silencing academics criticising their university, of having intolerance for different views, where dissent must be crushed rather than encouraged, is a perversion of those words of Mill. It is a perversion of the legacy of the Enlightenment. That is how totalitarian regimes develop and work.

And yet we have the treatment by James Cook University of Professor Ridd. First they tried to punish the professor for simply daring to question the sacred peer review. And these are the words they objected to which Professor Ridd said:

… we can no longer trust the scientific organisations like the Australian Institute of Marine Science, even things like the ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies – a lot of this is stuff is coming out, the science is coming out not properly checked, tested or replicated and this is a great shame because we really need to be able to trust our scientific institutions and the fact is I do not think we can any more …

Professor Ridd is merely voicing an alternative opinion. His opinion should be tested against the facts with different hypotheses tested over and over. That is how the scientific method works. But yet, because of those words, there was not only the campaign to curtail Professor Ridd's academic freedom; James Cook University actually made an order that he should not even discuss their campaign to silence and censor him.

And this has gone to the length of absurdities. He was even told not to contact or speak with his wife about the case. He was told that he could not trivialise, satirise or parody James Cook University, and that is what they've accused him of. They've actually accused him of trivialising, satirising and parodying, because he sent a newspaper article about his case to an old friend—merely copied the article—and wrote the words 'for your amusement'. For that, we have a university trying to censor a professor.

But we know what Professor Ridd's real crime was. His real crime was that he dared to question leftist groupthink ideology—an ideology that has a totalitarian mindset that dissenters must be crushed. So I say to those running James Cook University: 'Your targeting and your seeking to silence Professor Ridd are an affront to everything our universities stand for. They are an affront to the very principles of Western civilisation, to the legacy of enlightenment and to our democracy.' When John Stuart Mill used the word 'evil', he said that the particular evil of silencing the expression of opinion is something that we should avoid. I ask those running James Cook University to look at themselves closely, look at the history of the enlightenment and allow Professor Ridd to continue his work. And, if his work is wrong, prove it with science and evidence.

I'd like to address a few other issues during this debate. Firstly, there is the contrast between the coalition and the Labor Party during the budget speech and budget-in-reply speech. We heard the opposition leader, on the night of the budget-in-reply speech, say that he would commit the Labor Party to copying the South Australian experiment—the failed South Australian experiment of a 50 per cent Renewable Energy Target which was inflicted upon the poor, long-suffering residents of South Australia. They were turned into guinea pigs for that experiment. What did that experiment deliver—the very experiment that the Leader of the Opposition wants to foist upon the entire nation? It gave that state not only the highest electricity prices in the nation but, unbelievably, it gave that state the highest electricity prices in the world. That is what the Leader of the Opposition wants to copy and inflict upon the nation.

The Labor Party talk about the greater happiness for the mass of the people. That 50 per cent Renewable Energy Target resulted in South Australia having the highest rate of disconnections in the nation. In fact, they went to a 130 per cent increase in disconnections. In 2009-10 in the state of South Australia, there were 4,748 disconnections—people having electricity turned off. Fast forward: once they'd implemented the wonderful policy of a 50 per cent Renewable Energy Target, in 2016-17 there were 10,902 households in South Australia that had their electricity disconnected—a 130 per cent increase. That is what the Labor Party want to inflict on all of Australia. How does a family operate if they've had their electricity disconnected? How do their kids do their homework at night? How do they cook their evening meal? How do they keep food fresh in a refrigerator if they have no electricity after it was cut off? And yet the policies of the Australian Labor Party are to introduce and copy the very policies that saw a 130 per cent increase in South Australian households having their electricity cut off.

We have seen from the Australian Energy Regulator what it has done to the average debt. While the average electricity bill debt in Queensland is $650 and in New South Wales it is $850, in the state of South Australia it is $1,200, almost 50 per cent higher. What that means is that residents in South Australia have less money in their pocket to spend on services, at the local shops or at the local cafe. They have less money to buy something extra for their kids or something nice or to save money for a holiday, because they have to put more money aside for electricity. We are talking about a $550 difference between Queensland and South Australia in what they have to pay on their bill, yet this is the policy that the Labor Party want to inflict on all of Australia.

It doesn't stop there. We also have seen the Labor Party commit to upping the Paris targets. They think the Paris targets that we have committed to are not high enough. They want to up it to a 45 per cent reduction in carbon dioxide emissions.

So I would ask the members of the Labor Party this. We know what your plans are for electricity. We know how your plans proceed. We know exactly what happens. We have the example of the state of South Australia. But can you tell us: how are you going to get a 45 per cent reduction in emissions in the transport sector? Are you going to put up the price of petrol? Are you going to put up the price of registration? Are you going to take cars from people? Explain to the Australian public how you are going to get a 45 per cent reduction in transport. How are the Labor Party going to get a 45 per cent reduction in emissions in the agricultural sector? What do they have planned for the farmers of this nation if they inflict or force upon them a 45 per cent reduction? What about industry, which uses gas? How are they going to get a 45 per cent reduction there? Quite simply, we'll close the businesses down, put the workers out of work and send the production offshore. Is that the plan that the Australian Labor Party have? What about gas for home heating? How does the Labor Party intend to get a 45 per cent reduction in the emissions from people using gas for their home heating? Do you expect people to sit shivering in the cold so we can achieve some sort of virtue signalling and so you can run around and say, 'Yes, we've achieved our targets?' This is what the Australian people need to know. This is what the Labor Party need to explain about their policies. We know the damage that they are going to cause in the electricity sector, but tell us: what are your policies on transport to get those reductions, what are your policies on agriculture, what are your policies for industry, and what are your policies for gas and heating?

Finally, this is where we see the greatest difference between the coalition and the opposition. We see the difference in speech after speech in this chamber. Members of the Labor Party simply think the size of our economic pie is fixed. They think the wealth that we've created just arrives naturally and it's just a matter of carving it up in a way that they see as fair and equitable. This is a mistake that, as we've seen in nation after nation, has sent countries backwards, because the size of the economy is not fixed. The wealth that we have in this nation depends on the hard work, the entrepreneurial efforts and the risk taking of the Australian citizen.

That's why we think that it is best policy to lower the corporate rate of tax, because we know that we need to have that corporate rate of tax internationally competitive. How long can we continue with a 30 per cent corporate tax rate, stuck at that level since the year 2000, if we see all our international competitors lowering their corporate rate of tax? We see the US bringing it back to 21 per cent. We see the UK bringing it back to 19 per cent. We see Hong Kong and Singapore at 15 and 17 per cent. How can we attract investment if we are going to have a 30 per cent corporate tax rate, plus a top marginal rate of tax of 49 per cent, where 50 per cent of every extra dollar that someone earns goes to the government? These are the destroyers of the incentives that create the wealth in our nation.

There cannot be greater clarity between what the opposition plans for this nation and what the coalition does. We see the plans of the opposition. They will give us uncompetitive energy prices. They'll copy South Australia and give us the highest prices in the world. They'll make transport unaffordable for many Australians. They'll make our corporate rate of tax uncompetitive. If we have those things uncompetitive, how can we in this nation therefore afford to pay the wages that we'd like to see? How can we increase people's wages if more and more of every business's expenses has to go to a higher and higher electricity bill to meet some artificial target so the Labor Party can go around in their electorates and virtue-signal to the Greens to try to get their preferences?

This is the choice that is coming, and it is a stark choice. It is about a coalition government acting responsibly, bringing the budget back to a balance, then to a surplus and then paying down that debt as the coalition government have done and succeeded at before. The alternative is a reckless Labor Party that will spend and spend money we don't have, make our nation uncompetitive and destroy wealth. (Time expired)

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

It gives me great pleasure to rise on the Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2018-2019. I would have to say that I've been in this place 10 years now and back in the electorate there is the best response to a budget I've ever met. It's been a tough decade for Australian taxpayers and, after the 4½ years since the coalition came to government, at last a surplus is in sight. It's not the member for Lilley's fake promises. It's not the, 'We'll be back in the black by 2012-13,' as promised by the member for Lilley. It's not the 'My commitment to a surplus in 2012-13 was a promise made and it will be honoured,' as the then Prime Minister Julia Gillard said in April 2011. It's not a hundred other quotes announcing the surplus being delivered when the record shows six years of multibillion-dollar deficits under the former Labor government.

It's been hard work since that time, in the 4½ years of the coalition government. Since coming to government, the coalition has applied a steady handbrake on growth to government expenditure. It's not a brick wall that would have stalled the economy, no slashing of jobs and no savage cuts, but gentle pressure across the board that has allowed for growth in government expenditure, has increased services and, most importantly, has promoted growth in the country. I think perhaps the most important news in the budget is that we do return to surplus next year, a year earlier than we predicted. Contrast that to the former government, where the surplus just kept getting postponed and put further and further out. In fact, this government, with a sustained effort, will bring in a surplus 12 months earlier than predicted. This is an enormous turnaround, and we have gotten there by underpromising and overdelivering—always a very good path for governments.

The brightest part of the economy is the jobs growth, with 427,000 in the last 12 months, and one million new jobs since the coalition was elected in 2013. It doesn't happen by accident. One million new jobs means there are one million people that are no longer on new start; one million people that are paying tax and contributing to the wealth of this nation; and one million people that will are renting and building houses and installing a new kitchen in their house, giving jobs to other people.

The budget delivers immediate tax relief for middle-income earners. Within four years, the government will remove the 37-cents-in-the-dollar rate completely. Now, a lot of rubbish has been spoken about the changes the government proposes in taxation. I would love to wax lyrical about that and point out all of those errors, but there is a bill coming up on this matter in the next 24 or 48 hours, and I'll reserve my comments on the changes to the tax rates to that debate.

There is a whole raft of good news. In Grey, without doubt, the big ticket item in infrastructure is the commitment to duplicate the Joy Baluch AM Bridge at Port Augusta. For those of you that don't know—I know, of course, you would, Mr Deputy Speaker Irons—all of the north-south traffic through Central Australia and all of the east-west traffic across the south of Australia passes over this single bridge at Port Augusta. It is the only viable link between the east and west of Port Augusta. Emergency services can be sidelined if traffic is interrupted on the bridge. Yorkeys Crossing, which is the alternative crossing, is around about a 30-kilometre diversion around the northern swampland of the gulf. It is sometimes suspect and sometimes closed because of wet weather. That has been the fail-safe measure here. I point out that all of the emergency services in Port Augusta are located on the east side, and there is a substantial population living on the west side. You can imagine what would happen if the bridge happened to be out of commission when one of those emergencies eventuated.

East and west Port Augusta were first joined in 1927 by the Great Western Bridge, a wooden bridge which still stands but looks more like a jetty than a bridge—a wooden structure. It was superseded in 1972 by the now-named Joy Baluch AM Bridge. That bridge has served us and the nation—I've talked about the crossflow of traffic and freight across the nation—well since then. However, the designs of 1972 are quite different to today's, and that bridge, as part of its features, has a narrow walkway to the side of the road. This walkway is about 1.4 metres wide, and two gophers can't pass each other if they meet on the walkway. The other day, a lady was pushing a pram with twins in it—the side-by-side arrangement, Deputy Speaker Irons; you would be quite familiar with it—across the bridge, and the pedestrian they encountered had to step onto the roadway to go around the pram. It is obviously not a safe arrangement. In fact, schools are now bussing children from one side of the gulf to the other. Parents draw their breath when their children ride across the bridge on the walkway. They are millimetres from 100-tonne-plus road trains. It's an accident waiting to happen.

Up until April last year it all worked okay, until Port Augusta City Council, which now owns the Great Western Bridge, closed the bridge—the old wooden walkway I talked about earlier—which had fallen into a dilapidated state. These things happen; the bridge had to be closed. Of course, the old wooden bridge was where the pedestrians in Port Augusta had been crossing the gulf since 1972. It forced all of the foot traffic onto the Joy Baluch AM Bridge—and I've described that walkway. I raised this issue with the former South Australian government, along with the then minister for transport, the member for Gippsland. I asked for an engineering report with suggestions on how to install a safe, separated walkway on the bridge. In the almost 12 months through to the state election it never came. I could not believe it. Despite my repeated calls for the state minister to come up with an engineering report on what was the state's bridge it never came. I had great concern for safety in the city.

So the caravan's moved on. In the lead up to the election, I met with a number of business groups. I met with SACOME, the South Australian Chamber of Mines and Energy. Their No. 1 priority was the duplication of the bridge across the gulf. I was very pleased indeed when that wish, if you like, was granted in the budget. $160 million committed from the federal government to partner the Marshall state government on an 80-20 basis. Let me say, what a pleasure it is to work with a government that is open for building infrastructure in rural and regional areas. We were able to strike a deal quite quickly. It's a huge investment. It will be quite disruptive, and I ask residents to be somewhat patient, because we know that none of the work has been done on this bridge at this stage. We will need such things as native title clearance, EPA clearance and coastal protection clearance. We don't know exactly where the bridge is going to go and whose houses and businesses might have to be removed as a result of building that bridge. We have no designs at this stage. We are starting from scratch and it will take a little bit of time.

There has been a bit of sniping about the projections in the budget for the expenditure. There's $60 million in the forward estimates. The extra $100 million lies in the projections. Let me say, if we are running in front of the time frame that Treasury predicts to build this bridge, we will find the money. You will not find that this government is holding up the construction of that bridge. I'll be putting pressure on at every level to make sure that we get on with this job, because this is very important. If we are seen to be dragging our heels and something bad happens—I don't even want to contemplate that. I am just so thankful that we've got this commitment from the federal government and that we have this commitment from the Marshall state government.

So that's the big ticket item in Grey. But, let me tell you, there are a lot of extra things in the budget, many of which I and others like me have been lobbying for. In aged care we have an extra 14,000 home-care packages to go along with the 6,000 that the minister allocated in the MYEFO last December. That is 20,000 packages. We know this is still not going to be enough to fill the backlog, but it is an enormous commitment. The Minister for Aged Care has taken this chamber through a process where he has actually drawn in the numbers, so we now understand what that backlog is. It's an enormous commitment and I thank him very much for it. He's also put aside money to help rural aged-care facilities. They can apply to it for capital grants, and I have quite a number that are looking for any kind of assistance they can get. Delivering aged-care services in the country is more expensive than delivering them in the city, and we need to recognise that. These smaller facilities, which are suboptimal in size, are so important to their local communities. As much as is humanly possible, people need to be able to age within their own communities where they are supported by friends and family.

Also in the budget—and I think this is very important—there is an increase, from $250 to $300 per fortnight, in the amount that age pensioners can earn before it will affect their pension. They will applaud this. There is an extension of the $20,000 automatic tax write-off for small businesses—for all businesses, in fact. This has been a very popular measure in the last few years, and I applaud the fact we've been able to extend that. We've raised the threshold for qualification for independent youth allowance. It does raise my eyebrow, I must say, that the independent youth allowance is dependent on what your parents earn. It seems to me that 'independent' would indicate that the student is independent. But we have lifted that threshold where they can apply from $150,000 to $160,000, with an extra $10,000 for each student that is under that parent's responsibility at that stage.

From 1 July there's a new package for parents needing childcare. It will make a considerable difference to working parents. There's a further $200 million on offer for another round of the Building Better Regions Fund. We've had quite a number of very good projects funded throughout the Grey electorate under this program. We always have lots of applications, and I'm looking forward to trying to partner again with those people putting applications into the next round. We have a commitment to a fourth round of the Stronger Communities Program. Once again, this is at the lower end, the grassroots, of community, where we see grants of from $2,000 to maybe $20,000. These are grants that make an enormous difference to voluntary organisations.

The budget committed an extra $550 million for the Stronger Rural Health Strategy. Many times I've spoken in this chamber about the challenges of finding GPs to work in rural Australia, and the suggestions that I've brought forward include something that has not been picked up yet: postcode-specific Medicare provider numbers. This is a constant issue for those of us who live in the country. In fact, at this stage, the electorate of Grey is 29 GPs short. That is up from a figure of around 19 eighteen months ago, and I'm very concerned. That's why I'm pleased the government is making a considerable commitment in this area, including upskilling existing doctors so they feel better prepared to deal with whatever the practice may throw at them, and increasing the number of placements for undergraduates to experience something of rural living while they're going through their training program.

Something that many schools around my electorate will be celebrating is a commitment to permanent funding of the School Chaplaincy Program. This is a program that was created by the coalition. It was altered somewhat during the Labor years, but we brought it back in its original form. It is extremely popular. The schools just lap it up, I have to say. When we're talking about issues in this place such as mental health and our young people needing assistance, a quiet hand and someone to go to to talk about issues, the School Chaplaincy Program is really delivering.

So, right across the board, I welcome the budget. As I said, it's probably the one that has gone down the best in the entire time that I've spent in this chamber.

Madeleine King (Brand, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak on Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2018-2019 and the related bills. As has been said, this side of the House will be supporting supply. It is for this reason that I support these bills, which will appropriate about $7.9 billion for the remainder of this financial year and then around $108 billion for the 2018-19 financial year.

But my support for supply is in no way support for the unfair Liberal budget we have just witnessed. This budget is just like every other Liberal budget in that it fail the fairness test. While this is not unexpected, it is always disappointing. It is disappointing to see a federal government so committed to giving its friends at the top end of town an $80 billion tax handout but happy to cast aside the needs—yes, the needs—of children, the elderly and the sick. Instead of investing in schools, TAFEs and universities, instead of investing in hospitals and Medicare and instead of investing in the welfare of pensioners, this government is instead taking care of big business. It is taking care of the multinationals and it is taking care of the banks. I know the banks are having a bit of a rough trot at the moment, courtesy of the banking royal commission, but surely those opposite must question the need to make them feel better at the cost of $17 billion. A cynic in the room could even be forgiven for thinking that the $17 billion was by way of a mock apology for a banking royal commission that this government clearly did not want to have. This government stonewalled the banking royal commission for more than 600 days. It did everything it could to prevent the shocking and unacceptable banking practices that are now front-page news from being exposed. But, thanks to Labor's long and hard fight for the banking royal commission, the government capitulated and we are gaining an insight into how customers have been disgracefully treated by the banks.

This government ought to think long and hard about rewarding this behaviour, especially when we consider what is not being rewarded in this budget. The more than generous $80 billion in tax handouts to the top end of town have to be paid for from somewhere. Let's think about this for a moment. The government is giving $17 billion to the big banks and taking $17 billion out of education. So, on the one hand, it is giving $17 billion to the banks and, on the other hand, it is taking $17 billion out of the education portfolio. That truly is unbelievable. Unfortunately for the mums and dads worried about their children's education, unfortunately for those in the community who are sick or have ill family members and unfortunately for those pensioners who rely on the energy supplement to get by, that handout is being paid for with savage cuts to education, health and the pension. This government has plans to persist with its $715 million in cruel cuts to hospitals during the next two years, with further cuts locked in for the five years from 2020. Those opposite are forcing up the out-of-pocket costs on patients needing to see specialists by keeping the Medicare freeze in place. Do they not understand how this is hurting struggling households having difficulty with living pressures and how it is hurting those struggling with low and stagnant wage growth and others struggling with cuts to their wages of up to $77 per week, thanks to this government's shameful stance on penalty rates?

Difficult choices are being made around this country when it comes to things such as private health cover. When you are paying more and more for less and less, you'll find that people start ditching their private health insurance because they can no longer afford the annual price hikes and they can no longer see the point of private health insurance. So how about the government looks to address this affordability crisis, instead of rewarding those with at least an $80 billion windfall? The same applies to education. Cutting $17 billion from schools, as I said before, and cutting another $270 million from TAFE—where is the sense in this? To my mind, and to the minds of most Australians, the last thing we should be doing is stripping money from education. Rather, we should be investing in it and doing all that we can to encourage further investment in education.

I do not know how this government thinks this country can continue to ensure we will have a supply of skilled and trained workers when it continues to strip funding from vocational education. The whopping $3 billion ripped from vocational education has not been enough for Prime Minister Turnbull's government. This budget includes a further $270 million worth of cuts to TAFE and apprentices. I suggest the education minister take time to actually learn what TAFE is all about and how important it is in training Australians for all types of work.

Seriously, have we ever had to withstand a worse education minister in this country? Has there ever been an education minister more out of touch with universities, with TAFEs and even with the early childhood sector? The technical and further education system deserves more than the elitist and dismissive attitude of Senator Birmingham, and apprentices and those in technical education deserve more than the stripping of essential funding by the senator. It's time someone in the government woke up the education minister, gave him a good old shove and stopped him bagging a reputable institution that delivers much more than energy healing and basket weaving. The education minister showed his ignorance of the university sector when he proclaimed that they operate on rivers of gold. Anyone who has anything to do with the sector, anyone who has worked in it and anyone with a skerrick of interest in universities knows that this is only a misguided and dangerous fantasy. He showed his disdain for and ignorance of the TAFE sector as he casually dismissed the efforts of all those TAFE students currently studying. In case those opposite cannot assist the minister for education in learning what goes on in a TAFE, I'm going to take you through some of the many courses and examples of trades training delivered at South Metropolitan TAFE, which includes the Rockingham campus in my electorate of Brand: aero skills and skills in avionics, aviation—a commercial pilot licence—marine craft construction, maritime operations and marine engineering, engineering—industrial electrician, accounting, project management and nursing. The list goes on but, alas, there is no basket weaving or energy healing on offer at the moment.

I think the education minister doesn't really like the portfolio he's been given. He has shown his ignorance of the university sector, his disdain for TAFE and vocational education, and his utter ignorance of and inability to learn anything about early childhood learning and its funding. Given the magnitude of the cuts the minister for education is applying to the sector, it makes me suspect that Minister Birmingham is perhaps auditioning for another role in this government. Perhaps he's auditioning for the Finance portfolio, but of course we know it's going to take quite a few levers to get Senator Cormann out of that role.

While Minister Birmingham has cut into schools and TAFE, that doesn't complete the education trifecta. Of course, universities and higher education are the other place where this government has delivered cuts in very real and dangerous spades. I worked in the university sector before entering this place, so I speak from experience when I talk about how damaging this government's attack on the sector is and the dreadful impact it is having on our institutions, the staff and, most importantly, the students.

The ruthless cuts of this government started before my being elected to this place in 2016. The 2014 budget was just the start of a long and sustained attack on Australians' right, regardless of their bank balance, to a university degree. It's a right based on ability, not bankability. There is still $2.2 billion in university cuts entrenched in the Treasurer's latest budget, despite the voices of many in the field telling how bad it is.

I have met with vice-chancellors and senior staff from three universities in Western Australia: UWA, which stands to lose $38 million, Curtin University, which stands to lose $86 million, and Murdoch University, which stands to lose $35 million from this budget. When the cuts to Edith Cowan University, which are $49 million, are added, this creates a cut of over $208 million from universities for my state of Western Australia. This is utterly unacceptable.

I've said this before: I can only imagine that it's the intention of this government, by putting universities in a funding vice, to push institutions toward instituting higher fees. What we are seeing is the opportunity for a better future that a higher education affords being taken away from those who cannot afford it. I have been to many open days and other university events, and I have talked to students and staff about how these cuts will impact them, and their views aren't positive. Their reality isn't positive. Instead of helping young people to start out on what should be one of the most exciting times as a young adult, we are saddling them with doubt, stress and debt.

I'd like to commend the work of the National Union of Students on their Build a Better Budget campaign. They are campaigning hard for a better deal for university students around the country. Those opposite would do well to listen to student-led grassroots campaigns like this one, and they would do well to work for better standards for students and to increase federal funding for universities around the country. Labor has committed to reversing the savage cuts to the university sector and to moving towards having 200,000 extra Australians attending university, effectively abolishing the Prime Minister's unfair cap on university student places. Labor has always been the only party serious about improving education standards and opportunities in Australia and will continue to be the only party to ensure that those commitments are met. It might seem like a cliched expression, but stating the obvious is somehow helpful in this place: young people are the future. We should be adequately funding, growing and adapting our education institutions to ensure that young Australians who aspire to reach a little higher through the Australian education system have the opportunity to do so. Increased cost of higher education will be unmanageable for many.

People are doing it tough when it comes to managing their household budget—faced with the rising cost of living and housing affordability pressures and when faced with underemployment and stagnated wage growth. Some of the most vulnerable people who are dealing with these pressures are doing it on a pension, a fixed income with no wriggle room. How is this government is taking care of them? The answer is that it's not. What it's doing instead is slashing the energy supplement from their pension and leaving a $14 hole in a pensioner's fortnightly pay. For many that will be a very difficult hole to fill. Fourteen dollars might not seem like much to those opposite, but it is when you're on a fixed income, when your pension is carefully budgeted to pay for essentials such as food, rent, heating and power. This burden should not be put on older people in our community. It will cause immeasurable stress on our elderly and vulnerable, and I for one take no comfort in their sacrifice to the big end of town's $80 billion tax handout.

But the vulnerable, regardless of where they are, are an easy target for some. This budget has extended the freeze in foreign aid funding, which is effectively another cut in funding, this time of $140 million, to some of the most desperate and poorest people in the world. Australia's overseas development assistance is at a record low, and the foreign minister has presided over more than $11 billion in cuts to date. The whole point of foreign aid, according to DFAT, is to promote our national interests by promoting prosperity, reducing poverty and enhancing stability, with a focus on our neighbourhood, but here we are as a country slashing our aid budget and undermining our role and responsibilities as a leader in our region.

In this budget, the government has given billions of dollars to those who do not need it, and those who need support most are paying for it. There is another way, a fairer way, of delivering a budget that Australia needs and deserves. Labor's approach to the budget is fair and responsible. It does not squeeze the most vulnerable to benefit the most well off. It is considered when it comes to budget repair. We'll deliver better funding for public hospitals, with every single public hospital benefitting from Labor's investment. Labor's $2.8 billion investment in hospitals will reverse the cruel cuts employed by this government. It will fund more beds, more services and more staff. Our plan will also deliver lower taxes for 10 million working Australians, and we'll also restore Sunday penalty rates. In fact, Labor's plan will see workers who earn up to $125,000 a year paying less tax than they would otherwise pay under this government, with more than four million people in this country getting a tax cut.

As I said before, Labor will abolish Prime Minister Turnbull's cap on university places, which denies disadvantaged students access to university. We introduced the demand driven funding system, a system which enabled more people to go to uni and that allowed an additional 190,000 students to get a place at one of the higher education institutions around this country. This is important when you consider that research tells us that by 2020—in only two years—two out of every three jobs created in this country will require a diploma or other higher education qualification. Investing in higher education place and young people's access to it is a smart thing to do and the right thing to do. We will also abolish upfront fees for 100,000 TAFE places in courses where Australia needs the skills. I would be more than happy to show Senator Birmingham, the supposed Minister for Education, around my local TAFE and show him firsthand what a vital institution it is and for him to meet with some young people engaged in vocational training. It might help open his eyes to the real world, where investment in vocational education delivers skilled workers. For that matter, I'd be very pleased to take him around a university as well.

Labor can deliver on our commitments because we put people ahead of big business and the banks and because that $80 billion of tax windfall to the top end of town can be much better used to deliver for more people in our country. We'll be guided by clear fiscal principles that repair the budget in a fair way. We will not ask the most vulnerable to carry the heaviest burden. Tough calls have been made on tax reform, but they are fair calls: negative gearing, capital gains tax, trusts, and dividend imputation refundability. We will close loopholes to those who need them least. Our plan is fairer and more responsible because we've made the big calls and we've got them right. (Time expired)

Andrew Broad (Mallee, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It gives me great pleasure to speak about the budget, because the budget is a very important part of governing. Ultimately, the first role of this government is the defence of the Australian people, to ensure that Australians are safe and that provision is made for our welfare. The next is to create an economy that rewards endeavour. You have to reward endeavour, because the government doesn't have any money; the government only has your money. We need to get that clear: we spend your money, and it needs to be spent responsibly. But we also, if we can, should give some back, because an economy has to create endeavour. Those who get out of bed earlier than others—those who take risks—ultimately need to get rewarded for that. If you fail to grasp that, you get to a point where you stifle the money that comes into this place and the country becomes poorer. Ultimately, a country is rich when its citizens are rich. I think that is the difference and the contrast between how we view a budget and how the Australian Labor Party views a budget. In this budget, we must make sure we look after those who can't look after themselves. We have a duty of care to our senior Australians. We have a duty of care to educate the future and to look after our children. We also have a duty of care to be a beacon to other countries in the world, and I will touch on Australian aid in this budget as well.

Let's just run through this: in 2007, the nation had no government debt, and now we have government debt of $349.9 billion. That is partly from the years of the Labor Party in power, but we have also run deficit budgets ourselves, so we need to look very clearly at that. This year the budget will have a deficit of $18.2 billion and next year a deficit of $14.5 billion, but by 2019-20 we will have a surplus budget of $2.2 billion. I need to make it very clear for those who might be listening that a surplus budget does not mean we no longer have debt. A surplus budget simply means that we have spent less money than we have received, and that then affords us the opportunity to start to pay down debt. We have a long way to go. In 2020-21 we will have an $11 billion surplus, and in 2021-22 there is a projected surplus of $16.6 billion. But that is still only chipping away at the debt.

But I think there are some very good things in this budget contained in the Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2018-2019, and it's about investing in growth and investing in incentives. I want to just touch on the $530 tax rebate for the people who live in my patch. Seventy-three per cent of the people who live in my patch earn under $87,000. The electorate of Mallee is not an electorate made up of people who are very rich. We're not an inner city Sydney or a Brighton or some of those suburbs in Melbourne, but we are very fair and decent people. So we will be quite appreciative of this tax cut.

I noticed that someone put on my Facebook, 'You can keep my $10, and that should go to health and education.' I replied very quickly that I can give you some schools and some hospitals in my patch that would happily take his donation of $530. He didn't reply, and I put that challenge out there. But can I say that that does create incentive, and $530 for those people in that year will be spinning through our local economy. They will spend it on essential things. That's a family trip to the pool. That's a little camping trip on the Murray, a great place. Spinning money through our economy is very important to our country towns. We have over 17,000 small businesses in the electorate of Mallee, and they will benefit from the $20,000 instant tax write-off. There are things that you can deduct instantly to make your business grow. I think that's been very welcome.

One of the things I'm particularly proud of in this budget is addressing health concerns. Unfortunately, we have a shortage of general practitioners in my patch. If you're a general practitioner who has tuned in on the radio, listening to the great debate in parliament, because that's what a good general practitioner should do, can I just say that there are very welcoming people in my patch who would love to have you. Part of this budget is that we have invested $550 million into a stronger rural health strategy. This means that GPs will be able to train in a regional area from start to finish. More than that, there's going to be the opportunity for a graduate who practices in a rural area to have a Medicare provider number, so they will be able to practice. Also, there will be support around graduate positions. What was happening was that people would train in the regions but then have to go to the city for those graduate years, and somehow the attraction of the great lights of the city—whether they fell in love or enjoyed the coffee—meant they didn't come back. Just on that, I might point out that Mildura was the second city in Victoria to get a barista, so if you want good coffee as a GP, you can get it in our part of the world.

There's been some good money put aside for regional development, with round 3 of the Building Better Regions Fund. This is the fund that in our patch has built the Swan Hill saleyards upgrade; the Horsham North Children's Hub; some facilities around recreational lakes, like Tchum Lake, Watchem Lake, Wooroonook Lake; the Mildura runway upgrade; and, recently, the Mallee Accommodation and Support Program facilities, which got $2.4 million, for which I did a sod turning the other day. Having that fund so that councils and communities can work with me to try and tender for it has also been welcome.

I am very pleased to see more money for education in our patch. There are 119 schools in the electorate of Mallee, and every one of those schools gets more. One of the things I've been advocating for, surprisingly, more than anything in the lead-up to the budget, was the school chaplaincy program. Because some of my country schools are reasonably small country schools, they wouldn't have an opportunity to have a school counsellor or wouldn't be able to afford a school counsellor. I was very pleased to see that the National School Chaplaincy Program of $247 million over the forward estimates has been committed. When I started as a member of parliament five years ago I was pulled aside by a young lady, who was 17, and her dad. They said they were in Swan Hill and that there were no mental health support services at all for her when she was going through a difficult time. We now have three headspaces in the electorate of Mallee, in Mildura, Swan Hill and Horsham, combined with the school chaplaincy programs. So they have that initial point of contact within the school network and can be directed to headspace for more clinical support. It makes me very pleased that we are addressing the needs of youth mental health in the great electorate of Mallee.

We have massive infrastructure needs in our patch. One of the great things I've got to say about my electorate is that we are a net contributor to the Australian economy, with $5.3 billion annually of agricultural product being produced—not bad—with only 140,000 residents of Australia. But those things have to be carted on rail or on roads. I was pleased to see that the federal budget continues to fund the Murray Basin Rail Project, with a $440 million upgrade. We are now seeing upgrades on our roads. Of course, something I'd like to see more of, frankly, is Roads to Recovery. There is no point producing something on a farm and not being able to get that onto a national road. You still need to be able to get that 60-tonne B-double down that dirt country road to get the product to the market. I think we should be doing more, and we should continue a higher allocation of that.

One of the things that is also very relevant to the people in my patch is funding for pensioners. Now, I'm going to touch on this a little bit. There are 20,234 pensioners in the electorate of Mallee. Whilst I was pleased to see that a pensioner can earn $300 per fortnight without it upsetting their pension payments, I would have liked to have seen that able to be accumulated in a lump sum and then averaged across a year. I will explain why this is. Three hundred dollars per fortnight is $7,800 over a 12-month period.

Increasingly, many of our senior Australians are going to be an important aspect of filling the labour shortage, particularly in a horticultural region. I was at Boundary Bend Olives the other day, and they were picking their olive harvest. They were employing 130 people for about an eight-week period. They have people who tend to be grey nomads who come in and work. Once they've worked the harvest, they will go up to Queensland and spend the money there, or maybe they'll even go down to Tasmania and spend the money down there, which would make some members in this place very happy—or even across to South Australia, if they're really scraping the barrel for places they might go to visit!

We should be empowering them to do that seasonal work. Rather than making it just $300 per fortnight, it makes sense that they could accumulate $7,800—so work a vintage, work a season in horticulture or work somewhere—and then go away and take their holidays, and they will largely spend that money locally. So, whilst I'm very pleased to see that our pensioners can earn a little bit more without it upsetting their pension, I would like that to be able to be accumulated and then averaged over a 12-month period both to provide an incentive for our workforce in our horticultural industry and to create more flexibility for our senior Australians who choose to do something in the workforce. I've got to say: pensioners have a lot of skills. We should empower them. They've still got a lot to offer Australia.

One thing I think we need to look at very seriously in a welfare payment—and it concerns me a great deal—is the impacts on single pensioners. If you are two pensioners living in a household, by the time you pay your rates and by the time you pay your power bill, you can get through. It's not a rich, vibrant living, but you can get through. But what happens when one of those pensioners passes away? The rates still need to be paid. The power bill still needs to be paid. I think that, if there's one thing in the welfare budget that we should look at some increases in, it should be that single widow pension. I think that would be a very interesting and compassionate response, particularly when people find themselves in those hardships, and in the light of the expenses of daily living.

I was very pleased to see $51.3 million put aside for agricultural counsellors. It's one thing to have a free trade agreement, but a free trade agreement simply opens an opportunity. There's no point having an opportunity unless you can turn an opportunity into a reality. A lot of our producers produce very, very good product. In my patch, there is really nothing you can eat that isn't grown in the Mallee, be it table grapes, be it carrots—25 per cent of Australia's carrots—or be it citrus. I was told once that the only thing you can't catch in the Mallee is a Murray cod, because technically it's on the South Australian side once you get on the water, and all that water is making its good way down to South Australia to be used effectively there as well. You've got to be able to turn those opportunities into reality, and the additional $51.3 million to do that is very welcome.

As well, something that, whilst not in the budget, slipped through the radar for many people is the unlocking of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan that came with the SDLs. I'll explain why this is relevant to my patch. One of the great lessons we've learnt out of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan is that you can achieve good environmental outcomes with the investment of some pumps, some dams, some risers and a culvert here or there. People may not have realised this, but there will be $300 million worth of investment—think about that: $300 million worth of investment—in the electorate of Mallee to deliver seven environmental water projects, and they have to be built by 2024. Whilst the budget was going on here, in the other chamber over there they were passing the SDLs. This will achieve better management of our water as well as unleashing quite a substantial amount of infrastructure that has to take place in my patch.

One of the other great things in the budget, which is a small thing, which appeals to me as an aviator as well as a farmer, was $260 million for the GPS satellite based augmentation strategy. For people who don't understand what that is—I first saw this in Canada—essentially you can have inter-row sowing and GPS technology. Instead of it taking five metres, it will get it down to 10 centimetres, so the accuracy is substantially improved. There's also a big advantage for aviators—and I am one—in being able to do GPS approaches to airports.

There are a lot of good things in this budget. There are a lot of things to be proud of. There are things that we can do better, and we should always have that robust debate. I do not hold the view that everything we do on our side of the parliament is perfect and everything the other side does is wrong and evil, or vice versa, but we need to ensure that we spend Australians' money wisely, create incentive and look after those who can't look after themselves. I think this is a very fair and reasonable budget.

Brian Mitchell (Lyons, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I often end up following the member for Mallee's speeches for some reason. He's a good speaker and I do enjoy listening to his contributions. I'd like to say a couple of things, if you don't mind, Deputy Speaker, following his contribution. He mentioned the instant asset write-off. I'm very proud that the government had included this. I would remind him that in 2013, when the coalition came to government, they axed the instant asset write-off that was in place under Labor. They killed it stone dead, much to my disappointment. So I was very pleased to see it return, member for Mallee. It was a good decision and one that Labor has been backing all the way through. He made mention of the Building Better Regions Fund and round 3. I'm very disappointed that in Tasmania we've seen very little of this money. I look forward to perhaps seeing a little more of it. Maybe they'll open it up in time for the Braddon by-election and we'll see some rolling in.

Andrew Broad (Mallee, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Heaven forbid!

Brian Mitchell (Lyons, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, heaven forbid! We heard the Prime Minister today talk about the supposed falsehood of education cuts. We all know that schools had funding budgeted to them. It was in the budget papers in black and white. A certain figure was in the budget papers a couple of years ago and that figure was cut. So it's good to see that funding in total is now on the increase, but that's from a low base—a base that's already been cut. There'd be a lot more money for schools in your electorate, member for Mallee, if those cuts had not been made by this Treasurer.

I come to the budget. Two weeks ago, we listened as a Liberal Treasurer handed down a Liberal budget that again failed the fairness test. There was a $17 billion handout for big banks while cutting $17 billion from schools. What illustrates a budget that's unfair better than that? Here we have banks before a royal commission admitting to things like forging signatures, charging dead people fees and charging for services that were not delivered. So here we have the banks admitting to all of these things and this government's tough action for those crimes is to give them $17 billion in tax breaks. A round of applause for the tough action of this government! There was a $17 billion handout for banks while cutting $17 billion from schools. New aged-care packages are paid for by stripping the residential aged-care places. There is not one extra dollar for aged care; just a shuffling of the deck. There is a $270 million cut for TAFE. What a great way to train Aussie kids for jobs of the future: cutting their pathways to that future by cutting TAFE and training on top of the government's entire axing of the trade training centre program when it first came to government in 2013! I think that was one of the most scandalous decisions of this government. Those trade training centres were a project of the former Prime Minister, John Howard. I would have thought the Liberals would have been proud of that program. Labor liked that program and we kept it in place when we were in government. It worked. It gave kids who wanted to train for the future a place to gain skills, and one of the very first acts of the Liberals upon coming to power was to axe trade training centres. That cut, the cuts to TAFE and the drop in apprenticeships of 130,000 over the last five years all add up to a government that is not looking after the interests of young people. Thank you, Member for Mallee!

The government will make a $127 million cut to the ABC, all because this organisation dares to report news that this government doesn't like and airs opinions this government doesn't agree with. There's no reason I can think of as to why this government would be cutting that sort of money from the ABC other than just sheer malice against the national broadcaster. They might think they're being a bit smart in doing it, but we're talking about a funding cut that will result in less money for children's broadcasting, less money for drama production, less money for news and current affairs and, as far as I'm concerned, less money for regional and rural reporting. The ABC does a wonderful job in the regions in bringing the stories of country Australia to the rest of Australia, and that will all be put at risk because of this government's petty vindictiveness. The list goes on.

The big shining light of this budget, apparently, is a $10 a week, or about $540 a year, tax cut for working Australians. That's lorded as the government's major achievement of this budget—a 10-bucks-a-week tax cut. But they keep quiet about the more than $7,000 a year that they plan to give back to high-income earners, like every member in this place, bank executives, lawyers and highly paid surgeons. Anybody on more than $200,000 a year, by the time this government's tax program gets through the parliament, if it gets through the parliament, will be getting $7,000 a year back in tax breaks, when ordinary workers will get back just over $500. What an absolute disgrace when it comes to fairness. Australians expect better than this second-rate attempt to copy the failed trickle-down economic model that has wreaked absolute havoc across the once mighty American middle class. Trickle-down has been in place in America for the last 30 or 40 years, since Reagan. Kansas tried to take it even further; they've doubled back. I see the member for Brisbane having a bit of a chuckle—he's a member of the IPA brigade, I believe, or the retailers.

Ms Flint interjecting—

Sorry, the IPA brigade is over there—the member for Boothby.

Nicolle Flint (Boothby, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We know you're Labor. You don't believe in freedom.

Brian Mitchell (Lyons, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I don't believe in trickle-down, Member for Boothby. Trickle-down is a failed experiment. They've had it in place in America for 40 years. It has absolutely failed. You've got a widening gap of income in America. The once mighty middle class in America that everybody aspired to—the great American middle class; the great American dream—has gone. People are casualised and contracted out. There are low wages. You've got the wealthy getting wealthier, rich beyond comprehension, whereas everybody else is living in their car. There was a woman living in her car doing three jobs at, I think, a doughnut shop and other franchises. She died in her car because she was living in her car between shifts instead of being able to go home. This is the reality of trickle-down economics in America and this is the future that we can expect in Australia if those failed policies gain a bigger foothold here than they have already.

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Minister for Urban Infrastructure and Cities) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Why don't you find another rhetorical straw man to attack?

Brian Mitchell (Lyons, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I wouldn't speak of straw men, Minister.

Mr Fletcher interjecting—

The straw man is a character without a brain, Minister—I'd be careful there! Trickle-down economics is a model that makes those with money even richer but leaves those without even further behind. So Labor absolutely rejects trickle-down. We reject it completely. What we believe in—

Mr Fletcher interjecting—

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

Order!

Brian Mitchell (Lyons, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The pink and grey galah is having a bit of a squawk down there at the dispatch box, so I'd ask him to pipe down.

We believe in trickle-up. We know that the best growth comes from feeding the roots, not the leaves. You don't spray the leaves; you feed the roots. You provide strong foundations to an economy—strong foundations in health, education, infrastructure and community services. You feed the grassroots. You feed the people. You feed the masses at the bottom. You don't feed the top; they're getting enough. You feed the bottom. You provide strong foundations in all of these services.

Yet this Liberal budget, like all Liberal budgets before it, fails this test. It's all about the top end of town, and that does not help the people of my electorate. The medium household income in Lyons is $981 per week. That's less than both the Australian average and the Tasmanian average. People in my electorate are not wealthy. It doesn't mean they don't work hard. They do. And it doesn't mean they don't deserve respect. But this government believes that, for a $10 tax cut, the people of my electorate will forget about the health and hospital cuts, they'll forget about the cuts to schools, TAFEs, trade centres and universities, they'll forget about the cuts to pensions and the robo-debt scandal, and they'll forget about the second-rate NBN. Well, the people of my electorate are smarter than that. They won't forget about these cuts and the difficulties that this government has placed upon them.

We all know this is a government that can't be trusted. It says it will build a new $461 million bridge in Bridgewater in my electorate. But a detailed look at the budget pages shows a glaring hole in the budget allocations. Just $25 million is earmarked in the forward estimates. Now $25 million is a lot of money, but it's not going to build a bridge. There is no time frame and no detail. It is a promise from a government that also promised no cuts to health, no cuts to education, no cuts to pensions, no cuts to the ABC and then cut the lot of them. It provides little comfort to the people of my electorate that this is a government that cannot be trusted.

This budget shows just how much disregard this government has for rural and regional communities and people by failing to commit to new rounds of the Mobile Black Spot Program.

Mr Fletcher interjecting—

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

Order! The member for Lyons has the call.

Brian Mitchell (Lyons, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's alright, Mr Deputy Speaker Vasta, I appreciate the protection but I don't require it. The chicken hawk can continue squawking. The pink-and-grey galah down there can keep going and squawk all he likes.

Connectivity is vital in a regional electorate that's prone to bushfire. It can mean the difference between life and death. But this budget ends mobile black spot funding at the end of the next financial year. As those opposite always like to remind us, mobile black spot funding was one of their initiatives. It was a good one; they should have kept it. It ends next year, a decision condemned not only by members on this side of the House but, I would certainly hope, by regional members on the opposite side. It was a short-sighted, stupid decision. When you consider that there is $80 billion to give to corporations and banks but not even a few million to address critical communications gaps in our regions, you really do have to wonder about the priorities of this government when it comes to regional Australia.

This budget is an affront to Australians everywhere. It's only Labor that will provide a budget that is responsible and gives Australians a fair go. Labor has a plan to deliver lower taxes for 10 million Australians. Under its plan, every Australian earning up to $125,000 a year will pay less tax. In my electorate of Lyons, 90 per cent of workers earn less than $90,000 a year. Labor's plan has real benefits for every single one of those people, and every single one of them will be better off under Labor's plan than under the coalition's plan. Only Labor's plan also results in better-funded schools and universities and a better-resourced TAFE, providing people, including our young people, with the knowledge, skills and training they need to reach their goals and enter the careers and industries they want to.

Only Labor reverses this government's billion-dollar cuts to health and hospitals, creating better systems across the country that are able to accommodate demand and minimise waiting lists. It's no secret that the Tasmanian health system, under the Liberal government in Tasmania, is one of the worst in the country, with appalling outcomes, ambulance ramping and long waiting times for surgery. You name it, it's behind on every measure. It is poorly resourced an unable to meet the needs of the community. Tasmania's health system needs national support. It's not going to come from this government, but it will come from Labor. Labor has made that commitment. For too long, Tasmania has been neglected by this Liberal government. Tasmania has been ignored for the past five years. It's clear that this government thinks it can buy back support with a $10-a-week tax cut and vague promises of infrastructure that will be given at some undetermined time in the future. But Tasmania will not forgive or forget this government's arrogance, nor will Tasmanians tolerate this government's pandering to the Prime Minister's big business and big bank mates. Tasmanians will not respond well to the government's habit of abandoning rural and regional communities when they need assistance most.

We had a speech in the Federation Chamber earlier today on the member for Grey's motion on suicide prevention trials—which has bipartisan support, I must say. The glaring fact out of that speech and that motion was that rural and regional communities suffer with that issue. It's rural and regional communities that need support. It is rural and regional communities that are left behind under this government's budget. We need to do better, and only Labor will do better.

Lucy Wicks (Robertson, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2018-2019 and the other appropriations bills before the House and commend the work of the Treasurer in particular for his work on this budget. This is a budget that is good for my electorate on the Central Coast and is good for Australia. In my time today I'd like to talk about five local examples of why this is the case. Firstly, we're delivering safer communities in places like McEvoy Oval at Umina Beach. Secondly, we're backing small businesses like Six String Brewing at Erina. Thirdly, older Australians are being supported while also being protected from Labor's retiree tax. Fourthly, we're seeing tax cuts for almost 60,000 low- and middle-income earners in Robertson while guaranteeing the essentials like Medicare. Finally, we're delivering infrastructure that our region needs, like better local roads and infrastructure that rejuvenates Gosford and our region, such as the performing arts and conference centre.

I'm starting with safety and security, because I know that for many people of all ages this is their No. 1 concern. Last week we were joined by the Minister for Home Affairs, the member for Dickson, who met with local residents at Ettalong Beach, and then a couple of days later by the Assistant Minister for Home Affairs, the member for Mitchell, who made a significant announcement at Umina Beach. I thank both of them for joining me on the peninsula, because this was a week when we took another step forward in uniting with our community against crime, vandalism and antisocial behaviour.

At Umina Beach, we gathered at the fabulous Jasmine Greens Park Kiosk to announce new funding from the government's Safer Communities Fund for CCTV cameras to keep our region safe. The cameras will be located at the Peninsula Recreation Precinct, where the cafe is located, at McEvoy Oval at Umina Beach, at the San Remo BMX park and at Banjo's Skate Park in Terrigal, where construction is underway. The funding boost was welcomed by local community leaders who came with us to hear the news firsthand over a coffee and some beautiful food prepared by Gabby Greyem, including Rod Unsworth and Mark Nitsos from the Umina Community Group, Stuart Field and his son Ronan from Woy Woy Peninsula Little Athletics—one of the groups who use McEvoy Oval—Matt Sawyer from the Peninsula Touch Association, Matt Cooper and Senior Constable Paul Scollon from Umina Beach PCYC, Central Coast councillor and advocate Jilly Pilon—who was also there to speak about Banjo's Skate Park—and Detective Inspector John Zdrilic from the Brisbane Water police district in the New South Wales Police Force. Of course, we were hosted by Gabby Greyem from Jasmine Greens, who really has been a tireless community advocate, particularly on this issue.

Police tell us how CCTV cameras are an effective crime prevention measure, a valuable investigative tool and a deterrent to antisocial behaviour. McEvoy Oval, a local community hub as well as a sports field, will be covered, and it will help to protect the new amenities block, which was recently opened thanks to funding from all three levels of government and the local clubs themselves. The driving force behind that project was Kylie Brown from Woy Woy Peninsula Little Athletics Club, who told us that the club facilities at McEvoy Oval are often targeted, sadly, by vandals with graffiti, including just a few days ago, and in fact goods were stolen from the sporting clubs, resulting in a flow-on cost to the community to repair that damage. So Kylie said that this CCTV funding is most welcome at such a pivotal time for the club.

The funding is being committed under round 2 of the coalition's Safer Communities Fund, and I'm advised that the budget also allows for a third round of funding, which we are already starting to plan for and will no doubt advocate for. Keeping our communities safe also benefits small businesses, and there's great news in this budget for them too. Our economic plan has delivered more than one million jobs into the Australian economy over the last five years, which is of great benefit to so many households and businesses. Parts of our ongoing plan are our small- and medium-business tax cuts, which will help more than 15,000 local businesses with turnovers of up to $50 million if they're incorporated and up to $5 million if they're unincorporated as they look to invest, employ and pay their workers more.

This budget also extends the popular instant asset write-off for small businesses for a further 12 months. Small businesses with turnovers of up to $10 million can benefit from writing off assets costing less than $20,000, and I'm advised that well over a thousand local businesses in my electorate have already taken advantage of this great initiative.

But, ultimately, it's not the government that creates jobs; it's business, which is why we need to listen to industries who have specific needs so that they can continue to grow. One of these industries is craft brewers, many of which are Australian owned, such as Six String Brewing in Erina and Block 'n Tackle in Kincumber. This budget means that craft brewers and distillers will no longer pay additional tax, allowing them to compete on fairer terms with large beverage companies. As part of our commitment, the government will increase the amount beverage companies can claim back on their excise and extend the concessional draft beer excise rate to smaller kegs like the sizes typically used by craft brewers.

To find out exactly how our local brewers would benefit, we went down to Six String on a Friday afternoon for a drink and a chat with Chris Benson and Ryan Harris, owners of Six String, along with Chris's wife, Sharon. Chris told me the announcement was a much-needed recognition for independent breweries as an emerging industry with different needs from the bigger beer companies. As the owner of a small business, Chris said this tax cut will make Six String more flexible, with increased cash flow allowing them to expand, employ more staff and invest in things such as larger tanks to increase the capacity of the brewery itself. It will open the doer to new local products. They've got a number of new beers, such as the delicious and inventive chai latte beer, and it's expected to lead to a downward pressure on beer prices. Nationally, there are around 380 craft breweries in Australia, employing the equivalent of almost 2,400 people, and I commend this budget for backing small businesses like these.

Building a strong economy also means we can keep supporting older Australians and guaranteeing the essentials like Medicare. My electorate has almost 31,000 people over the age of 65, and in this budget we made some important announcements providing more choice so they can live healthier, more independent and safer lives. This includes more financial security by increasing the pension work bonus, expanding the Pension Loans Scheme and delivering relevant skills and training advice to help workers build their careers or transition to jobs in new industries. We're also offering more choice, with 14,000 additional high-level home-care places by 2021-22, adding to the 6,000 places provided since last year's budget.

The budget also guarantees the funding of the National Disability Insurance Scheme, which is a major breakthrough so that Australians with a permanent significant disability receive the best care we can provide. It's important for my electorate on the Central Coast, where, once it's fully rolled out, it will directly help almost 3,000 people and their families.

There's also a strong focus on health in this budget. To begin with, hospitals will receive record funding. Under our new agreement, New South Wales public hospitals will receive over $39.5 billion over the five years to 2024-25, delivering an additional $8.9 billion in funding the compared to the previous five years—up 29 per cent. Medicare, medicines and mental health are also getting a boost, including through the legislated Medicare Guarantee Fund, meaning we can help people to access life-saving medicines for breast cancer and spinal muscular atrophy. I've already spoken with the Minister for Health about the wonderful $1.3 billion National Health and Medical Industry Growth Plan, which will transform and save lives through world-leading medical developments as well as create tens of thousands of new jobs. This includes $500 million for the Genomics Health Futures Mission, which will help Australians live longer and receive better treatment personalised to their medical needs.

This funding boost comes at a really ideal time for the Central Coast where we're seeing an exciting transformation in Gosford with the arrival of the new medical school and research institute on the grounds of the newly upgraded Gosford Hospital. This is a game changer for our region: an $85 million project funded across this government, the New South Wales government and the University of Newcastle. As well as providing a university presence in Gosford and all the jobs and opportunities that will bring, we will also have links with the University of Newcastle's global advisory board, which has connections with the great universities of the world, like Cambridge and New York. It will be a centre of excellence in medical teaching and an international hub for integrated healthcare research and innovation. A collaborative task force has already been working behind the scenes on how the medical school and research institute can be the catalyst for even more jobs, growth and opportunities, including by potentially attracting major corporations to choose Gosford as their base.

As my team and I were meeting with local families across Saratoga and Davistown on Saturday, many people were pleased to hear about this project and some, like Edith on Davistown Road, were also concerned about what we are doing for young people. So I'm pleased to see this budget delivers $110 million in additional investment in child and youth mental health services, with a focus on providing mental health services to children within the school setting. There's also $338 million in new mental health funding with a focus on suicide prevention, research and older Australians. An additional one million people will receive diagnosis, treatment and recovery through a new Million Minds Mission in mental health research with funding of $125 million over the next decade.

For those who need to see a GP without worrying about their hip pocket, the number of GP services that are bulk billed continues to rise, with figures from the July to March period of around 648,000. This is an increase of more than 111,000 since Labor were last in government, with the total percentage of GP bulk billing services sitting at 86.6 per cent, which is up three per cent since the coalition was elected. We will also guarantee the essentials when it comes to schools funding, with government and independent schools funding in my electorate rising by $43.4 million when comparing this school year to the 2027 school year. The Catholic school system across Australia also receives a boost. Funding growth for Catholic schools will be $2.93 billion from now to 2027, a growth of 46.3 per cent. And children of preschool age will benefit from a multimillion-dollar preschool funding boost, which, in my electorate, will mean over 2,000 children will be able to access 15 hours of quality early learning in the year before school.

But families are also concerned about the cost of living and that is why a central part of this budget is tax relief, with a focus on low- and middle-income earners, particularly on the Central Coast. Almost 60,000 taxpayers in the Robertson electorate alone will receive an offset of up to $530 a year under our plan to reduce cost pressures on household budgets. For example, a high school teacher earning $75,000 will have an extra $530 in their pocket from the budget year onwards, with an extra $3,740 in their pocket over the first seven years of the tax plan. A shop assistant in Erina on $45,000 will have an extra $440 in their pocket from the budget year onwards, with an extra $3,380 in their pocket over the first seven years of the tax plan as the tax relief increases. We are also lifting tax brackets to ensure wages don't get eaten by higher taxes and to ensure the government lives within its means. What this translates to is a forecast return to a modest budget balance in 2019-20, increasing to a projected surplus of $11 billion in 2020-21, meaning we will no longer be borrowing to pay for essential services.

Finally, this budget helps deliver the infrastructure that the Central Coast deserves by confirming funding for major projects. We are investing $10 million to help Gosford's long-awaited world-class regional performing arts and conference centre on the site of the former Broadwater Hotel on Mann Street, which will fulfil a decades old dream of our community. The government has invested $7 million towards projects that rejuvenate Gosford such as the regional library learning hub. We are also delivering on our commitment to 600 new jobs in the nearby ATO building. The Somersby Industrial Estate, Banjo's skate park and Terrigal Trojans House upgrade were all confirmed in the budget, along with roads funding for the Central Coast Council through the Roads to Recovery Program election commitments such as the upgrade of Oceana Street at Copacabana. Other road commitments are either already completed or well under way, such as the roundabout on the intersection of Langford Drive and Woy Woy Road in Kariong and Ryans Road at Umina Beach.

Thousands of hardworking local commuters are also benefitting from our commitments, which I'll shortly speak about in more detail elsewhere in the House today. This includes NorthConnex—the M1, M2 missing link—plus our commitment to continuous mobile coverage on trains with Wi-Fi at train stations. These commitments are on track, along with funding from the New South Wales government business case to investigate faster rail options between Sydney and Newcastle.

I strongly commend this budget and these appropriation bills to the House. I do so because of all the reasons outlined today but also because of people like Meredith, from Daleys Point, who wrote to me to say thank you. She said she was so glad there is better help for older people still needing to work. She made particular mention of the Treasurer, who said that, ultimately, it is not the government's money to spend but belongs to the hard-working people of Australia. On a personal note Meredith said, 'Thank you for your kind birthday wishes and birthday card.' Meredith, I hope you had a very happy birthday and that you can plan for even more birthdays in the future with even greater confidence under this government. I commend these bills to the House.

Matt Keogh (Burt, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Back in 2005, prior to the global financial crisis, the member for Wentworth, as a backbencher, commissioned a paper on tax reform entitled Taxation Reform in Australia: Some Alternatives and Indicative Costings. The paper advocated for lower tax rates and a simplified system—in particular, a flatter tax structure. Thirteen years later, after the GFC, the now Prime Minister is finally trying to bring his wishes for a flatter income tax structure to fruition. The paper also noted that arguments for taxing capital gains at the same rate as income are compelling ones. To simplify the argument back in 2005: if you try to tax higher income earners too much, they will be pushed into tax minimisation strategies such as negative gearing and taking full advantage of the capital gains tax discount. Such discounts should be removed, the paper advocated.

So it appears that Prime Minister Turnbull should really be supporting Labor's proposed changes in those areas. Instead, this budget looks after big business at the expense of people who work and struggle. Australians earning as much as $200,000 will be subject to the same tax rate as those earning as little as $41,000 under the tax plan put forward by Scott Morrison to flatten Australia's taxation system, previously known as a progressive taxation system.

Budget tax cuts through to 2024 and 2025 will be less progressive than in our current system and will only help the rich get richer. The promise of income tax cuts worth $140 billion would, as the member for Wentworth's 2005 paper noted, bring the vast majority of working Australians into the same tax bracket, meaning that high-income earners would contribute a much smaller proportion of overall tax revenue than they currently do. In two elections time, the government proposes a shift towards this flat tax system, where the current 37 per cent tax bracket would be axed and workers on incomes between $41,000 and $200,000 would be taxed at the same marginal rate—quite a boon if you are a high-income earner.

In the electorate of Burt, the average income earner is on around $60,000 a year. How on earth is it fair for a construction worker on $60,000 a year to pay the same tax rate as a CEO or a lawyer who is earning $200,000 a year? How can it be fair that, under this tax experiment being put forward by the government, the lawyer or accountant, earning more than three times as much as a construction worker, gets a tax cut that is more than three times as big? In fact, The West Australian newspaper crunched the numbers on Mr Turnbull's unfair tax plan and found that those living in the leafy western suburbs of Perth would pocket an income tax cut of, on average, 11½ times the size of the cut that workers in the suburbs of Gosnells and Armadale, in my electorate, will be receiving. How is 60 per cent of the tax cuts ending up in the pockets of the top 20 per cent of households fair?

The Liberals say they want to deliver tax relief for low- and middle-income Australians. But their income tax plan is holding people hostage for tax cuts. If they really cared about low- to middle-income earners, they would split their proposals so that those that come into effect from 1 July could be supported but those that will only provide a benefit for high-income earners could be avoided. Instead, it seems that this government only cares about the top end of town.

It's interesting, though, to note that the International Monetary Fund says that taxing the super-rich will help reduce inequality without having an adverse impact on growth. The head of the IMF's fiscal affairs unit said that the average top income rate for the rich country members of the OECD—that includes Australia—had fallen by nearly 30 per cent since 1981. If that had occurred for ordinary income earners in Australia, they'd now pay no tax at all. He said there was scope for a more progressive system to tax the rich at higher rates in an effort to redistribute income to those who are less well off.

Meanwhile, this government's budget seeks to do exactly the opposite. The government has not only failed the fairness test set by Labor and, more importantly, by the community; it's also failed the fiscal responsibility test that it set for itself. Net debt for this coming year is double what it was when the Liberals came to office, while gross debt will remain well above half a trillion dollars for each year for the next decade. Both types of debt are growing faster under this government than under the previous government, and the previous government had to contend with the GFC.

Labor's approach to the budget for this nation is fairer for middle Australia and the most vulnerable people in our community, and it's more responsible when it comes to budget repair. Labor would deliver lower taxes for 10 million working Australians. Labor's plan will see those earning up to $125,000 a year still paying less tax than they would under the Liberals. Indeed, under Labor's plan, four million working Australians would receive nearly double the tax cut that they would under this Liberal government.

But the unfairness of the budget doesn't stop at its approach to income tax. This budget raises questions about how committed this Liberal government is to helping Western Australia with its financial woes, with the Turnbull government, over the term of this budget, halving its infrastructure spend for Western Australia. The budget papers also reveal that the only money that the Prime Minister and the Treasurer will provide Western Australia to help with its low allocation of GST is $189 million in this current financial year. There is no extra money to be provided in the budget year or in any of the forward estimates after that. Under the Liberal budget, WA is set to receive only the equivalent of a 50c GST share.

Even the infrastructure funding for Western Australia that the Prime Minister came to announce pre budget is a hoax. It was stated that Western Australia would be receiving an infrastructure spend of $3.2 billion. But then, once we saw the budget delivered and we got into the detail of the budget papers, it shows not only that actually there is no new infrastructure money in this budget but also that, over the period of the budget, the infrastructure spend is only down at $1.2 billion.

This compares to Labor's commitment of a $1.6 billion WA fair share fund, which will provide Western Australia with the equivalent of 70c in the dollar GST. Maybe it's this contrast that explains why the government is hiding the recently delivered Productivity Commission report on GST distribution—and only the Liberals are hiding from the people of Western Australia. Not only are they hiding this Productivity Commission report but they're running away from the by-elections to be held in Perth and Fremantle.

Now, everyone can see that this government is about mates rates on tax, helping those who earn the most, handing $80 billion to the biggest businesses and the banks, as well as its ongoing protection racket for the banks, trying to avoid a royal commission and then, as we've seen in the budget, defunding ASIC and defunding the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions. It's no wonder that this Liberal government is cutting and running.

Only Labor is committed to delivering a fair go for Western Australia by delivering the infrastructure, health and education funding that WA needs, as well as providing actually budgeted GST assistance. Only Labor is committed to delivering lower taxes that are fair for millions of working Australians. Labor's approach to the budget is fairer for middle Australia and for the most vulnerable in our community and more responsible when it comes to budget repair. We will deliver extra funding for public hospitals. We'll deliver 20 new MRI machines for regional centres and outer suburbs. We'll abolish Mr Turnbull's cap on university places, and we'll abolish up-front fees for 100,000 TAFE places, to help Australians build their skills. Bear that in contrast to the $270 million cut in funding for TAFE under this government's budget. Labor can deliver on these commitments because, unlike this government, we won't be giving away $80 billion in tax cuts to big business and the banks.

Under a Shorten Labor government, we will achieve a budget coming back into balance in the same year as the government. We'll deliver a bigger cumulative budget surplus over the forward estimates, as well as substantially bigger surpluses over the 10-year medium term, and we'll put the majority of the savings raised from our revenue measures over the medium term towards budget repair and paying down debt. A Shorten Labor government will also be guided by clear fiscal principles, including repairing the budget in a fair way that doesn't ask the most vulnerable Australians to carry the heaviest burden. We will more than offset new spending with our savings and revenue improvements. This is in stark contrast to the approach of this government. We will be able to bank changes in receipts and payments from changes in the economy, and this will be seen in a positive bottom line for our budget—something this government has never seen—because Labor has made the tough calls, tough calls that this government has decided to try and pay us out on, on things like negative gearing, capital gains tax, looking at how income is split through trusts and, of course, the dividend imputation refund. By closing these loopholes, we will be able to make sure that we're able to provide the essential services that all Australians need.

Our plan is fairer and more responsible because it makes sure that those that are most vulnerable in our community are looked after, and it makes sure that we get budget repair done in a fair way. We're able to do that because we've made the big calls and we've got them right. We will of course support supply, but once again we see in this budget the stark contrast between Labor's fair approach and this government's mean, arrogant, out-of-touch, wrong priorities. Let's hope that this budget is their last.

George Christensen (Dawson, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2018-2019 and the related appropriations bills. I note that these bills demonstrate the benefits of the sound economic management that we've seen once again from the Liberal-National government. The benefit of focusing on jobs and growth flows through to everyone in Australia, most obviously to those who directly benefit from the jobs this government is helping to create—a record number of jobs, I've got to say; one million jobs since Labor left government.

Having more people than ever in jobs means that there's less pressure on the welfare budget. Having more people than ever in jobs means that there's greater tax revenue to facilitate the things that we all need and want. A stronger economy means that we can spend more on health care. A stronger economy means that we can invest more in education. A stronger economy means that we can start paying down the debt that Labor left behind. A stronger economy also means that families can start keeping more of their own money. We recognise on this side of the House that tax cuts are not a handout. When Labor spruiks handouts and giving away money, they fail to acknowledge that it was their money in the first place. Taxing someone less is not giving them money; it is letting them keep more of their own money, and that is exactly what this government is doing.

The federal budget that the Treasurer brought down earlier this month recognises that cost of living is a major issue for most families, especially those on low to middle incomes. By giving back in lump sum up to $530 each to those low- and middle-income earners, this government will immediately ease cost-of-living pressures. Our tax relief will make it easier for families to pay their electricity bills. It will make it easier for a family to pay their car registration or their council rates bill. A stronger economy also enables investment in major infrastructure projects, which in turn creates jobs as well. A stronger economy also enables investment in our communities.

Representatives from regional areas always face the challenge of ensuring that we see a fair share returned to the regions, especially to the regions where the wealth is created. The regions of Central Queensland and North Queensland punch well above their weight when it comes to delivering dollars into the coffers of both state and national governments. But we often get a raw deal when it comes to seeing some of that wealth reinvested into the region to address our infrastructure and industry needs. However, I've got to say we've been seeing some pretty big wins lately. Many of our big wins have centred around major upgrades of the Bruce Highway that have addressed concerns that North Queenslanders have been raising with me for some time.

In 2012, I led a convoy of Liberal-National politicians, including former Deputy Prime Minister Warren Truss, along the entire 1,700-kilometre stretch of the Bruce Highway, highlighting places that needed attention most urgently. That convoy and my 'fix the Bruce' campaign worked, securing record funding for the Bruce Highway, and major projects like the Mackay ring road are now under construction. This project will provide a new major crossing of the Bruce Highway. It will take highway traffic out of the city, easing congestion, especially during peak hour. It will also take dangerous heavy trucks off the local streets. Just as importantly, it will create local jobs. I've spoken with a number of contractors and workers on site about the number of local people who have secured their jobs on the back of this infrastructure project. Those jobs came at a time when they were badly needed. But half a billion dollars of works in stage 1 of the Mackay ring road is only the beginning. We still need to close the loop on this ring road, and I'll be working to secure funds for the second stage of the ring road from measures that were announced in the budget.

The Liberal-National government allocated $3.5 billion to Roads of Strategic Importance, and $1½ billion of that package is earmarked specifically for northern Australia. A further $1.4 billion was announced in the budget for the Bruce Highway but as yet is not allocated to any specific project. I'll also be fighting for funds out of those allocations to be set aside to flood-proof the Goorganga Plains area of the Bruce Highway just south of Proserpine. Goorganga Creek floods very easily and very regularly, with heavy rain cutting off the Whitsunday Coast Airport from the actual Whitsunday coast. That means that flights from southern capitals are sometimes returned to their airports of origin and tourists can't get to where they want to go. The Queensland government's Department of Transport and Main Roads has begun the essential planning work on that project because of $12 million in federal funding, which this budget points to. Outcomes from that planning process will inform what needs to be done and what funds will be required to keep the north moving.

The Bruce Highway is a vital link for all of Queensland, connecting industries and products with end users. In this Liberal-National government's budget, we saw—as we have seen over the last few budgets—the spending of a record $6.7 billion on the Bruce Highway. As I said before, a major part of that was on the Mackay ring road. But there is another Bruce Highway project in my electorate that's also worth half a billion dollars, and that is the replacement of the Haughton River bridge, identified by people in my electorate as the most urgent black spot that needs fixing. That project not only replaces the ageing and unsafe Haughton River bridge; it includes another two overpasses, a number of different bridges that are going to go over flood-prone areas and the upgrade of about nine intersections along a 14-kilometre section of the Bruce Highway. The federal government is providing $411 million towards this project—as I said, it's worth a total of half a billion dollars or more—and works kicks off in the middle of this year. We pushed to bring that forward when the state government said it couldn't come forward, and we've brought that project on this coming calendar year. Further south, we've already invested $57 million into the Sandy Gully bridge upgrade, just north of Bowen. Sandy Gully is another regularly flood-prone area, cutting access to Abbot Point for workers who are based in Bowen, further south in Mackay and in the Whitsundays. It also severed the Bruce Highway—the arterial transport link that keeps the north moving—right there and then. These road projects all create jobs for the north. Most of those jobs, though, as we know, only last during the construction of that particular infrastructure project, but they increase freight movements as well, and that adds to a greater economy, which creates long-term jobs.

Talking about long-term jobs, we're seeing the benefits of the regional jobs and investment package that I fought so hard to secure during the lead-up to the 2016 election. North Queensland suffered badly during the downturn in the resources sector, and that's why I pushed for a jobs package to address the needs of regional centres around the Bowen Basin area. The Liberal-National government recognised the importance of those regional economies and the dollars that the mining industry and mining communities contribute through royalties, through wages and through taxes. We're now seeing the fruit of all that work, with more than $9.7 million from the government contributed towards investments that total about $50 million in that region. In Mackay, the Liberal-National government provided $1.6 million to D&T Hardchrome so they could build an industrial standard electroplating and finishing facility in Paget. D&T have been a great contributor to the mining services sector in Mackay, and this particular project will provide access to services that previously have had to be sourced far beyond the mining region where they are needed. Another funding project in Mackay was $420,000 provided to Diacon, a local company who will expand their plastic conveyor protection systems business. There was $250,000 to Linked Group Services to help them showcase their energy efficiency initiatives. In total, there's been a federal government investment of about $2½ million in four projects worth about $12 million in Mackay. These projects will create 84 jobs, the vast majority of which will be ongoing, so we are directly creating permanent jobs from this one-off investment. In the Whitsundays, we announced $5.8 million of funding under the Regional Jobs and Investment Packages for the Ozone Whitsundays Eco Resort at Riordanvale. This is a $37 million development and it'll feature contemporary villas, a striking wedding and conference venue, and a boutique native fauna park. When it's complete, it'll create more than 100 jobs and boost land based tourism options for one of Australia's premier tourism destinations in the Whitsundays. In Bowen, that same jobs package is delivering $1½ million for the Murroona Gardens aged-care facility.

One of the most important industries in North Queensland is defence, with the Townsville city being home to the Army's Lavarack Barracks, a RAAF base, the Townsville Field Training Area as well as the port of Townsville's Berth 10, which is designed for the Royal Australian Navy. Consequently, we in the north were jubilant about Queensland's win of the $1.8 billion Land 400 Defence deal. That deal will have big benefits for Townsville. About 150 Boxer super-tanks—I guess they're not tanks; they're weaponised reconnaissance vehicles—will be based in that garrison city. Two hundred million dollars will be spent on building simulation facilities over the next 10 years and 80 jobs will be created during the construction phase.

But not all important projects involve such big dollars. The Liberal-National government has helped and continues to help industry and community provide a better lifestyle and greater amenities for families living in the north. The federal government recently provided $150,000 to Mackay cane growers for their irrigation efficiency training program, which helps them reduce electricity costs and boost productivity in the cane-farming sector. We provided half a million dollars to Carlisle Adventist Christian College. I was just there on Sunday, yesterday, to provide them with a hospitality and home economics facility. Just on the weekend—as I said, yesterday—I opened new classrooms and a science lab for the school, to which the federal government directly contributed to the tune of $375,000. We delivered $15,000 for the Mackay kidney support group to buy a new car, when one of their previous cars was stolen, $15,000 for the Mackay Tennis Association to upgrade their courts and develop a new kitchen, and about $10,000 for the Mackay St Vincent de Paul Society to help them reduce their electricity costs, leaving them more dollars to support clients who are homeless. There has been about $200,000 invested in the Dalrymple disability respite service centre. All in all, there has been about $250,000 poured into community services around the Mackay region in just the past six months.

We supported VMR, the volunteer marine rescue, in Burdekin with $20,000 for their services. The Burdekin Art Society and Cungulla men's shed have also been recipients of funding. I secured $250,000 for Home Hill State High School's multipurpose hall. There's been a lot done for the community. We've helped the Mackay and Whitsunday region in their time of great need in the wake of Cyclone Debbie, with the federal and state governments providing joint tourism recovery funding, including $1 million for new infrastructure at Peter Faust Dam, $2 million for Hill Inlet lookout on Whitsunday Island and $1 million to enhance facilities at Flagstaff Hill in Bowen. There's more to come. This year's budget provides a number of measures that will benefit the north, including a $550 million Stronger Rural Health Strategy, which will deliver around 3,000 additional doctors and 3,000 additional nurses into rural general practice; an additional 14,000 high-level in-home-care packages to help older people remain in their own homes; 13½ thousand new residential aged-care places and 775 short-term restorative places, which will be made available where they are most needed. The chaplaincy program in our schools will get more funding to focus on antibullying, and we are skilling Australians by investing $1½ billion, an extra $250 million that we've provided in this budget, in the Skilling Australians Fund to deliver apprenticeships and traineeships that are so vital in training young Australians for the jobs of the future. We've enabled pensioners to earn more and keep more of their pension, and there are initiatives to address the need for more seasonal workers in the fruit and vegetable sector, with a two-year trial of incentives aimed at increasing the number of jobseekers who take on such work. I could go on about the sports infrastructure grants program and about the tax relief we've provided that's going to help over 66,000 taxpayers in the electorate of Dawson.

All of this stuff is contained in our budget. It's been a great budget for North Queensland, providing all these local benefits. I'm proud to support these bills.

Nick Champion (Wakefield, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Manufacturing and Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm happy to get up here and support the appropriations bills Nos 1 and 2, one about parliamentary departments No.1, and Nos 5 and 6. Of course, Labor always support supply. The lessons of 1975 have not been lost on the Labor Party. It is important, though, for the contest over the budget to protect the nation state. We don't want to get into a situation like that in the United States of America where they have to come up with one deal after another simply to fund the public service, public servants and public service jobs. We don't want our nation beset with crises of that nature.

Nevertheless, this is going to be a debate about the government's budget strategy and, in particular, their ideas about corporate tax. We know that the government's budget basically backed in an idea which has no support in this country. It can't find support in the public sphere and it can't find support in this nation's parliament, particularly in the other place. That idea is $80 billion worth of corporate tax cuts, which are tax cuts the like of which Australia has never seen. We know when the Hawke-Keating government undertook taxation reform in the 1980s it involved a lowering of corporate tax rates, but it also involved a broadening of the base with things like the fringe benefits tax, capital gains tax and the petroleum resource rent tax. That was taxation reform. It involved spirited debate at the taxation summit and, as I think Mr Keating notably once said, they crossed the finish line with one wheel off the chariot.

Taxation reform is difficult. It's hard work. If you broaden the base, if you lower rates, that sort of reform is noted and lauded. Keating's reforms of the eighties were good all round, but this budget starts with a different idea, a Reaganesque idea: you just give $80 billion to companies and $17 billion to big banks, and somehow that idea, that great largesse, blows a hole in the nation's budget and blows a hole in its capacity to deliver services to schools, hospitals, aged-care homes and everything else that the federal government might fund and simply lowers the rate for companies, and somehow that will translate into a common good, a public good. That is nonsense. It's such nonsense that even in the United States of America, where this idea originated, it's starting to lose support.

In The Economist on 26 April, in the print edition, the headline read: 'Marco Rubio offers his Trump-crazed party a glint of hope. The Florida senator thinks that reheating Reaganomics is a dead end.' I encourage those opposite to read the article. It's not written by a socialist; it's in The Economist, so they would be safe in reading it. They might want to read Mr Rubio's quote in the article. It says:

"There is still a lot of thinking on the right that if big corporations are happy, they're going to take the money they're saving and reinvest it in American workers," he says—

quoting Mr Rubio—

"In fact they bought back shares, a few gave out bonuses; there’s no evidence whatsoever that the money's been massively poured back into the American worker."

Think about this. Marco Rubio is on the conservative end of his party in the United States of America, the home of that sort of neoliberal idea—the Reaganomics—where, if you somehow lower the corporate tax rate, there will be a magical nirvana of higher wages and higher revenues, and somehow everything will work out in the never-never. In America, Senator Rubio puts a sword to that idea in the US Senate.

You would think that those opposite would just stop and think about what they're doing to their own political brand and what they're doing to this nation's capacity to fund schools and hospitals, pay down debt and encourage growth. We know the sort of corporate largesse. As I said before: $80 billion to corporations in the corporate tax cut and $17 billion to banks, despite all of the evidence to the royal commission—day after day after day of evidence of poor corporate ethics, bad corporate behaviour and one story after another, and now amazingly involving children's bank accounts. You would think there would be some underlying ethical boundary to bad behaviour, but clearly not. Every day, when we see these stories, we know it was the right call to have the royal commission, and we now see this government still wanting to shove $17 billion to Australian banks.

It's interesting. The other problem with this budget is that it has an assumption that you'll get reasonable wages growth in the coming years, but this of course does not match up with what this government's doing. On the one hand, the government say wages will grow, but we know that their policy is divorced from this. We know they're going to cut penalty rates. That's this government's policy: cut penalty rates and hack into workers. And we know they're going to get stuck into unions. They're the two basic tenets of this government's wages policy—surprise, surprise! On the one hand they want to do these things and on another they expect wages growth. On 17 May, The Sydney Morning Herald reported that wages growth was 'stuck in the mud'. It talked about how workers 'got a 0.5 per cent pay rise in the three months to March', which is 'the softest result in the history of the series'. It talked about how 1.3 million workers in the retail industry are banking an average pay rise of 1.5 per cent, which is actually a real wage cut of 0.4 per cent in real terms when compared to inflation. Think about the consequences of expecting your wages to go to one end and then having them go the other. Capital Economics' chief economist, Paul Dales, is quoting as saying wage growth is 'stuck in the mud at 2.1 per cent in the first quarter and likely to stay there or thereabouts' for the rest of the year.

But it wasn't just them. The Australian Financial Review on 17 May quotes deputy governor Guy Debelle. He's talking about what normally happens: the unemployment rate goes down and workers then have some capacity to ask for a pay rise. He says:

There is a risk that it may take a lower unemployment rate than we currently expect to generate a sustained move higher than the 2 per cent focal point evident in May wage outcomes today.

This is a problem for the old model—that is, where unemployment fell, workers would have more bargaining power and thus ask for a pay rise. We've got the deputy governor of the Reserve Bank here saying that that model might well be broken.

Why is it broken? I'll tell you why: because this government has set out to break it. This is why they are appointing Fair Work Commissioners who side with employers. This is why they are hacking into penalty rates. This is why they oppose increases to the minimum wage. This is why we have the very, very concerning series of charges brought against trade union officials for blackmail. That tactic went out with the 17th century. Of course, it's not surprising, when these charges are brought, to see that they don't survive the court process because it is not blackmail to ask for a pay rise or to get your union to ask for a pay rise. That's part of a healthy wages system.

So this government is wrong on tax and wrong on wages. It's not just the Labor Party saying so and not just a union saying so. The Reserve Bank of Australia and other economists are putting a pretty cogent case about wages. The Australia Institute is saying magical wage growth underpins the budget forecasts. You are not going to get magical wages growth if you are hacking into workers and unions every day. I'll tell you, Deputy Speaker, for your own information, you have to let workers and unions bargain. It's not criminal, either in civil law or criminal law, to have a strike to withdraw your labour; it's a standard right across industrialised economies, and it has been for some time.

So if those things are broken, then necessarily we are starting to question the government's approach to things like Newstart as well. Of course, the level of Newstart is a concern. It's a concern with ACOSS, Social Services and many people in my electorate, including the Anti Poverty Network, who take issue with it and have sent representatives to see me about it. It's also a concern with business. Jennifer Westacott was on Sky News, saying:

But we've got to make sure while they're on Newstart that it's adequate, that we're not entrenching them into disadvantage, that they've got the opportunity to get back into the workforce because they're able to maintain a reasonable standard of living. I mean $39 a day is not a lot of money, it's a very low amount of money for people to actually live on.

This is certainly the case. I've noticed many people in my electorate struggling on Newstart at the level that it's at, and also dealing with a regime of oversight that is very, very onerous. If you miss a simple appointment or if there's a mistake with your appointment with a job services provider, you can be cut and thrown into poverty and sometimes homelessness very quickly indeed. So we do have to be mindful in this place about just how difficult it is to live on Newstart and just how onerous a regime we are imposing on people who are on very low incomes, particularly if they have to sustain over a long period of time out of the labour market or are in and out of casual work or are in labour hire, which is the other big problem. We have to have be cognisant of that. When not only the Australian Council of Social Services is telling you it's not adequate but when business is also telling you it is not adequate, you know there is a case to be answered here.

I'm very proud that Labor has committed to reviewing the nature of these payments and I think we should review them with an eye to the adequacy of those payments and with a view to preventing people from falling into poverty. Once you have fallen into poverty, we know, it doesn't just affect your capacity to apply for work but there's also a fair bit of evidence to say that once you have fallen into those poverty traps, it's very hard to make the right judgements to get out of them. And it is very hard to live on very low incomes for a long period of time.

So this government's budget strategy, which Ayn Rand would be proud of, I don't think is very sensible or well thought out or reasonable in the modern era. We are saying to the government: you are going down the wrong path; you need to reconsider. The Labor Party won't follow you down this path so you should split the bills, allow us to do taxation reform for those who need it and, for those who don't—the big corporates—we should leave them to do what they should do, which is invest, create jobs and pay taxes like everyone else. We should get back to having a sustainable fiscal strategy which provides tax relief to those who need it, which pays down debt and which allows us as a nation to provide the services that we need now such as schools and hospitals and that we will need for the future.

Trevor Evans (Brisbane, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2018-2019 cognate debate with Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 2018-2019, Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2018-2019, Appropriation Bill (No. 5) 2017-2018 and Appropriation Bill (No. 6) 2017-2018, and to state, in case there was any doubt amongst honourable members, that this month's budget has been a great budget for Brisbane. More than 75,000 people across the electorate of Brisbane will be getting tax relief next financial year commencing in 40-something days' time, meaning the hardworking people of Brisbane will be keeping more of their own hard-earned money as reward for their efforts because this government's strong economic plan is starting to pay dividends.

A year ago, talking here on last year's budget, the topic was business tax cuts and we just heard that last year's budget still manages to distract members of the opposition. Last year, we talked about how this government was predicting what would happen if we backed Australian businesses, notably the small and medium family businesses which together make up such a large proportion of Australia's economy and its enterprise. We talked about why supporting those small and medium and family businesses might pay certain dividends. Now we are here seeing the very real evidence that the key planks of this government's strong economic plan are working—the tax relief already delivered for small and medium businesses, our innovation agenda, the new free trade agreements and the growth of our defence industry. We see evidence of these policies working certainly in Brisbane, right across Queensland and indeed across Australia.

Last week, two notable economic milestones were reached. Queensland's population reached five million and the target of one million jobs being created since the coalition government was elected was reached—about half a year earlier than was hoped for originally. The first milestone is a sign of the confidence Australians have in the great state of Queensland, including the 3.5 million who choose to make their homes in the south-east corner, centred on the wonderful place that is the City of Brisbane.

The second milestone, those jobs, is an unambiguous sign that the government's strong economic management is paying the dividends that we were talking about here in this place a year ago. A million jobs means a million livelihoods out there improved, a million more people having the security, dignity and prosperity of work. Record jobs being created, business investment rising, the budget strengthening is the story underpinning the budget.

Nationwide, our policies are coming together to help Australia's small and medium businesses create all of these new jobs faster than jobs have ever been created in the history of this country. Last year, a record 1,100 jobs a day were created, on average. That means, as I said, more Australians are being productive. It also means more Australians are paying taxes, and fewer of them are relying on welfare. That is a powerful outcome economically and morally. And it is enabling, in turn, this government to provide and guarantee the essential services. For instance, in the budget there is a record level of support for seniors and a record investment in the Great Barrier Reef. Finally, with certainty, it is enabling the government to fully fund the NDIS out of consolidated revenue.

This is all at the same time as being able to give tax relief to the Australians whose hard work and success have helped to bring this about. That is the real power of supporting Australia's small and medium businesses and it is the power of supporting hard-working Australians. The government's policies are fostering the conditions and the framework so that so many more Australians can prosper and so many more Australian businesses can grow and hire even more Australians. It is very good news for the 31,000 small businesses situated in my electorate of Brisbane. The feedback we received when the Treasurer visited Brisbane just last week, after the budget, was very positive. Local business people and local workers all clearly support the tax cut as fair and well targeted. The return to surplus next year was a very welcome improvement, as were the guarantees to the essential services that Australians rely on.

Nationwide, the government's income tax relief, as announced in the budget, will benefit 10 million Australians, including over two million Queenslanders. There couldn't be a bigger contrast with our opponents, whose shadow Treasurer, last week at the National Press Club, pledged to retain the top marginal tax rate at 49 per cent indefinitely. As usual, Labor's approach is all about high taxes, not lower taxes. I want to talk about infrastructure for a moment. Others have already noted here today that, in this budget, we deliver a record $75 billion in an investment pipeline in key infrastructure projects right across Australia. More than $20 billion of that infrastructure bonanza is for projects in Queensland, including in and around Brisbane.

I have previously welcomed in this place the $300 million the government is investing in the Brisbane Metro. That congestion-busting project is critical because of the strong population growth in Brisbane and the extra workers that brings into the Brisbane CBD, and because of the very high proportion of commuters in Brisbane that use buses rather than rail. It is a vital project to keep our city moving. It will cut daily travel times, reduce bus congestion in the CBD and improve bus services to the suburbs. For a daily commuter, it may mean over an hour of travel time saved each and every week—time that everyone would rather spend at home with their families and friends.

Last week, I was really pleased to join with the Brisbane Lord Mayor and the federal Minister for Infrastructure to inspect the site of the proposed underground metro station in Brisbane's cultural precinct. So, soon, there will be a world-class public transport project to accompany Brisbane's world-class cultural and entertainment offerings—QPAC, the Art Gallery, GoMA, the State Library and the Queensland Museum. In addition to the Brisbane Metro, the budget includes a whole raft of other infrastructure projects helping the people of Brisbane and south-east Queensland. It includes $1 billion to ease congestion on the M1 highway between Brisbane and the Gold Coast and a further $3.3 billion for additional upgrades along the Bruce Highway to improve safety and reduce congestion, taking the government's total investment to $10 billion and supporting around 2½ thousand jobs. These are all game-changing infrastructure projects that in various ways will improve the lives of millions of people who call south-east Queensland and Brisbane home.

The budget also continues the Turnbull government's strong commitment to supporting Australia's best health and medical research, including a record $6 billion in budget measures. In the same way that last year's budget really identified and singled in on the opportunities in our defence industry, this year's budget is really homing in and identifying the big opportunities that sit in front of Australia in the space of medical research. We have established the Medical Research Future Fund to provide long-term sustainable funding for medical research. It already has a balance of $7 billion and it's on track to reach $20 billion by 2021.

This budget includes $2 billion in disbursements from the Medical Research Future Fund to fund various research projects and priorities. Investment in medical research is critical to providing new treatments to diseases and to improving the quality of life of all Australians through things such as treating brain cancer in children, reducing premature births and developing new medical devices. It's all about improving and saving lives and it's part of our commitment to delivering the essential services that Australians rely on, guaranteed, as I said, by the strong economic plan that underpins our ability to guarantee the services.

Health and medical research is an area in which Australia is world class, and I'm proud that many of these amazing researchers are calling Brisbane home. Last week, it was really exciting to have the chance to visit the UQCCR with the Minister for Health, Greg Hunt. The minister announced $1.2 million in funding being awarded to UQ's Professor David Paterson through the Medical Research Future Fund. Professor Paterson's research is about tackling antimicrobial resistance and has the potential to save 30,000 lives, which puts the work that we do here in this place into some perspective.

I've also recently visited Queensland's largest medical research centre, the QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute. I've had the opportunity on many occasions visiting there to hear from some of the scientists and medical researchers there about their fascinating and very important work.

Australia has all of the necessary ingredients to bolster its position as a world leader in medical research, but it's essential that we don't rest on our laurels. In this budget, the centrepiece of the government's commitment to health and medical research is a new investment of $1.3 billion in the National Health and Medical Industry Growth Plan, to be overseen by Professor Ian Frazer, AC. It's about identifying discoveries and translating ideas into practice and commercial successes and it really has the potential to turbocharge the health and medical research industry just as the government's strategic investment in the defence industry sector in last year's budget is doing.

As well as improving health outcomes for hundreds of thousands of Australians, this will create up to 28,000 new skilled medical research jobs and develop the next generation of Australia's world-leading medical research industry. Groundbreaking biological and medical technologies have a significant place in the future of health care, and so this government's growth plan will also provide for a minimum of 130 new clinical trials and add a 50 per cent increase in exports and new markets in biotechnology, pharmaceuticals and medical devices. The growth plan includes half a billion dollars of funding over 10 years for the Genomics Health Futures Mission, which will help more than 200,000 Australians live longer and get better treatment tailored to their medical needs. The first genomics project will be Mackenzie's Mission, with almost $20 million being provided for screening trials for rare and debilitating birth disorders, including spinal muscular atrophy, fragile X and cystic fibrosis.

Another research investment is $248 million over five years for an expanded Rare Cancers, Rare Diseases And Unmet Need Program and new international clinical trial collaborations. We're also providing funding of almost a billion dollars a year to the National Health and Medical Research Council and have funded the $500 million Biomedical Translation Fund to help transform biomedical discoveries into commercial opportunities for Australian researchers.

That's just one aspect in summarising the plan for a stronger economy and what it means in one great area going forward for Brisbane and for all of Australia. But I did also want to mention in passing that the budget does include, contrary to some of the talk of cuts that we hear repeatedly from the other side, record funding for hospitals and schools, guaranteed funding for disability services and a comprehensive approach to aged care so older Australians can live healthier, more independent lives.

This budget ensures the government lives within its means, with a forecast return to moderate balance in 2019-20 increasing to a projected surplus of $11 billion in 2020-21. Importantly, we're no longer borrowing to pay for essential services and we have the lowest average real growth in payments of any government on either side of politics over the last 50 years.

I also wanted to mention quickly in passing that in my electorate of Brisbane more than 5,000 local families stand to benefit under the budget from our reforms to childcare. That'll come into place on 2 July and is obviously on top of their tax relief. There is also the guaranteed funding for the National Disability Insurance Scheme. That will be directly helping 1,800 people and their families in my electorate of Brisbane. This budget is the next step in our long-term economic plan to deliver all of those essential services on which we rely and to provide tax relief to hardworking Australians to thank them for the hard work that they and so many small and medium businesses have done over the last year in helping to get Australia back into this strong position while simultaneously living within our means.

I want to spend a moment comparing and contrasting what I've just outlined to some of the things that we've heard from those opposite. I want to spend a moment talking about the politics of envy and the case that Labor are now pushing, because it does seem that they have absolutely nothing else to talk about—certainly not a significant economic plan. I was in the chamber earlier and I heard the member for Lyons. He said one thing that was right; he identified that I was laughing—chuckling, I think, was the word he used—in response to his contribution. I was laughing because these are just discredited Labor lines that are being rolled out like robotic union Daleks. I think they hope that if they say them often enough they'll become true. His speech and so many other speeches that we're hearing from Labor reveal that they have no actual plan. At the heart of all of those uninspired Labor lines is this false war that they're trying to whip up, chasing the divisive politics of envy.

Sadly, we all had to endure the opposition leader's budget reply speech a few weeks ago. For those lucky enough not to hear it, let me summarise it briefly. Labor essentially said that they would spend a stack of money that they don't have on all manner of things. They said that they could pay for it because they'll tax banks and big companies more. That's essentially what they said. So, 10 points out of 10 for the politics of division and envy, but, sadly, zero points for adding things up and zero points for honesty. If you look at their numbers, you'll see that there are no changes in the forward estimates to the taxes being paid by big businesses and banks—not in our forward estimates and not in theirs. In their forward estimates over the next four years, the biggest tax takes include $10 billion from retirees, which is the biggest; $6 billion in additional taxes on small and medium businesses, the ones that we just identified as having created all of the jobs and prosperity over the last year; $2 billion from home owners; and precisely zero in additional taxes from big businesses and banks. That stands in stark contrast to the multinational tax avoidance laws that this government's passed—sadly, without Labor's support.

Chris Hayes (Fowler, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would like to make a contribution in this cognate debate on Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2018-2019 and other appropriations bills. There's probably one thing that we have learnt since the handing down of this budget by the Treasurer, and that is that it is only a Labor government that understands and knows about the delivery of fairness. Fairness is not about what you say or the words you might want to couch your budget in. Fairness is about what you do; it's all about actions. This government, once again, has failed that test. As a matter of fact, they've failed it five times.

This is their fifth attempt at a budget delivering so-called fairness to the Australian community, yet, despite the rhetoric of those opposite, this is really a budget about big business. We've heard in the past about trickle-down economics. We have heard that, provided we give it to the big end of town, it will eventually work its way down to the workers. We know that over the last couple of years businesses have been making reasonable profits, and yet we are seeing the lowest wage growth in living memory at the moment. They want to take this whole concept further—to say, 'Well, just trust us,' and, 'Let's make our key signature policy giving $80 billion to the big end of town in the hope that that's going to stimulate the economy and create jobs, and that everyone's going to live in a land of prosperity.'

After five years, I think the tired old government over there should be starting to think about giving it up. Let's face it: that's what the electors are thinking. The previous speaker might want to get bolshie about this, but he, like any of those on the other side of the parliament with margins under 5 per cent, knows what the polls mean. They know that people have turned off. They're no longer listening. It's one thing for the Liberals to want to come out and say that they're concerned about fairness and about returning fairness to the Australian economy and to working families. But to make your key signature policy all about big business is really not delivering much in the way of fairness for working families of this country.

In fairness, the tax plan does give a modest $10 a week to Australian workers. As I say, it's modest, and we will support such a modest increase. But don't forget that they're giving with one hand while, with the other hand, savagely making cuts to pensions, cuts to education and cuts to health. I'm not sure they can actually sell that at the election. I invite them to try! They've got to get out there and say, 'We'll give you something and we'll take all of this from you.' It simply is not going to work, because, as I say, people have turned off. They're no longer listening, despite the talk around the corridors here, and I know, regrettably, you guys don't get a bounce out of this. I'm not sure what that means—should you go to a longer period for elections, or which leader should you take to the election? All that is in the hands of you and your party room. But the realistic aspect about this is that a $10 tax cut for Australian workers does not cut it when you want to do things such as take $17 billion out of education and cut into health and pensions. People are aware of this stuff. This is not something new. They've seen this before. This is a government that is showing all the signs of being tired. It's out of ideas, and the only thing it can come up with is: 'Let's throw some money at big business.'

Bear in mind, this mob opposite is the same mob that protested vigorously about having a royal commission into the banking industry. They said, 'We know what's happening in our financial institutions. All the royal commission is going to do is make lawyers rich.' I'm not sure how the lawyers on the other side would take that. They said, 'It would only tell us what we know.' I really hope those opposite and those in the Treasury didn't know about all the things we now know about—things about AMP and what is occurring with the Dollarmites at the 'which bank'. All those things are happening. It's a far cry from what they wanted to do and say about a royal commission into trade unions—absolutely. They were looking at one prosecution as a result of the trade union royal commission, but I think that's been withdrawn now.

Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Only one? Only one, you reckon?

Chris Hayes (Fowler, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Only one flowed out of the royal commission, as my friend reminds me. But it took $78 million for that one. Anyway, we've lost the board of AMP. We have a financial system in debacle, a financial system which has been protected by those opposite, who withdrew the very protections we put in place for people so that financial advisers would act in the best interests of clients. One of the first actions of the government opposite was to withdraw that. What! These are the people who are now saying, 'We want you to trust us with our fifth budget because we are all about fairness for Australian people.' No wonder people are starting to think, 'When they talk about fairness, let's see what their track record is.' I've got to say it's pretty dismal.

Anyone in this joint must think that it is our absolute honour to be here. Very few people get to represent their community in the federal parliament. When you think in those terms, you must think the Australian people deserve better than what's being offered by this government. They deserve better than to be told that what's in your interests is to give the top end of town a lift at the expense of everybody else. A modest tax cut, if it's affordable, is the right thing to do. But you don't give with one hand and take with the other.

I have just one little piece of advice for those opposite: if you can't afford to give an $80 billion tax cut to business—and I accept that you can't—simply don't do it. You wouldn't do this in your household economy. You wouldn't say, 'Look, I'd like to buy that new car but I can't afford it so let's just add it to the mortgage.' If you can't afford it, don't do it. Don't do it at the expense of working families, at the expense of pensioners, and don't do it at the expense of all those people who put their blood, sweat and tears in, who are raising families and who want the best outcome for them. And by the way, we need that $80 billion for our future.

The cutting of $17 billion out of education is ridiculous. Any investment in education is not a line item. It's not something you just say, 'This is what we're doing in our budget, how we're going to save money.' An investment in education is an investment in our future. It's an investment in our prosperity. It's an investment in our nation. It's not just a line item in the 2018 budget. And $17 billion is almost exactly the amount of money the banks are going to get, a tax cut of $17 billion as a reward for their hard effort over the last 12 months. The royal commission will no doubt now discover more and more things. I know those opposite didn't want the royal commissioner to extend the terms of reference but they might be stuck with them now, because the Australian people are getting more and more concerned about what they're seeing is happening in their financial institutions. By the way, over the last period of 12 months, those banks made something in the vicinity of $34 billion in straight-out profit.

Madeleine King (Brand, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They need a tax cut!

Chris Hayes (Fowler, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They really need it, don't they? And you know what happened? Those workers in the financial institutions, well, jeez, they haven't done terribly well. They haven't increased their salaries. The executives may have actually got some bonuses. As a matter of fact, they did work some stuff with the Dollarmites, making sure those accounts were working so that people got a payout. A number of banks and financial institutions were signing off fraudulent statements on behalf of applicants at the NAB. Look, you guys opposite have got to start thinking there's more to being in government than trying to pull a job of smoke and mirrors, more than just pulling the wool over the eyes of people.

I'm very fortunate. I work in the most multicultural community in the whole of the country, bar none—very vibrant, very colourful. We have many, many opportunities to celebrate New Year from the start, with everyone else, on the 1st January, through to my last New Year's, celebrated in August or September with another group. Mine is not a rich community. The average income in my community is a tad over $60,000. I know what this budget means for them. I know what taking $14 a fortnight off pensioners means for those people. They're not going to go and work an extra shift. They are not going to work some overtime to make this up. The pension is all they get. Taking the $14 energy supplement off them at a time when the member for Hughes keeps reminding this House about energy prices. At a time when he wants to talk about record energy prices in New South Wales, he's part of a government that is going to take $14 off pensioners who can't go and make up that difference.

We need to be a bit smarter about this. We need to give people the opportunity to go out and invest in themselves and in their future. We did that in the global financial crisis. By the way, you never, ever hear a word about that from those opposite, but we came through that reasonably well, because we stimulated the economy. We did that by looking after families and encouraging them to invest in their futures. That is not what we're seeing coming out of this budget.

The mums and dads in my community are more concerned about what's happening in education. I preface this by saying that mine's not a rich electorate. As a matter of fact, I have the lion's share of refugees coming to this country, and many of the migrants make their home in the Fairfield and Liverpool areas. Interestingly, of the 12,000 refugees that the government decided to take, particularly out of the Middle East—and we supported them—we get 7,000 in Fairfield. Yes, there are all sorts of issues that come with that in terms of making sure those people are appropriately settled, which is fine, because I think we are a very giving community in my area. But what I've seen with the people from the Middle East or, before that, the people from Cambodia or, before that, the people from Vietnam is that they have a passionate belief in education. They believe that the ticket to success in a country like Australia is to ensure that their children have a first-class education, and they just cannot rationalise in their minds what this government is doing in taking $17 billion out of education. I know they all want to get up and say that's all just hyperbole over there. We have even got the Catholic bishops coming out today and reaffirming what this means in respect of Catholic education.

We are privileged to be in this place. We are privileged to have the honour of representing our communities in this parliament. Not many people get this opportunity. When we're here, we should be trying to make a difference for the better in our community, not simply rattle off some lines about how this is the budget and we're going to do all these various things. We should, on both sides of the House, be trying to make a difference for the better. Quite frankly, after five budgets, I just do not think those opposite have that view in mind. Perhaps they think this is their ticket to another election. I've got to say: guys, I think you're mistaken on that as well. But, if you're not in this House with a genuine commitment to make a difference for the better in the community, you should not be here.

Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2018-2019 and the other appropriation bills before us today demonstrate the stark choice which is going to face the people of Australia at the next election. It will be a choice between a Turnbull government which delivers sober reform and a strong economy, and an opposition that arrogantly parades its false and vacuous promises. It will be a choice between responsible government for all and naked self-interest. On this side of the House, we have delivered a million more jobs and record bulk-billing rates, and we're delivering $75 billion worth of infrastructure our nation desperately needs. On that side, they have kowtowed to law-breaking unions, shielded members who should never have taken a seat in this place, and tried to set Australians against each other in an outdated and divisive class war—wait, I've got more about that.

And why? Because on this side of the House we have real leaders who have shifted the debate on everything from stopping illegal immigration to fixing our declining school standards. The Leader of the Opposition, on the other hand—well, he's just shifty. Three years ago, the Heydon royal commission saw straight through this Leader of the Opposition. The commission's counsel assisting called him evasive on the witness stand, while the commissioner himself said that his non-responsive approach to giving evidence called into question his very credibility. Since that royal commission, we've had the question of this Leader of the Opposition's credibility settled once and for all: he has none. You simply can't trust a word he says. Sadly, to the detriment of this House and our nation's democracy, we have seen ample evidence of that over recent months.

There's no doubt that the Leader of the Opposition read the same court decisions as the rest of us when it came to the test for eligibility under section 44 of the Constitution. He knew what it meant as well as the rest of us. He knew that there was a two-stage test for those who held dual citizenship and that the 'all reasonable steps' that they parroted on about applied only when a foreign law operates irremediably to prevent an Australian citizen from renouncing his or her citizenship.

Ms Madeleine King interjecting—

And they still can't accept the High Court's decision. He knew that the law was firmly established, just as the court has held in Sykes v Cleary and later reaffirmed in Re Canavan, delivered on the 27 October 2017. Yet for six months he misled the Australian public and dishonestly maintained that no fewer than four of his members of parliament were eligible to represent their local constituents when clearly they were not. Months of Labor parliamentary salaries and perks were paid out, while my colleagues on this side of the House in fact did the right thing and resigned or referred themselves to the High Court immediately.

Ms Madeleine King interjecting—

He went further, of course. Famously, he gave no less than a 'rolled-gold' guarantee that all Labor members were eligible. The people of Australia and the unfortunate constituents of Fremantle, Braddon and Longman know what that guarantee was worth.

Ms Madeleine King interjecting—

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

The member for Brand will cease interjecting.

Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They know how much trust they can place in the Leader of the Opposition. But it's always been that way with him. What about the workers of CleanEvent when the Leader of the Opposition stripped away their pay and conditions while the AWU received secret payments of $75,000 for those arrangements? What about the workers at Chiquita Mushrooms when the Leader of the Opposition sold them out in return for secret $4,000-a-month training payments to his union? They quickly found out how much credibility he had as an advocate for the working people. And who could forget Labor's 'Mediscare' campaign in the 2016 election?

Even his own colleagues can't trust him. Former Prime Minister Rudd learned that the hard way. No doubt he trusted his then employment minister when that minister pretended to be a loyal cabinet colleague. As Mr Rudd soon discovered, trust in this Leader of the Opposition is often misplaced. No doubt the woman who replaced him, former Prime Minister Gillard, trusted the now Leader of the Opposition when he threw his support behind her. We all know how long that lasted. 'Up until the spill,' he told reporters, 'I was going to support the Prime Minister.' There you have it. The Leader of the Opposition was 'going to be loyal'. He was 'going to tell the truth', right up until the moment his self-interest changed his mind.

The workers he claims to represent, the people of Australia, his own closest colleagues—they all know that this Leader of the Opposition will do anything, say anything and doublecross anyone to claw his way to the top.

Steve Irons (Swan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Whatever it takes.

Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Whatever it takes, and at what cost? We began to learn that back in 2013. In his desperate efforts to gain the then CFMEU's support, the Leader of the Opposition was once again ready to promise almost anything, to the detriment of his party and the Australian people. He agreed to the CFMEU's demands that he oppose any industry specific regulator, including the one he himself established in 2012. He agreed to oppose any form of building code, despite the clearly established need. He agreed to oppose any kind of compulsory evidence-gathering powers for a regulator in the building industry, despite the ever-mounting evidence, now proven, of staggeringly widespread union illegality. Having made his deal with the lawless construction union and linked his self-interest to theirs, it is difficult to know what representatives of the CFMMEU would have to do before the Leader of the Opposition would not stand next to them. Justice Geoffrey Flick said of them:

It is difficult, if not impossible, to envisage any worse conduct than that pursued by the CFMEU.

This is a union that has been fined almost $15 million, far more than has ever been seen before.

It's an organisation with around 70 officials personally before the courts. Its boss, John Setka, by the way, has been widely congratulated by those opposite for having blackmail charges dropped last week. Everyone knows it's not unusual at all for the DPP to drop charges in legal proceedings. What is unquestionable is that John Setka has been found guilty of 59 separate offences, including assault and theft, and was jailed twice, in fact, for contempt of court. He has even admitted that illegal activity is at the heart of the way he does business. Channelling ACTU secretary, Sally McManus, Mr Setka told Sky News last week, 'We get fantastic pay rises and good conditions for our members because we fight it outside the law.'

Even the Leader of the Opposition's own colleagues know how wrong and self-serving his continued support for the CFMMEU is. Labor's hero, former Prime Minister and ACTU boss, Bob Hawke, has called the construction union's behaviour appalling and said that he would not tolerate it. He told The Australian in 2016, 'I would throw them out,' just as he himself threw out its predecessor, the Builders Labourers Federation. Oh, for a Labor leader with some backbone today! Even Kevin Rudd has called for the CFMMEU to be expelled from affiliation with Labor, and for the influence of trade union factions in the party to be reduced. Even Peter Beattie said last week that he would refuse CFMMEU donations if he were the leader.

Yet there this Leader of the Opposition is, telling CFMMEU members at the Oaky Creek north mine site, where threats, including threats to rape children, and intimidation had been rife, 'The privilege for us today is to be in your company.' There he is, defending the CFMMEU day in, day out, just like his job depended on it. That's because it does—with $11 million in donations paid to Labor since 2001 and the factional support of its many active members, this Leader of the Opposition is owned lock, stock and barrel by the CFMMEU. The most sickening part of all of this is the fact that the Leader of the Opposition peddles his divisive, dishonest and exploitive envy mongering under the banner of a fair go. It's a cynical and nauseating distortion of what we all believe is at the heart of our uniquely Australian egalitarian way of life.

Where is the Leader of the Opposition's fair go when he is slugging senior Australians, who have worked and saved their whole lives, with a new multibillion-dollar retiree tax? Where is the fair go for 2.6 million Australians with APRA regulated superannuation accounts? What clever excuse is he going to give them when it comes time to explain why he has pillaged $3.75 billion from their hard earned savings? Where's the fair go for the millions of Australians whose jobs will be put at risk by the insatiable hunger of this Leader of the Opposition for more and more tax and his desire for the keys to the Lodge?

Even if what passes for a moderate version of Labor's tax plan were enacted, there would be 1.4 million Australian workers put at risk. There would still be thousands of businesses whose investment decisions had been undermined overnight. It would still mean many thousands of unemployed or underemployed Australians who would no longer have the opportunity to take up one of the new jobs created by our investment. What clever weasel words will the Leader of the Opposition use when it comes time to explain to our young people why there are no jobs for them? And where was the fair go for the workers at Clean Event or at Chiquita Mushrooms when their union secretary gave away their pay and conditions for his union's benefit?

Whether he's the secretary of the AWU or the Leader of the Opposition, he has only one guiding principle—that is, selling out the people he's meant to represent in the interest of his own. That's how he ran the AWU back then. It's how he's running the Labor Party today. It will be how he runs the country if he is ever allowed to occupy the Lodge. In the end, there is only one Australian the Leader of the Opposition is looking out for, and that is the Leader of the Opposition himself. There is only one standard to which he holds his words and his actions, and that is naked self-interest. His colleagues know that, those present here tonight know that, his supporters know that and the people of Australia know that. They have seen through the shifty Leader of the Opposition, and when they have the chance next year they will, as we should today, shun his empty politics of selfishness and division and support the Turnbull government's plan for a stronger, more prosperous Australia.

Lisa Chesters (Bendigo, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Fisher should stand on his feet and resign. That was the most appalling speech. This debate is about his government's budget, and these bills are about appropriations for the budget. Yet he engaged in a 14-minute tirade against the Leader of the Opposition. How pathetic he is. How pathetic is everyone on that side? Every question time, every chance they get, they slag off the Leader of the Opposition. What a bunch of cowards. This is your budget, and yet all you want to do is come in here and slag off the Leader of the Opposition. There's a metaphor they use in sport: play the ball, not the man. Perhaps everyone on the government benches needs to remember that. Play the ball and not the man. Be engaging on policy, that is what you should be doing as a government. This is about your budget. You would think they'd have some pride about what the government has put forward and be in here talking about their great vision. But, no, like a bunch of cowards they're going on the hack and are not standing up here. They can't even defend their Treasurer's budget. Just how useless are they? It is pathetic. If you're not in here to stand up and advocate for policy, if you're not in here to stand up and advocate for measures or your vision for this country, then resign. You have no business being an elected representative, and you have no business representing your communities.

The electorates of the member for Fisher and of the members on the Sunshine Coast are some of the poorest electorates that we have. It's so typical of the Liberal and National parties to forget the bush. It's so typical of them to come up here and completely forget the regions and not advocate for the regions. Some National Party held electorates and some Liberal Party held electorates are among the poorest electorates that we have. Yet what we are seeing from this government in these appropriations bills is cuts to the pension. They're actually cutting the pension. The age pension is well below the poverty line, but this government, this miserable mob of MPs who claim to represent the regions, is cutting the pension by $7 a week. I know it's not a lot to a millionaire, to someone who lives it up and who lives in a harbourside mansion. I know it's not a lot to those who may have 10 or 12 investment properties. I know it's not a lot to the silver spoons across the chamber from us. But it is a hell of a lot to a pensioner, to someone who is trying to survive on that fixed income. They say, 'We're just correcting the scrapping of the clean energy supplement, because there's no longer the carbon tax.' Something the government doesn't recognise is that—news flash!—energy bills have gone up under their watch. Under their great—I use exclamation marks—stewardship energy bills have gone through the roof. And now they want to cut the pension. They also want to lift the retirement age to 70. What an absolute disgrace. They are going to say to nurses, to cleaners, to builders: 'Keep working until you're 70.' They say it's because Australians are living longer. It's not about how long you can live. It's about your working age and how long you can work for. That's the problem with this government, and that is the problem with its proposals in this budget.

Another area that this government hasn't been honest about is the cuts to early childhood education. And what the government is doing—

Debate interrupted.