Ian Goodenough (Moore, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm pleased to speak in support of these appropriation bills, which make provision for the moneys required to be appropriated from the Consolidated Revenue Fund as part of the 2018-19 budget to fund the day-to-day operations of the Commonwealth. This budget forms part of the government's plan to build a strong, prosperous economy while funding the operations of the government. The centrepiece of the budget is that it ensures that the government lives within its means through disciplined fiscal management, maintaining a pathway to the projected surplus in 2020-21.

The growth in government payments has been limited to 1.6 per cent, and, from this year, no longer will the Australian government be borrowing for recurrent expenditure. Keeping taxes below 23.9 per cent as a share of gross domestic product means that Australians will not be unfairly burdened and economic growth will not be constrained. Disciplined fiscal management, ensuring that wage growth is matched by productivity growth, helps keep inflation under control, which in turn takes pressure off interest rates. Maintaining low interest rates is important to ensure housing affordability for millions of Australians paying off their mortgages in our suburbs.

I thank the Prime Minister for visiting Perth in April to announce the $3.2 billion infrastructure package for Western Australia, as an interim measure to partially alleviate the inequality in GST distribution to our state, pending a more comprehensive review by the Productivity Commission into the methodology of distributing funds between states. This positive outcome has been achieved through the advocacy of the team of West Australian members and senators.

For the people in my electorate of Moore, the federal budget delivers more than $320 million for local projects, including $158 million for the Joondalup hospital extension, $108 million for the extension of the Mitchell Freeway northwards to Romeo Road, $50 million for a new cybersecurity research centre at Edith Cowan University, and several millions of dollars in financial assistance grants to the City of Joondalup.

Federal investment in the Joondalup hospital will meet the medical needs of one of the fastest growing areas in Australia, delivering an extra 90 public hospital beds, 75 mental health places, eight new operating theatres, and specialist medical facilities. When completed, local patients will have access to a regional hospital with more than 880 beds, delivering world-class medical services locally, without facing the prospect of a two-hour commute to Royal Perth or Sir Charles Gairdner hospitals for their treatment.

The much anticipated extension of the Mitchell Freeway for six kilometres north of Hester Avenue to Romeo Road will connect residents of the coastal corridor around Alkimos, with Joondalup as their closest regional CBD, boosting demand for goods and services and supporting the growth of Joondalup. Widening the Mitchell Freeway southbound by adding an extra lane to the sections between Hodges Drive and Hepburn Avenue and Reid Highway to Erindale Road will alleviate traffic congestion as a top priority for residents faced with traffic congestion daily. Currently, federal funding to widen the freeway southbound for seven kilometres between Cedric and Vincent streets has been delivered, with the construction scheduled to commence later this year. The total cost of the project is $40 million, with the federal government contributing $32 million in funding and the state contributing the balance. It is necessary to widen the southern traffic congestion point on the approach to Perth's CBD, prior to commencing works further north, in order to minimise traffic banking up along the length of the freeway.

I would like to place on record the importance of maintaining financial assistance grants to local government authorities across Australia, in particular in my electorate, where the funding is used by the City of Joondalup to deliver community facilities, upgrade local roads, minimise traffic congestion and improve road safety. The strong level of federal funding support to local government has been maintained in the current budget in order to deliver services and amenities for local ratepayers of the City of Joondalup.

A key measure in the budget is the provision of tax relief to encourage and reward hardworking Australians through a plan, which will be implemented over the next seven years, for lower, fairer, and simpler income taxes. From 1 July 2018, immediate tax relief up to $530 will be provided to low- and middle-income earners earning between $48,000 and $90,000 annually. In addition, increasing the income threshold of the 32.5 per cent tax bracket from $87,000 to $90,000, from 1 July, will reverse the impact of bracket creep for some 200,000 taxpayers, and in the medium term, the abolition of the 37 per cent tax bracket will further simplify the tax system and provide incentives to income earners. Due to increased revenues from a stronger economy, there will be no increase to the Medicare levy. By maintaining the current capital gains tax discount of 50 per cent for assets held for more than a year, the Liberal-National coalition government will protect the interests of those who save and invest for their future financial independence and self-sufficiency. In contrast, under Labor's proposal, 75 per cent of capital gains will be taxed at an individual's marginal tax rate. The coalition government will also maintain the existing negative gearing arrangements to assist people who save and invest for their future financial security and independence in retirement. The coalition will oppose Labor's plan to stop surplus tax credits on dividends, on which company tax has already being paid, being refunded to shareholders on lower incomes, which will affect 1.6 million Australians, 200,000 of whom receive part pensions and 14,000 of whom receive full pensions. An estimated 97 per cent of people currently receiving refunds are on annual taxable incomes of less than $87,000. The Turnbull government has an economic plan to encourage business investment and create more jobs, through measures such as legislating for lower taxes for Australian businesses, extending the $20,000 instant asset write-off, and investing $75 billion in transport infrastructure across our nation.

Our government is supporting international competitiveness and exports in the agricultural, defence and medical industries. The government's plan to reduce corporate tax rates is designed to maintain Australia's international competitiveness in an increasingly competitive global marketplace. As emerging nations in our region become more automated and mechanised through the adoption of new technology, Australia must reform and innovate in order to stay competitive in terms of trade and investment. Australia's total agricultural exports increased by an impressive 27 per cent between 2012-13 and 2016-17. Export deals with China, Japan, South Korea and many countries in the ASEAN region have opened up markets for Australian producers. The budget provides $51.3 million to expand our network of agricultural trade counsellors in Asia, Europe and Latin America.

Through a strong economy the coalition government is able to guarantee the essential services that Australians rely on: continuing to guarantee Medicare; pharmaceutical benefits; record funding for new hospitals, with the states; and full funding of the National Disability Insurance Scheme, which will benefit around 1,839 people and their families in my electorate. The budget includes new and amended items on the Medicare Benefits Schedule and the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, including cystic fibrosis testing, 3D breast cancer screening, and MRI tests for prostate cancer. Bulk-billing for GP visits remains at record levels, with 84.3 per cent of GP visits in 2016-17 being bulk-billed, representing three million more visits than the previous year. The budget includes $1.4 billion for new and amended listings on the PBS, including medicines to treat spinal muscular atrophy, breast cancer, relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, and a new medicine to prevent HIV. $6.2 million has been invested in the Insulin Pump Program to increase the availability of insulin pumps for children with type 1 diabetes.

To meet the needs of our ageing population an additional 14,000 high-level home care packages have been provided for the in budget. In my electorate 145 aged care places have been approved for Southern Cross Care on the site located on the corner of Burns Beach Road and Connolly Drive in Currambine, including 60 specialist rooms, and services for people with dementia. The planned facility will offer an integrated health, wellness and residential care service, with housing options for downsizers to continue living independently with in-home care services as well as medical support of GPs and allied health professionals.

From 2 July 2018 the government will ease the cost-of-living pressures for nearly one million families by implementing the new childcare package. Families on incomes of around $187,000 a year or less will no longer have an annual limit on the amount of childcare subsidy they receive. This covers more than 85 per cent of families with children in child care. More than 348,000 young Australians will have access to 15 hours of quality early learning in the year before school, including more than 2,071 children in my electorate. The government's needs based funding model for schools delivers an additional $24½ billion for Australian schools over the next decade, representing a 50 per cent increase in funding per student. This is based on the 23 recommendations of the Gonski review. The budget also provides permanent funding for a National Schools Chaplaincy Program, providing an additional $247 million to more than 3,000 schools over the next four years.

The budget invests in strengthening airport security and improving national security architecture. Measures include investing $294 million to increase the capabilities of the Australian Federal Police and the Australian Border Force at nine major domestic and international airports, enhancing screening capability for inbound cargo and international mail, and installing new advanced screening technology at 64 small regional airports across Australia. The coalition has invested in our defence forces to provide new offshore patrol vessels and Poseidon maritime surveillance aircraft. The government has stepped up efforts to stop drugs and illegal weapons at the border before they hit our streets, as well as enhancing measures to manage biosecurity risks to protect our environment, agricultural exports and tourism sector.

Our government is introducing significant reforms to ensure welfare is targeted at those who genuinely need it and that working-age recipients comply with their obligations to look for work. The compliance rules have changed, requiring welfare recipients on drugs to undertake available treatment. Cashless welfare cards require 80 per cent of welfare payments to be spent on food and living essentials, and a trial of drug-testing for welfare recipients is being sought. The government will save $203 million over the next five years by increasing the waiting period to four years for newly arrived migrants to access certain welfare benefits from 1 July 2018. In summary this legislation forms part of the government's fiscally responsible plan to balance the budget, reduce debt and build a strong, prosperous economy whilst funding the traditional functions of government such as health, education, social services and national security. I commend the bills to the House.

Ms Catherine King (Ballarat, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Medicare) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My remarks on the Appropriation Bill and the budget concern health policy. I think the best way to describe this budget when it comes to health, as my friend Lesley Russell from the Menzies Centre for Health Policy has said, is that it is a budget of ad hockery and missed opportunities. It's a budget that has no strategy, no vision for how to prepare Australia's healthcare system for the many challenges ahead. It's a budget that is bereft of big ideas. True, there are some measures in the budget that Labor has welcomed—a new rural health strategy, although I would argue it's actually a new rural health workforce strategy. It's something that is needed, but it's not actually a rural health strategy. There is some investment in the health of mums and bubs and new medical research Future Fund disbursements, some of which of which have been badged as the National Health and Medical Industry Growth Plan.

I want to flag three serious concerns today. First, the budget in health does contain significant new savings. The budget includes over a billion dollars of new savings. This number has so far gone relatively unnoticed, perhaps because, compared to the savage cuts inflicted in previous Abbott-Turnbull budgets, a billion dollars no longer seems that much when it is being cut out of our healthcare system. It's a sad indictment of how much damage the government has done in health since coming to office nearly five years ago. These savings include $416 million from GP visa changes, $336 million from increased use of generic and bio-similar medicines, $190 million from the Medicare Benefits Schedule review, $78 million from improved use of blood products and antirheumatic drugs, and $40 million from the MedicineWise and national return of unwanted medicines project.

Of course not all of these savings are necessarily bad. Labor has offered bipartisan support for the clinician-led MBS review, despite calls for us to do otherwise from some quarters. Indeed, it was Labor who established the framework on which the MBS review is based, in order to improve efficiency, quality and safety in healthcare. Our intention was that the framework was to find smart, sensible ways to update and modernise the MBS, not to provide a fig leaf for further cuts. We are pleased that so far the government has followed the recommendations of the review, although we remain concerned about the government's overall intent. We also have welcomed constructive engagement from the medicines sector, which has led to further savings in this year's budget on top of savings banked last year.

But some of these savings will be contested. In particular, the government must urgently explain the claimed savings from the GP visa changes. Weeks on from the budget, we still don't know the details. AMA president Dr Michael Gannon has argued that these savings won't actually be realised because these patients will move to other GPs. If that's true, the government effectively has a half-billion-dollar black hole in its budget. The only alternative is that these $416 million of savings will be realised, and that means that people's access to Medicare services is being cut. Either way, the government needs to come out of hiding on this point and share the details with the Australian people that that is what it intends to do.

There is a broader question to be answered here. Where are the savings actually going? Where is that $1 billion going across the portfolio and what is actually happening in relation to other cuts that have happened in previous years? The government claims that it will redirect or reinvest these savings back into the health portfolio, but there is no guarantee or detail about how they are going to do so. For example, while there is $190 million in savings from the MBS review, there is just $25 million in new MBS listings, meaning a net cut to Medicare. You might call me a cynic, but I simply don't trust the government when it comes to health anymore. How could I? Nearly five years of broken promises and savage cuts, and trust is pretty low across the sector. Labor will be pushing the government for more detail on this new $1 billion in health savings, particularly in Senate estimates next week.

Our second concern is that the budget includes new listings for the National Immunisation Program in the PBS. Of course that is always very welcome. The minister is right that thousands of Australians will benefit from new drugs to prevent and treat diseases, including refractory hodgkin lymphoma, spinal muscular atrophy—a terrible disease—and breast cancer. These listings are particularly welcomed where they have been delayed, as in the case of the pertussis vaccine, which was recommended for listing almost two years ago. I'm not quite sure why it took the government so long.

I want to make three points about this. First, the Pharmaceutical Benefits Schedule listings are the ordinary business of government. The last Labor government spent over $6 billion to add around 800 new medicines and vaccines to the PBS, the Life Saving Drugs Program and the National Immunisation Program. We understood that the credit for listings doesn't belong to the minister of the day—they are not his personal gift to the nation. The credit belongs to the medicine companies that develop new treatments; the patients, the clinicians and the researchers who build evidence from them; the independent committees that have ensured that the new listings are clinically and cost effective; and the Australian taxpayers, who ensure that we actually have a Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme.

Second, whether they admit it or not, governments of both stripes have struggled to afford the new high-cost drugs that will increasingly characterise the PBS, but list them we must. The discussion around PBS sustainability is crucial. The $1 billion provision for new listings in this budget is a start and it will go pretty quickly, but it is a drop in the ocean compared to the $20 billion in PBS savings under the Howard, Rudd and Gillard governments through simplified price disclosure. As many of you know, in our second term of government, Labor agreed to establish in essence a notional bank, allowing the health minister to offset new listings on the PBS against those savings. That concept was lost when this government came to office, so we are essentially back where we started.

Third, the PBS has been and always should be defined by a rigorous focus on clinical and cost effectiveness. There are worrying signs that the government has begun to politicise the PBS to secure support for its changes to rebate arrangements. Those changes may prove worthy, but no minister should overrule the respected advice of the PBAC on any issue. When there is a perception that overruling the PBAC has resulted in a drug being listed on the PBS and a company participating in a rebate trial, we have a problem. The politicisation of the PBAC process would be a shocking legacy for any minister and for any government. Of course, we will again be pursuing this in the weeks ahead.

In terms of my overall thoughts on the budget when it comes to health, this budget is notable for what it does not include. The government failed to speed up its very slow thaw of the Medicare rebate freeze, meaning elements still remain in place up until 2020, forcing soaring out-of-pocket costs even higher. They've already banked billions of dollars of savings from this freeze and they are banking billions in savings right now. That is money that has come out of the patient rebate for Medicare services. Billions of dollars have been cut from Medicare.

The government has also failed to abandon its hospital cuts—$715 million between 2017 and 2020. They went to the 2013 election committing to Labor's National Health Reform Agreement and committing explicitly to funding 50 per cent of growth in the efficient price of hospital-based activity. Their policy document stated that. They, of course, in 2014 decided to completely abandon that commitment, ripped up those agreements, started off with a $57 billion cut to public hospitals—a campaign was strongly run by Labor and the states against them for those cuts—came back and said: 'Okay. We'll fund 45 per cent of growth in the efficient price capped at 6.5 per cent.' That is a cut to public hospitals. Those are the facts. It is $715 million from 2017 to 2020. The new agreement the government is seeking to impose on states is the same funding formula, entrenching that level of hospital funding again over the next five years in the agreement.

A number of states have signed, and they have said very clearly to us that they have only done that because of budget certainty; but they recognise that this hospital deal that the government has put on the table is entirely inadequate to fund our public hospitals properly. It does nothing to deal with problems of elective surgery and emergency department waiting times, it does nothing to deal with outpatient waiting times and it basically locks our public hospitals into a funding death spiral when it comes to the Commonwealth. With trying to lock in those similar cuts to the 2025 periods, Labor has said very, very clearly that we will reverse that $2.8 billion with our Better Hospital Fund, as was announced by the Leader of the Opposition in our budget-in-reply speech.

There is also very little in this budget on prevention, other than a continued commitment to provide support and some initiatives in relation to physical activities. There is nothing in this budget on innovation in primary care. There is very little on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health. In fact, there are some concerns about where the government might be going next in relation to savings for Aboriginal medical services. We will be keeping a very close eye on that. There is certainly nothing in the budget that actually starts to tackle health inequalities. In fact, while there is a lot of activity in the budget—listings, disbursements and grants—there is very, very little focused on outcomes or innovations in that long-time future vision that we need for our health care

I am sorry to say that is typical of the government's approach to health. There are plenty of announceable things—anybody would think that maybe we are in an election year—but no overarching strategy for the portfolio itself and no attempt to grapple with the big challenges ahead. After repeatedly attacking health throughout it first term, the government has spent much of its second term settling disputes that have been on it own making. It certainly has taken up a lot of the minister's time over the last 18 months. But what we actually need is a government that is prepared to ask and help to answer the big questions in health and not just clean up the messes of its own making. These are questions like: how do we better promote health and prevent disease; what is the role of the national government in that space; how do we ensure all Australians can access quality, affordable healthcare; and how do we adapt our unique healthcare system to meet our future needs? There isn't the slightest indication in this budget that the government is asking these important questions, let alone seeking to answer them.

In the last few minutes I have got remaining, I would like to talk about the budget in relation to my own constituency of Ballarat. In two words, what does the budget mean for Ballarat? Not much. The budget fails the people of Ballarat pretty badly. It seems like this government would struggle to pinpoint Ballarat on a map, let alone take a look at the worthy list of projects that needed funding in our community. There was a long list: the establishment of an emergency services hub at Ballarat Airport, stage 2 of the Ballarat Western Link Road and waste-to-energy projects that have been pursued by the City of Ballarat and the Hepburn Shire for some time. They are great projects. There is also the Bacchus Marsh regional community sporting hub and the restoration of our historic Her Majesty's Theatre. None of those projects are mentioned in the budget. Hopefully we will see some election announcements, but I am not holding my breath. Under the budget, these projects will have to continue to await funding.

I note the government's previous announcements that they will support the Melbourne Airport rail link, but as with everything the devil is in the detail. The $5 billion looks like it is going to be equity funding; it is not going to be a grant, which makes it incredibly problematic when it comes to public transport infrastructure of this nature. I have also said very clearly it is important that the route—when and if developed; it's in the never-never for this government—must go through Sunshine in order to ensure that the west of the state actually benefits.

Equally, the government has failed to fund aged-care packages to the level that is required. They have basically funded an additional 14,000 packages over the next two years, but taken that money out of the aged-care portfolio overall. When you have 100,000 people there, those circumstances are simply untenable. That includes my own dad—as his local member, the member of Chisholm, knows—who is waiting for a level 4 package. There are continued cuts to public hospitals. In my region, there was a $5.7 million cut. There are continued cuts to TAFE. All of those have significant effects on regional communities such as my own. This budget certainly does very little for Ballarat, very little for Victoria and very little for the nation, particularly when it comes to the vital area of regional services and health. (Time expired)

Kevin Hogan (Page, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Before I talk about some of the wonderful things that will be funded under Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2018-2019 and the related bills, I just want to pick up on what the previous member said—her accusation about the politicisation of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee. Let's talk of facts here: that committee's decisions used to be done completely at arm's length, and it was, in fact, Nicola Roxon, a previous Labor health minister, who decided that all of those things from the PBAC would come before cabinet. She completely politicised the process. I would just put that fact on the record.

This budget has some wonderful themes to it. If I look at the themes of this budget, there is major infrastructure spending, as you and many people would well know, Mr Deputy Speaker Irons. There is a $75 million spend in infrastructure over 10 years, and I will talk a bit about that. The overarching theme of this budget, too, is that this side of politics understands. I am almost at despair that the other side don't understand that all of the wealth of this country is created by the private sector. Every single taxpayer funded job, every single taxpayer funded program and every bit of money we spend on education, health, welfare and defence—you name it; basically, the whole city of Canberra—survives on the taxpayer dollar.

And the taxpayer dollar is all generated by the private sector. These are people who have a go; people who go out there, start a business, start employing people, make money and do well. They then pay taxes to fund the public sector. So the theme of this budget is very much about giving money back. It is not about cutting money to any public sector or to any public area; it's actually making it easier for the private sector to thrive. This has been well proven: one of the reasons that I think this country has had uninterrupted growth for the last 20-odd years—and I will give credit to the other side—is the tax cuts for both individuals and companies from both sides of politics over those 20-odd years, begun under Hawke and Keating. They were into personal income and company tax cuts, as was, obviously, the Howard government as well. It stalled under Rudd and Gillard, obviously, but, again, we are looking to re-institute those.

What that means is we're competitive. It means that those private businesses have more money to spend and they thrive. And every single company tax rate cut that we've ever done, for example, has meant that the tax collection from the corporate sector not only increased in dollar value within two to three years but it increased as a percentage of the GDP of this country. So that says that when we have a thriving private sector, therefore the public sector benefits from that.

I just want to go through a couple of things to begin with—infrastructure projects that I'm very excited about out of this budget. The one thing I think that we do need to do as a government is that while the private sector will create jobs and grow our economy, we as a government need to provide good infrastructure and provide the types of things that a modern, thriving economy and country has to provide for people for be attracted here and for things—goods and services—to move with ease around our country and, indeed. leave our country to be exported.

One part of what I'm very excited about is the Pacific Highway bypass of Coffs Harbour. The reason that we do dual duplication of highways, as you would well understand, Mr Deputy Speaker, is to reduce fatalities. Fatalities on our roads are still far too high. Fatalities on the Pacific Highway, which is very dear to my heart, are now at multidecade lows. When you consider the increase in traffic over the decades, that is a great statistic and it's because we are dual-duplicating it. We still have a bit to go, and the last bit, really, that funds have been allocated to is the Coffs Harbour bypass. One of the reasons for this is that the Coffs Harbour area itself was dual duplicated. It was not unsafe, so the parts that we were doing first were those that weren't dual duplicated so that we could reduce fatalities on the road.

There are big parts happening in my electorate; it is now probably down to four, but the dual duplication was a $5 billion project a few years ago. The big section still to be done is between Woolgoolga and Ballina. Again, billions of dollars of federal money are going into that—80 per cent of the funding of that is federal and 20 per cent is from the state.

The missing link was the Coffs Harbour bypass, and in this budget we have allocated $971 million to bypass Coffs Harbour. Coffs Harbour has 12 sets of traffic lights and is busy in itself. It is a thriving regional centre with a large, growing population. With the 12 sets of traffic lights, just with local traffic, it is busy. When you have B-doubles and a lot of people driving up and down the highway it is in lockdown, especially around tourist times and busy holiday seasons. So I was delighted to see and be part of the announcement in the budget. The northern beaches of Coffs Harbour recently came into my electorate in the last redistribution in New South Wales at the last election, and I have been spending a lot of time in places like Sapphire Beach, Moonee Beach, Emerald Beach, Sandy Beach, Corindi, Arrawarra and other places. When I am down there and in those communities, this issue is raised a lot with me. So I was delighted that that was announced in the budget.

There are four other programs that I would like to commend that are going to be re-funded in the budget. One is the Building Better Regions Fund. Our cities—the Sydneys and Melbournes—really are overcrowded. A lot of the growth in Australia's populations does get centred in those two major cities, and we are looking to decentralise. We have some thriving regional centres and regional cities where people can move without necessarily locking down the infrastructure or overloading the infrastructure in those places. The Building Better Regions Fund is an important part of that and I am delighted to see that funded.

We also had a pilot program, the Regional Jobs and Investment Package, and I will be looking to see that further extended as well. RJIP is about not only building public infrastructure—the roads and the bridges that you need—but encouraging and giving incentives to private businesses to move to regional centres. I announced some at the start of this year, which I was really excited about. We are going to help along a medicinal cannabis facility in Casino. We gave money to them and their projections have them employing up to 280 people within the next three or four years. We also are looking to relocate a robotics company called Adaptapack. This is a world-leading company that will relocate to the Northern Rivers as well, and will bring, very importantly, high-paying, skilled jobs to the region. One thing with regional areas is that they often do not necessarily have the career choices for our young people, if they elect to stay in a region. Some of the career choices have been more limited, obviously, than in the capital cities, so attracting companies like this to regional areas is important.

We also are helping the blueberry industry again. Regional areas tend to be great exporters; we produce things. Whether we grow food or produce other stuff, we are large exporters. We are helping the blueberry industry out as well with one grant that we are providing. We are building some infrastructure around Cumaran Creek Road with one of the biggest agribusinesses in our area, Mara Seeds. Just as an anecdote, they provide 85 per cent of the soybeans for Vitasoy in our country. You wouldn't know it if you were driving around that area, but they are hidden away behind hills doing wonderful work, and we are going to be helping them as well. Again, these are very exciting things about developing regional Australia and making sure we get our fair share of spending.

It was great to see also the 20,000 extra at-home care places in the budget, and also the ACAR funding in the budget. There has been an amazing growth in aged-care retirement villages and nursing homes within my electorate. There is a new one in Grafton—144 aged-care beds for Signature Care in Grafton. There is more money for aged care in Kyogle and Yamba There are some exciting developments there that I look forward to watching grow and come online in the next few years.

It's also great to see the Stronger Communities Program funded in this budget as well. They're not necessarily large amounts of money, but a lot of people talk about partnerships when they have been speaking on these appropriation bills. That is a great grants program helping what are often volunteer based organisations, where people are giving of their time and sometimes of their own resources to provide essential services or facilities in local communities. The Stronger Communities grants are all about helping them and whatever service or facilities they are providing. There have been some wonderful examples of that in my community. That program is continuing as well.

Just on the bigger picture again, I started by saying how important the private sector is. This country only thrives if our private sector is thriving. We always need to create the environment where they do thrive. Some of the things that are very important in this are the asset depreciation write-off, the $20,000 as a one-off capital purchase or anything under that. That created a real boon in my regional towns when that was introduced two or three years ago. If you were a small business and you were going to buy something, whether it be a piece of equipment or something in the office, you could instantly write that off. As soon as we introduced that a number of years ago, a lot of businesses came to me and said that it had made a real difference. That is because we understand it; we understand that people investing and putting their capital into their business is important. Updating equipment and re-investing has created a real boom. It's great to see that as well.

Let's talk about tax relief. The other side, when they use this word, say, 'Giving people tax relief is almost like robbing the country.' This is about letting people keep more of their own money to invest and spend so they can thrive. It is a bit disturbing, because this current Labor opposition is really the first government in 30 years that doesn't accept that. We've had 20-odd years of growth because of that philosophy, and it is very disappointing to see that after 30 years we're starting to disagree on that.

Very importantly, we have already given tax cuts to small businesses with turnover of less than $50 million. That is very important as well. Again, the other side would like to think it's a fluke. But we have seen 400,000-odd jobs created in this country in the last 12 months. It's not a fluke and it's not good luck. It's about the fact that we are creating the environment and the conditions where small businesses are encouraged to invest and grow their businesses and therefore, obviously, employ more people.

We do free trade agreements, and they are great. A lot of them get caught up in protocols, and different agreements get established with different parts. They are micro areas of the different economies, if you like. It was good to see new trade councils with different countries funded in this budget, which is going to help our export markets. Obviously everything that we export creates more wealth in this country, which is important.

I have spoken a lot about where we might be spending money and allocating resources, but with all of this, because we have a growing economy, more people in jobs and less people in welfare, we actually are increasing funding in important social infrastructure like education and health. Other speakers have mentioned the PBS and other health areas where we are increasing funding. That is social infrastructure, which is a very important part of our country's growth as well.

Above all that, there is other great news. It is often said that if you run continual deficits and run up the debt of your country you are literally robbing future generations. It's not okay to leave your children and grandchildren with a huge debt that they would have to pay back. The coalition government since 2013 has been looking to restore the country's finances, which were ruined by the previous Labor government. We are bringing the surplus back a year earlier, and for the first time since the Howard government we will be running a surplus, which, along with ensuring the security of this nation, is one of the most important things we do.

Warren Snowdon (Lingiari, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for External Territories) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am so pleased to be involved in this discussion. We watched the budget with great interest, thinking that we may see something productive come out of it in the context of looking after ordinary Australians, the health system, the education system, housing, remote communities and infrastructure across Australia, but how disappointed we were! We ended up with what we have seen in successive budgets from this government: they're all spin, and the substance leaves a great deal wanting. In 2014, $500 million was unceremoniously cut from the budget for First Nations peoples across the country, money that has never been restored. When you look at this budget, you ask what's in it for ordinary Australians—let alone Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people living in remote parts the country—and you find there's not a great deal. We know this budget is aimed at the top end of town and denies the opportunity it should provide for ordinary Australians. We've heard repeatedly that it fundamentally fails the fairness test: 'We'll give a massive $80 billion handout to big business, $17 billion of it to crook banks, and at the same time cut funding to hospitals, schools, TAFE and housing.' How does that work?

An opposition member: It doesn't.

It does not work. Ordinary Australians are having their pockets pilfered. We can see that in the government's support for the Fair Work Commission's penalty rate decision. How do you say to ordinary Australians, 'We're looking after your interests; we want you to do well and have good access to education and health care,' while at the same time ensuring the beneficiaries of this budget are not them, but the people who do well out of this community already? We're seeing record profits for the banks in particular. I cannot comprehend how this government sees it as a good idea to give banks a $17 billion tax cut, and how anyone in the community supports that idea. $17 billion is what they're cutting out of schools. How do you justify that?

When the opposition comes up with budget measures designed to restructure the tax system, like the decisions proposed for negative gearing, we get nothing from the government except criticism that this somehow or another is going to pilfer the pockets of the rich. That's the people it will impact upon, not working people, not families dependent upon public housing—the people who are going to suffer directly as a result of this budget. The Leader of the Opposition and the shadow Treasurer have made it very clear that we'll restore the funding cut from hospitals and schools in this budget. That means we'll scrap the up-front fees for 100,000 TAFE students as part of our $470 million plan to boost TAFE apprenticeships in the schools of Australia. We'll invest $100 million in modernising TAFE facilities around the country. We'll provide 10,000 pre-apprentice places for young people who want to learn a trade and 20,000 adult apprentice places for older workers who need to retrain.

We'll put $2.8 billion back into hospitals. That will impact upon the health care of ordinary Australians right across this country. That's what is important: health care and education. If we want young Australians to have a sustainable long-term future and the opportunity for a job, we have to make sure the foundations are right. We've got to make sure that they have good access to early childhood education, to a good health system and to a good education system which provides them with the opportunity to learn as they should learn and provides them with good post-school training, whether it's in the TAFE system or the universities—areas which have been impacted directly by this government's budget. The people who will suffer the most from this budget are people who live in regional and remote communities of this country.

The $17 billion cut from schools over the next 10 years, which this government has put in place, will impact on my electorate in a disproportionate way. The most disadvantaged students in the country live in rural and remote parts of my electorate—Aboriginal communities scattered across 1.3 million square kilometres of my electorate. They will be the ones who suffer the most as a result of these cuts. It means that, over the next two years, schools in the Northern Territory will be losing $71 million—that is $71 million that schools across the Northern Territory will lose. Of course, the kids in Lingiari will be losing access to almost $40 million: $37.3 million of that money will come out of the seat of Lingiari. Let's be very clear about it, they have the highest levels of poverty and the greatest disadvantage of any kids across this country. That funding cut to the Northern Territory is equivalent to cutting four teachers from almost every school. We need to be clear that 70 per cent of kids in the Northern Territory are enrolled in the public education system. It's not reasonable. It's not fair. That is why Labor is committed to restoring the $17 billion cuts from education.

This budget is such a con. It is such a con! We learn from the budget that Scott Morrison, the Treasurer, has led Territorians to believe that the Central Arnhem Highway will receive funding of $180 million for bituminising—by the way, $180 million won't be sufficient—and another $100 million for the Buntine Highway, which should also be upgraded. You would think as a result of those announcements that the people of the Northern Territory would be jumping up and down with glee, knowing that this money would be coming almost immediately and that the next financial year they could see the engineers, the road workers, the vehicles, the tractors and the bulldozers. We could see all this work happening on the roads in the Northern Territory—well, far from it. Four out of every five dollars of this money will appear in not this parliament, not the next one but the one after. It is in 2022 when we'll see any of the real money hit the deck. It means that people have been told to believe that this money would be forthcoming through this budget process, when, in fact, they won't get it until 2022. And it's even worse than that. What we know from their previous budgets and from estimates this week is that, in their first four budgets, this government have committed to investing $675 million in the Territory's infrastructure—that is $675 million that they have committed—but they have actually invested only $451 million. So, $224 million of the $675 million promised in budgets over the last four years to the Northern Territory for infrastructure have not appeared.

What sorts of fools do they think the people of the Northern Territory are, if they believe they're going to say, 'What a great thing it is that you've told us once again that you're going to spend more money on us, when we know that the money you said you were going to spend in the past has not been spent'? It's worth pointing out where some of that money hasn't been spent. Just think of this: $305 million was committed to major road projects and only $237 million has been spent—a 22 per cent underspend. The Bridges Renewal Program was allocated $17 million and $2 million has been spent—an 89 per cent underspend. With the Northern Australia Beef Roads Program, we hear it all the time—I can remember the former Deputy Prime Minister standing up in the parliament and telling us what these beef roads were going to do—that there are funds for Northern Australia. I will tell you what has happened. The Northern Territory was allocated $14 million, but do you know how much has been spent over the last four years? It was $1 million—and 89 per cent underspend. What sort of fools do you think we are in the Northern Territory that we're going to cop the crap you give us all the time. Northern Australian roads—$98 million coming to the Northern Territory. How much has been spent? It was $15 million, an 86 per cent underspend. We're not galahs around here. But you are, because you take us for galahs. We know that this place needs a lot better outcomes than you're providing.

The funding profile across the Northern Territory between 2018-19 and 2021-22 is $222 million in 2018-19, and by the time we get to 2021-22 it is $61 million. You cannot be serious. We see the current Deputy Prime Minister coming to the Northern Territory and pontificating about how much money is being spent and all the infrastructure that is going to be developed, when we know it's a fraud. We know it's an absolute fraud, and they should be ashamed of themselves.

It's not all brickbats, though, I might say. I want to acknowledge a couple of bouquets in this budget, because they impact upon particular groups of people. One of them is the excellent announcement of $23 million allocated in the budget for Western Desert Dialysis, or the Purple House. This is the Western Desert Nganampa Walytja Palyantjaku Tjutaku Aboriginal Corporation, which provides renal care for people living in remote communities. What this government has done, and I support it absolutely, is to provide a Medicare item number for remote renal dialysis, which means there will be a dedicated item number, providing $590 per dialysis treatment, at a total cost to the budget of $34.8 million for 2022. This is welcome. The expansion of remote dialysis will take the number of dialysis machines in remote communities from 36 to 54, allowing more than 400 patients to receive dialysis, compared to the current patient load of around 250 in these remote communities.

For those who don't understand the importance of this, let me say that the number of people who live in remote communities across north and central Australia who have had to relocate to places like Alice Springs, Katherine, Darwin, Adelaide, Perth, Broome, and other places for end-stage renal treatment is enormous. It means there's an impact on those communities. If we can provide these services to people in their home communities, that releases pressure on the towns, it will be cheaper in the long term, and it will provide a better health outcome for those people, which is where they want to be—in their home communities. That's a very important announcement and I congratulate Minister Ken Wyatt in particular for it.

There were some other announcements that I thought were important, although much overdue. They related to the Indian Ocean territories of Christmas Islands and Cocos Islands, although I note there is nothing in this budget directly for Cocos Islands. There is money for Christmas Island to relocate and upgrade the wharf crane and mooring systems at Flying Fish Cove. This is a process that has been going on for over 10 years, so it's about bloody time it was done, and I think it's important we acknowledge that it is being done. This money is welcome, but I have to say there are no infrastructure announcements for Cocos Islands. We know that the airstrip on Cocos Islands needs to be upgraded—it is being upgraded, but there's no money in the budget for it. So, I just wonder what is happening? Where is the money coming from for this work? It's vital for the nation, as many will know. It is important that we acknowledge that it needs to be done, but there's nothing in this budget for it.

I have given the bouquets, but the brickbats are a lot heavier and they are creating a lot more damage. I have mentioned a number of things, but I haven't gone into all the issues to do with remote area housing. We have seen a welcome announcement from the government of $110 million a year for remote area housing over the next period. That is $34 million a year less than was being provided under the previous agreement for remote housing in the Northern Territory, and no money has been allocated in this budget for remote housing in the other states of the country, and that needs to be done. This budget is a fraud.

Barnaby Joyce (New England, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think that one of the most crucial things about this budget is that we return to a surplus position. If we do not return to a surplus position as envisaged, in 2020-21, with a small surplus and more substantial surpluses after that, then the budget loses its integrity, and at any future time it really won't matter what you say in the budget, because there will be no money to do it. This is a task that was left to us by the trajectory that Labor Party imprudence put us on. At that time, I remember being at the front doors and giving a speech, because I was amazed at how quickly they had taken our gross debt from around about $60 billion to over $100 billion, in lightning form.

Then came the time where, apparently, they were going to save Australia from the global financial crisis. Might I say, we were saved from the global financial crisis not by school halls or ceiling insulation or other ridiculous money that was thrown out the door for people to go and spend as they wish. A lot of it went into such things as the pokies; I don't know whether the pokies revitalised the Australian economy, but they certainly gave it a good crack. We were saved by a range of things. Coal exports were a very big one; iron ore exports were another very big one. We also had a large export of grain, especially from Western Australia, at the time. These factors contributed to our capacity to avoid a downturn in the economy, to keep that record growth going; it had nothing to do with Labor prudence.

The repair mechanism we were placed on from that trajectory has been long and arduous. It has taken hard work, it's required people to deal with a lot of pain as they had to try and remove themselves from these crazy contractual obligations like some madman who'd been on a late-night television shopping splurge, buying everything they could possibly see. Now we are heading back to a surplus. I hope, no matter who the government is, that they are cognisant of the fact that, if we don't move towards surpluses, then your promises to an electorate are meaningless because there is no money to back them up.

Within this budget, though, we do have a range of things that talk to the growth of our nation, and I want to identify a few of them. Infrastructure is the core to the development of our nation. We have a nation that is basically seen through the eyes of a crescent economy: it starts at about Rockhampton, goes through to about Adelaide and sticks very closely to the coast. That is not the way our nation should see its future. It has to develop further regions. Within this budget, we have a continued equity injection into something the National Party fought for, and in which I was proud to play my part—that is, the inland rail. This is absolutely vital in how we drive another section of our economy into a form of economic development, and you will see this in its most prevalent form in places such as Parkes, where Pacific National is already investing in excess of $35 million into new infrastructure—into Narrabri, into places such as Goondiwindi and Toowoomba, and of course the beneficiaries of this reside at the bookends, which are Melbourne and Brisbane. This is one of the most seminal statements of regional development that this nation has seen, certainly in my time in politics, and it is something that we fought for and that we can still do whilst bringing the budget into surplus.

Hand in glove with that I'd like to acknowledge that, yes, we do have an obligation to make sure that we make the lives of people better. The member for Lingiari, who spoke previously, brought to our attention such things as the renal dialysis issues, and these are vitally important, especially for Aboriginal people, Indigenous people, particularly those of the Western Desert. Renal dialysis is vitally important because of the high incidence of renal failure that is present in Indigenous communities. Mr Deputy Speaker Gee, you would also have a personal engagement in the investment that will be made in such things as the Murray-Darling Basin medical school, something I know you have fought diligently and ardently for over such a long period of time. Once again, the only way these sorts of things can happen is due to the prudence of having a budget that is ultimately going back to surplus.

We must also invest in roads. Within my own electorate, we're looking for close to $75 million to be spent in the current year on capital on roads, especially the New England Highway, which is our corridor of commerce. It will go between the Inland Rail to our west and the Pacific Highway to our east. To our east, we'll also see something we have been fighting for over a long period of time, and I acknowledge the work of the member for Cowper, and that is the Coffs Harbour bypass. Coffs Harbour is one of those areas where it's a bottleneck. We have a national purpose to remove these bottlenecks, because we should be able to get on a dual highway at Gympie and go all the way to Melbourne. One of the last major bottlenecks is Coffs Harbour, and now we have brought forward the capacity to start working on that. It was always in the budget, but timing was the issue.

I know that the member for Wide Bay is very aware and thankful for the work that will be done on section D of the Bruce Highway. Section D was slightly easier because there were other savings, and these savings in the allocation within that portfolio were allowed to be brought forward to 'like purposes', and a like purpose was obviously seen to be section D of the Bruce Highway.

Regional airport security and the upgrade of regional airport security are other issues of vital importance, and two beneficiaries of that reside in my electorate, including Armidale. The federal government and the state government have invested a large amount of money in Armidale, and this $3.5 million will take that airport to the next stage—that is, getting the proper screening facilities in.

I'd like to acknowledge former Leader of the National Party Warren Truss and the work he did in bringing about $1 billion for the Building Better Regions Fund. During my time we refurbished that with in excess of half a billion dollars, and that fund continues on. This work is hand in glove with the requirements of councils, who always have certain projects they're looking for funding for. I'm not trying to be parochial, but working closely with councils allows us to deliver to people the projects that they want. There has also been an unfreezing of the financial assistance grants, otherwise known as FAGs. They'd had their indexation frozen, but they have now been released so that councils can have greater access to money. We must work closely with our local councils because they are, to be quite frank, closest to the people. In that working relationship between state and federal and local governments, we must allow them to have access to resources to do their jobs. By so doing, they are doing ours.

We can also see there is a $3.5 billion Roads of Strategic Importance initiative. Now $1.5 billion of this is going to be spent in northern Australia, so I would like to take issue with what the previous speaker, the member for Lingiari, brought up when he asked, 'What are we doing in northern Australia?' This is yet another statement, a $1.5 billion statement. It allows another $2 billion to be spent on other Roads of Strategic Importance initiatives. I think we should really start thinking of roads that not only go north-south but also east-west. Within my patch we have things such as the Bruxner Highway. We need to make sure we upgrade that; it's a major corridor. We have the Taree to Tamworth road, including such things as the Bucketts Way and Port Stephens Cutting, which is a vitally important piece of infrastructure that needs to be upgraded. Recently the Armidale Regional Council approached me about a major road—that is, the Kempsey to Armidale road, a large section of which goes over the Great Dividing Range Range—that is without side rails, so if someone goes over the edge, they're dead. It is roads such as those that are crying out for an investment—an investment that can only be made by a budget that is going back into surplus. Mr Deputy Speaker Gee, Bells Line of Road is something that you drove us half-crazy with, so it's good to see that there is a pool of funds with the capacity to allow us to deal with issues such as that one.

The digital transformation package, which is $10.1 million, will allow us to further build on something that has been a core issue for the National Party, and that is decentralisation. This is genuine decentralisation: decentralisation to regional towns, not decentralisation to other suburbs within Sydney, or to other major capitals within our nation, but actually to regional towns.

I know that one of the more noteworthy of those, and something we fought for, was the relocation of the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority from Canberra to Armidale. Obviously, it builds on the concept of centres of excellence—people who can socialise the acumen on research into plants and animals. And by doing so in an area such as Armidale—a university town, with cathedrals, art galleries and the CSIRO—we hope that after the transition, which always has to be managed, that we allow and set up our nation for a better future, with resident expert knowledge and the capacity for that to cross-fertilise in such a way that we have a better outcome. This will be a better outcome for the CSIRO, a better outcome for the University of New England in its research into animals and plants, and a better outcome for the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority, because these skill sets are in close proximity to one another.

In your own electorate, Mr Deputy Speaker Gee, we're doing the same thing. We are setting up to do the same thing, with the financing of soft commodity products to stand behind such things. I commend the work done by David Littleproud in finalising the movement of the Regional Investment Corporation, a $4 billion investment cooperation, to Orange, where it can cohabit with Paraway financial, which is part of Macquarie Bank, with the regional and rural investment arm of the National Australia Bank and with the Department of Agriculture and Water Resources. This is creating, yet again, another centre of excellence, a centre of financial excellence. I may have talked about this excessively, but giving vision to it is our own form of Chicago in Orange. That is what you want to do when you have real vision for this nation.

I know there's further decentralisation, such as the Murray-Darling Basin Authority. A section of that has gone to Wodonga. That is good, taking jobs to Wodonga. And might I note that there were more applications for those jobs in Wodonga than we had places available for them. That is real decentralisation. And I know that the Minister for Agriculture and Water Resources, David Littleproud, the member for Maranoa, has further goals to set in further decentralisation.

I would also like to commend the work that is being done by the member for Riverina, the Leader of the National Party, in making sure that the offices for the Inland Rail Corporation are not in Canberra, but actually out in places such as Dubbo. This is the sort of decentralisation that our nation has to do if we want to evolve from this crescent economy that resides predominantly within 10 to 50 kilometres of the coast, in an arc from Rockhampton around to Adelaide. It's only through a budget such as this that we have the capacity to invest in what is important.

For the New England, it has been a good outcome: there is the further investment that is happening for the New England Highway, the further investment that is happening in our airports and the further investment that is happening in securing better water infrastructure. I note that we've had the upgrade of the Chaffey Dam in the past, and we're now driving for a further upgrade of water infrastructure to secure the water supply for the City of Tamworth. If we hadn't upgraded the water supply we'd be in dire consequences now. In the past we fought for it and we achieved it. Water is wealth, and it also underpins the economic development of those areas.

We're also working hand in glove with the resettlement of refugees. It was great, the other day, with Settlement Services International to see people such as the Yazidi people, who were persecuted. We may remember when they were on Mount Sinjar, being pursued by ISIS. I have a great sense of joy in making sure that these people find refuge, solace and a great future in a city such as Armidale.

We can show compassion when we have the wallet to do it. It is very hard to show compassion when you don't have the money. So the first responsibility—and concluding where I started—in anything is to make sure that what you spend, ultimately, is less than what you receive, otherwise you will go broke. You must pay off the credit card, otherwise your promises are without purpose. They are false and they are misleading, and you leave your nation in a dire position in the future, where the people who come after us, and our children, have to pay back debts—and they really would be debts. We have to set ourselves on that path, no matter who is in government. We must set ourselves that task and put ourselves on that path, otherwise we are being totally and utterly selfish in how we see it. We are letting down the people in the future who would have needed that money for a better lifestyle and for a better future—for better health, for better education, for better roads, for a nation that can defend itself, for a nation that has the capacity to show compassion in looking after others and for a nation that decentralises for a greater purpose in the future.

Susan Templeman (Macquarie, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I must pick up on something that the member for New England just said. He said, 'You can show compassion when you have the wallet to do it.' Sorry, compassion and humanity should not depend on how much money is sitting in your wallet. That is not the definition of compassion and humanity, and it is shameful that this government has that attitude to refugees, asylum seekers or anyone in need for that matter. Too often, people tell me that they can't see a difference between Labor and Liberal. Well, I think we just saw a very stark difference there. That is not something that they can say today; they cannot say that there is no difference between Labor and Liberal—not today, not this budget, not this government and not this alternative. These things are as different as apples and oranges, red and blue or Labor and Liberal. There is a very clear choice to be made.

Let's look at hospitals. The Liberals have cut $2.8 billion from hospitals, which is locked in in this budget. Labor will reverse public hospital cuts and create a $2.8 billion Better Hospitals Fund and put 20 new MRI machines in regional centres and outer suburbs. That is a very stark contrast. On schools, the Liberals have cut $17 billion. Labor will restore the full $17 billion so there is more money for teachers and resources to make sure that our kids get the education they need. In universities, the Liberals are cutting $2.2 billion, which means 10,000 fewer places. Labor will abolish the cap on university places so that students who want a university degree can get one. At TAFE, under the Liberals, there are already 140,000 fewer apprentices and trainees in Australia, and this budget cuts $270 million more from TAFE on top of the $3 billion already cut. Labor will rebuild TAFEs and waive up-front fees for 100,000 TAFE places in courses where Australia actually needs those skills. This means developing kids who have the skills that this country needs for the jobs that we have.

Let's look at pensioners. The Liberals have tried to cut the energy supplement for pensioners three times. That supplement is $14 a fortnight to help pensioners pay power bills, and the Liberals have tried three times to cut it. They also want people to work until they are 70. Labor will continue to fight these cruel measures. The contrast between red and blue, Labor and Liberal, couldn't be more stark, and so it is with tax cuts. The Liberals say they want to deliver tax relief for low- and middle-income Australians; but their income tax plan is modest, to say the least. It holds those low- to middle-income earners hostage to tax cuts for those at the higher end of the income scale years down the track. If this government really cared about low-and middle-income workers, they would split out the tax cuts so that the relief could flow from 1 July, which Labor would support immediately.

Our tax plan is a better one. Our plan will deliver lower taxes for 10 million working Australians. Labor's plan will see those who earn up to $125,000 a year paying less tax than they would under the Liberals. More than four million people will get a tax cut of $928 a year—so that's chalk and cheese, apples and oranges, Labor and Liberal. What really appeals to me about our approach to tax cuts is that it puts more money into low- and middle-income earners' pockets. We know that most of that money will actually flow through to local economies where those people live. They will be able to have that extra meal out for a special occasion or, God forbid, not for a special occasion. They will be able to let their kids go on that extra school excursion. The fees for soccer and netball won't be such a stretch. All of our tax cuts support an engaged, involved and less cash-strapped local community, where small businesses can thrive because people are able to do more than simply struggle to survive. At a time when no-one is getting decent wage increases and the cost of living keeps rising, Labor's tax plan has benefits to local communities, like mine throughout the Blue Mountains and the Hawkesbury.

The government's budget has failed not only the fairness test set by Labor and the community but also the fiscal responsibility test the government set for itself. For years I have heard the Liberal Party banging on about the debt and deficit disaster. Now there's barely a peep from them on those topics. On the back of the best global economic conditions in more than a decade, we now have net debt for this year coming in double what it was when this government came to office. Gross debt, which crashed through half a trillion dollars on their watch for the first time in history, will remain well above half a trillion dollars every year for the next decade. No wonder they're not talking about debt and deficit. Both types of debt are growing faster under this government than under the previous Labor government, which had the global financial crisis to contend with. Let's talk deficit, since they won't. This year's deficit—the 2017-18 year—is 6½ times bigger than the Liberals predicted in their first horror budget in 2014. Any budget that gives $80 billion tax handouts to big business while cutting from schools, hospitals and pensioners is an unfair budget.

Labor will achieve a budget balance in the same year as the government and deliver a bigger surplus. On top of that, a Shorten Labor government will be guided by clear fiscal principles, which include repairing the budget in a way that doesn't ask the most vulnerable Australians to carry the heaviest burden. We'll more than offset new spending with savings and revenue improvements and we'll bank changes in receipts and payments from any changes to the economy to the bottom line if this impact is positive. We won't just use them; we won't just spend them.

Labor has made the tough and big calls on tax reform, like negative gearing, capital gains tax, trusts and dividend imputation refundability. We've made those calls to close loopholes to those who need them least. We will have a superior debt reduction plan than the Liberals. Our plan is fairer and more responsible because we've made the big calls and we've got them right.

The budget gives an $80 billion tax handout to big business, including $17 billion for the big banks. This is at a time when it is clear to everybody that banks have questions to answer about their culture, their governance and their dealings with customers. Yet here we have a Liberal budget that looks after big banks at the expense of small businesses and individuals. Clearly, there is a massive power imbalance when it comes to what one can demand or do to the other.

We've heard of the pressure put on guarantors for small business loans. We've heard revelations that people at the Commonwealth Bank have meddled with the savings accounts of children, including those in the Blue Mountains in my electorate of Macquarie. These are the sorts of revelations that the Liberals tried to keep from people for so long. First, the Prime Minister resisted a royal commission into the big banks and now he wants to reward them with a $17 billion tax cut. He always sides with the big banks and big business over ordinary working Australians and ordinary hardworking small businesses. It says it all about the Prime Minister that he wants to give a $17 billion tax cut to the big banks at the centre of the rorts and rip-offs that are being exposed at the royal commission.

This budget lays bare, once and for all, the utter contempt the Liberals and Nationals have for Australians and the ABC services that they trust and rely on. We all remember the promise by the coalition on the eve of the 2013 election that there would be no cuts to the ABC. On top of the $254 million in cuts that they've imposed since 2014, this budget contains a further $127 million in cuts. They have frozen indexation of the ABC's operational funding. That's effectively a new cut of $83.7 million. It is supposedly to ensure that the ABC continues to find back-office efficiencies. The reality is that this government knows full well it will mean cuts to jobs, cuts to content and cuts to services at the ABC.

The Liberals and Nationals complain the ABC isn't doing enough news coverage, yet hypocritically they have left a $43 million hole in funding for ABC news and current affairs. You can't keep cutting the ABC's funds and expect the same quality of news coverage. I have been a journalist in a newsroom. My husband was in the ABC newsroom for years. We've both been foreign correspondents. We know the reality of gathering news on the ground. We know that it is changing, but as the Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance says—I am a proud member of the MEAA—they describe it as a dangerous and irresponsible assault on public broadcasting in Australia. At a time when news platforms are expanding but credible, on-the-ground, informed news sources are contracting, the implications for audiences looking for reliable news and information are really serious, particularly for audiences in rural, regional and remote Australia. The ABC is already cutting 20 journalist positions in a proposed restructure, cuts that will hurt its local newsrooms and starve local communities of quality reporting of news stories that matter to them. With fake news needing to be exposed and countered and social media undermining the current news models, the ABC has a crucial role in providing high-quality public interest journalism. It is still one of the most trusted sources of news, and it needs to be adequately funded to remain so.

The MEAA warns that the budget cuts also represent a dangerous threat to the creation of original Australian television production, particularly drama. The constant slashing of funding by governments endangers the ABC's ability to produce quality Australian screen content and fulfil its really important role of telling Australian stories. Even before the budget, more than $250 million had been cut from the ABC since 2014. Over this same period the ABC's commissioning budgets for adult drama and children's content each dropped by 20 per cent. Given their important cultural role, the ABC must be properly funded and future funding must be guaranteed so productions can be developed with certainty.

The Liberals say this budget is about investing to create more jobs and support essential services, yet these cuts will force further redundancies at the ABC and a reduction in ABC services that Australians value. It is pretty clear that just as he shed his leather jacket for good, the Prime Minister has also launched the biggest attack on ABC independence in a generation. There are three pieces of legislation lined up, a fake competitive neutrality inquiry and a further efficiency review, all designed to undermine the ABC. After years of budget cuts at the hands of Malcolm Turnbull, first as communications minister and now as Prime Minister, it is clear you can't trust the Liberals or the Nationals with the ABC.

I want to speak about the impact of this budget on women. Not that the government wants you to know the impact, because back in 2014 the Liberals abolished the annual women's budget statement. Recent Senate estimates show that after five years of supporting policies that disadvantage women, the Liberals are still failing to take real action to achieve gender equality. If you don't have women in your cabinet or your ministry or even on your team, you will never have policies that bridge the pay gap and the gender gap. The Labor 2018 Women's Budget Statement shows gender equity just isn't a priority for the Prime Minister or the Liberals. After five years in government, they have taken no serious action on gender equality, and I suspect they never will. In this budget they have locked in $80 billion of big business tax cuts but refused to scrap the $30 million a year tampon tax. Labor, of course, has promised to remove the tampon tax and we have made budget savings to do so. The Liberals still haven't secured a national housing and homelessness agreement with the states, leaving women's refuges and homelessness services unsure whether they will receive federal funding after 1 July.

After five years and five budgets, the Liberals are still leaving Australian women behind. Think about what they have done or tried to do. They have tried to cut paid parental leave, calling working mums rorters and double dippers. They have introduced a childcare policy that leaves 279,000 families worse off as childcare costs continue to rise. They have frozen funding for the six national women's alliances and they have cut millions of dollars from community legal centres and capital funding used for safe housing options for women. They have cut almost $2 billion of pay rises and support for workers in feminised industries such as early childhood education and disability care, and they have cheered on cuts to penalty rates that disproportionately impact women. They clearly don't see women and women's equality or even a fair go for women as a priority.

Scott Buchholz (Wright, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you for the opportunity to speak about the appropriation bills in light of what has been received and welcomed as a fair and equitable budget from the Turnbull coalition government. We went to an election openly, and our message to the Australian public was jobs and growth. We pretty well bored most of the Australian public with that message of jobs and growth and jobs and growth. Still I stand at this lectern today in front of the Australian public and suggest that we are delivering both jobs and growth—prosperity for our nation as a result of our prudent, responsible fiscal management. The budget is our major platform for that. Regarding jobs and growth, 2017 was the strongest year of jobs growth on record, according to the Bureau of Statistics, with no less than 415,000 jobs created, three-quarters of which were full time. Sometimes those brave trolls on social media say, 'Where are these jobs?' If you don't believe in the integrity of the Australian Bureau of Statistics, I ask you to go to the Australian Bureau of Statistics website. It will give you a breakdown of the service divisions of where those jobs are being created. If you don't trust them, go to the Reserve Bank. They will also give you a sense of where the economy is growing. More than a million jobs have been created since the Liberal-National government was elected in 2013. That is such an amazing feat.

To put those jobs into some type of contrast, and to understand whether or not 415,000 is a reasonable increase, we must ask what Labor produced in the way of jobs over a similar period and have a look at the final 12 months from when they were last in office. Was it 300,000 jobs? It was a bit lower. Was it 200,000 jobs? Again, it was lower than that. Did they get over the 100,000-job mark in that 12-month period? No, they didn't. Labor, the so-called 'friend of the worker', produced only 89,000 jobs, according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, during the remarkably disastrous 12-month Rudd-Gillard-Shorten-Rudd period of absolute anarchy. That is the contrast.

We will hear the rhetoric of how this side of the House is deserting families and giving $17 billion worth of cuts to the big banks. I want to have a chat with the Australian public about when our corporate tax rates are set to kick in. They are outside our forward estimates period—that is, four years down the track. They talk about the $17 billion worth of tax cuts we are giving to big banks. By that time the additional levy we have imposed upon the big banks will generate no less than $16 billion for the federal coffers. We will pull that benefit back from the banks, and it will offset their tax cuts. The corporate tax rates will advantage those businesses in my electorate with turnover of $50 million. Guess what? Businesses with over $50 million turnover will be the benefit of our company tax rate. They go broke as well. It is a competitive industry out there.

The largest contributor to GDP in my electorate is agriculture. I was on a farm the other day with the Prime Minister and the agriculture minister. When I say farm, it is a large organisation. They employ 900 staff. They add value to their product. When you go into the large retailers, you see their product, grown in the Lockyer Valley, on the shelves: zucchini noodles, carrot noodles—ready to cook, picked and packed—coleslaw mixes, bean mixes and cauliflower rice, which is delightful on the dinner plate. So those companies, if given the opportunity, if given a financial break through the company tax rates, will reinvest back in their communities. They will reinvest back with the likes of John Deere, the local tractor agents and the produce and fertiliser salespeople. That is how our local economies grow.

If the opposition looked closely, they would also see that the banks in the 2015-16 period paid a combined company tax bill of over $10 billion. That was reported by the Australian tax office data.gov.au, if you want to have a look at it. Banks pay company tax at the company tax rate. They don't get a special deal, but we do trim them up with the levy. Why is it that the Labor Party want to drive down jobs growth and wages down by stifling those businesses that want to employ Australians. They are businesses like Hood's Rugby Farms—local businesses.

With Australia's current tax competitiveness ranked as one of the lowest and poorest rates across a range of measures, Labor would want to drive the coffin nails in a little bit further. Let's talk about how competitive we are in that tax space. Data released by the Oxford Centre of Business Taxation suggests that, in the 2017 tax competitive ranking of OECD countries, Australia was ranked as the 27th worst performer out of 33 nations. So we are trailing at 27 out of 33. This is the seventh worst ranking on the basis of headline tax and the effective average tax rate. We are ranked 26 out of 33 on the basis of effective marginal tax rates. It is important to understand that last bit, because those who don't want to acknowledge the work done by the Oxford Centre of Business Taxation suggest that there are other local rates of taxation that offset it and skew that data. But when you look at it through the prism of the effective average tax rate, all of those factors are taken into consideration.

In October 2017, the International Monetary Fund's World Economic Outlook report found that a stimulus budget with a mutual reduction in corporate tax rates in France, Germany and the United States would increase economic activities in those localities, whilst also having negative economic spillovers for countries such as ours. The IMF are flagging to the world that, if Australia does not move into this space of company tax rates, it will be left behind. The world is a competitive place for the international flow of capital. We ignore it at our peril. Chris Richards from Deloitte Access Economics said this about the company tax rate: 'This federal tax hurts the economy more than any other.' It is shrinking our economy. We ignore these commentators at our own peril. When Australia cut its tax rate to 30 per cent in 2001 there were 19 OECD countries with higher tax rates than us. Have a guess how many there are today: two. We are lagging. When France's legislation kicks in in 2020, the only OECD country with a higher company tax rate than Australia will be—guess which country, Mr Deputy Speaker?—Portugal. We're asleep at the wheel on this.

Labor claim that it will fund its spending promises by not proceeding with the company tax reductions under our enterprise tax plan. So, as I suggested earlier in my contribution, the revenues that we are going to get from the company tax rates, the $17 billion, won't be realised in our receipts for another four years. But, if you have a look at what Labor are proposing in their budget reply speech, they are going to start spending that money today. Once again, it is Labor who are recklessly spending money they don't have. If you want to put our prudent economic management up against Labor's, remember when they were last in power. They thought they would put up taxes and call it the 'super mining profits tax'? It was to raise $300 million.

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

I remember that.

Scott Buchholz (Wright, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What happened was that they went out and spent all of these revenue gains. Member for Fisher, can you remember how much revenue that tax raised?

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

I believe it was somewhere between nil and zero.

Scott Buchholz (Wright, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Let's call it nil then, for the sake of splitting hairs. It raised no money. They were unable to raise it. That is the difference between our prudent economic management in running the economy and providing jobs and growth, as opposed to those on the other side, who should never, never be allowed anywhere near the economy. The Australian Labor Party will happily discard the hopes and aspirations of hardworking Australians, Australians who have paid taxes their entire life and have budgeted for their retirement so that they are no longer a welfare burden on the taxpayer. They are people who make contributions to our society, like nurses, teachers, police officers, Defence personnel. In retirement they will be worse off under a Labor government.

People are right: they deserve better. In my electorate they deserve better. I want to give you some statistics for the benefit of Hansard. 63,095 taxpayers live in Wright. Our plan is to address bracket creep, which means that around 95 per cent of all taxpayers are projected to face a marginal tax rate of 32.5 per cent or less. Many initiatives in the budget, for example the More Choices for a Longer Life package, will support no less than 22,700 people aged over 65 and their families in my electorate. We have extended the $20,000 instant asset write-off for small businesses, which will affect over 2½ thousand businesses. I was very proud to be able to lobby the government to maintain the National School Chaplaincy program. They do an amazing job. That is $247 million. My heart goes out to all of the unsung heroes in that space.

We have committed $200 million for a third round of the Building Better Regions Fund. Last year our community benefited from this fund with $15,000 for research into horticultural practices in the Lockyer Valley and $80,000 supporting the Scenic Rim for their Eat Local Week activities. Funding for other rounds of the highly successful Stronger Communities program is under way. It has been such a great program backing local schools, P&Cs, local sporting clubs, charities, historical societies and showgrounds. I look forward to making sure my community is connected with more money from those funds.

This budget also includes $29.7 million for sports infrastructure grants, which help sporting clubs do a fabulous job, especially in the regional communities like my electorate. There is a 56 per cent funding boost to the Local Sporting Champions program.

There is a funding increase of 34 per cent for Queensland public hospitals. You will hear those on the other side saying that we are cutting funds to hospitals. Go and have a look! The cheque gets bigger and bigger every year.

Opposition members interjecting—

You hear those on other side squealing in disbelief—it's like taking a baby suckling from the sow's teat—as they suggest that we are cutting money from hospital funding. No-one in Australia should be able to trust Labor, because the reality is we are spending more in hospitals and more in schools. The way you would work out whether or not we are spending more is to have a look at what we spent last year.

Opposition members interjecting—

You should hear the outcry from the other side of the chamber!

Maria Vamvakinou (Calwell, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I can hear the outcry.

Scott Buchholz (Wright, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Of course you can. People in my electorate can hear it. They know quite well. In order to spend more money on hospitals, the cheque that we give to hospitals in Queensland is greater than what it was last year. If we were spending less, that money would be a smaller amount. Those on the other side are mendacious in their claims that we are not spending more on hospitals and in our schools.

There are 6,400 local families set to benefit from the new childcare reforms. More importantly, the Prime Minister was in my electorate the other day announcing $51.3 million to grow our agricultural exports. We have a number of free trade agreements around the world, but behind that there are inhibitors that mean my local growers can't get into some of these free trade economies because of biosecurity protocols. That $51 million will strategically place assets around the world so that my growers can get access to those free trade agreements. We will also spend $121.6 million investing in biosecurity protections for product that is going to come to Australia. In the horticulture sector—in the agricultural sector at large—we have a clean, green image, and we will spend and invest money to make sure that we protect that. This is a great budget. It is a budget that shows quite clearly the difference between our side of government and those on the other side—who can't be trusted and who, when last in power, did nothing but wreck the economy,

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

I'm not surprised that members of the LNP from Queensland have been thrown under the bus by this government, because this is the party, for Queenslanders, that has a reputation for cutting, sacking or selling. You only need to look at the recent disgraceful comments, which I want to place on the record at the beginning of my remarks, about a tragedy that occurred in Brisbane yesterday. A very sad event happened when a mother was hit by a bus in the CBD. I extend my condolences to that poor family, but I want to place on record just how out of touch and offensive the former LNP Premier Campbell Newman is. At this time of tragic loss for a family, the loss of their mother, when the first responders came onto the scene the former LNP Premier decided it was more important to complain about traffic congestion—to issue tweets attacking the police and saying they do not do enough to ease congestion. I think those remarks stand on their own. I extend my deepest condolences to that family, and also place on record in the parliament my thanks and recognition for those dedicated first responders who were on the scene, the brave men and women of the Queensland Police Service and the ambulance and fire services. They risk their lives and do everything they can to keep us safe. They deserve our respect and support; they certainly deserve much more than the former LNP Premier criticising them and not showing compassion.

But the time for excuses is over. The time for shifting blame is over and the time for underdelivering for the Australian people is over. There is nowhere that this government can hide with the budget. They've had five years. For five years the Australian people have had to put up with this poor excuse of a government. For five years they've been kept waiting for this government to deliver. But, year after year, we get nothing but cuts and chaos from the government.

Put simply, this budget fails the fairness test. It fails the family test, it fails the infrastructure test, it fails the health and hospitals test and it fails the education test. Perhaps the only area where the budget delivers is for the Prime Minister's and this government's big mates at the top end of town. We know that in this budget the centrepiece, the signature piece, is an $80 billion tax handout to big business, including, as we keep hearing in the community time and time again, this government's priority of delivering $17 billion in tax breaks for the big banks. How on earth could any member of the government get up on their feet and defend that? How could any person in the parliament think that with the banks—with the royal commission, the rorting and the rip-offs that we're seeing— it's somehow a good economic policy to deliver a tax break to the same people who are seen time and time again ripping off mainstream, ordinary Australians.

While the government continues to defend, support and look after the top end of town, Bill Shorten, the Leader of the Opposition, and members of the opposition will continue to fight in this place every single day to bring fairness and opportunity to hardworking Australians. I note the members in this chamber now are getting upset at what I'm saying. They're not happy I'm pointing out the fact that their special interest mates, their millionaires and billionaires, are their priority. I know that's who they want to look after, and that's fine. Many Australians are waking up to that: 31 Newspolls in a row show that. We understand that. They don't like the fact that we hold them to account.

Government Member:

A government member interjecting—

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

Oh, we've just heard, 'The tide is turning.' Let me guess: the Prime Minister's got his mojo back; the Treasurer's got his mojo back. Every second week: 'We've got the mojo back'—we hear that time and time again. We heard that the Batman by-election was the test. We heard that the budget was the test. But do you know what? Time and time again we're seeing the government not understanding what Middle Australia needs.

The coalition government has done nothing over the past five years other than axe funding and support for seniors, pensioners, those who are vulnerable in my community. It's a long rap sheet. And many of the cuts in this budget still hang around the 2014 horror budget. We know that they tried to cut pension indexation—a cut that would have meant pensioners would be forced to live on $80 a week less within 10 years. That unfair cut would have ripped out $23 billion from the pockets of pensioners—from every single pensioner in Australia. We know that they axed the $900 seniors supplement to self-funded retirees receiving the Commonwealth seniors health card and that they tried to reset deeming rate thresholds—a cut that would've affected 500,000 part pensioners. We know that in 2015 the Liberals did a shonky deal with the Greens to cut the pension to around 370,000 pensioners by as much as $12,000 a year by changing the pension assets test. And in 2016 the government tried to cut the pension to around 190,000 pensioners as a plan to limit overseas travel for pensioners to six weeks. Further to this, the government still wants to make pensioners born overseas wait longer to get the age pension, by increasing the residency requirements from 10 to 15 years.

Legislation has been before the House for the past four years to increase the pension age to 70, meaning that Australia would have an older pension age than the US, the UK, Canada and New Zealand. This would mean that, for the first four years alone, around 375,000 Australians would have to wait longer before they could access the pension—a $3.6 billion hit to the retirement income of Australians. And, of course, the government is still trying to axe the energy supplement to two million Australians, including around 400,000 age pensioners—a cut of $14.10 per fortnight to single pensioners, worth $365 a year, and a cut of $21.20 a fortnight to couple pensioners, making them around $550 a year worse off. I know that, if you're living in a $50 million Point Piper mansion, clinking glasses of champagne on Sydney Harbour, that's not a lot of money to you. That's a round of drinks—it's less than a glass of Cristal for the Prime Minister. But what this also means is that, for pensioners—

Government members interjecting—

That's right, and the members of the government are defending the cut, time and time again. Whenever we talk about a fair go for pensioners—

Government members interjecting—

Maria Vamvakinou (Calwell, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am having difficulty hearing the member for Oxley. Order, please.

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

adequate services for pensioners, a decent retirement or income for pensioners, the government go berserk, because their priority is always those millionaires and billionaires. We get it. We understand that's the priority for the member for La Trobe and the member for Fisher, who are in the chamber. That's their top priority. They're proud of it; they stand by it—that's the centrepiece of their budget.

The centrepiece of the Leader of the Opposition's budget is delivering fairness and opportunity for middle Australians, giving 10 million Australians a fair dinkum tax cut—doubling what the government has on offer— delivering real tax reform for middle working Australians. They laugh at that. They think it's funny that workers have not had a real pay increase, that inequality is at a 75-year high. The government laugh at it. They think it's all a joke. Well, come and talk to the people in my community, in Redbank Plains, in Goodna, in Gailes, in Camira. Laugh at them—those families that are struggling to make ends meet, to get their kids to school, to get the shiftwork, to get the pay increases. They're the families in my community that don't want millionaires and billionaires and banks and multinationals getting a tax break. They're the families who just want a fair go for them and their kids. This is another central piece of this government, no matter how those opposite or the Treasurer wants to dress it up: this government, when it comes to debt and debt management, is a failure. Since coming to power, net debt has doubled to more than $350 billion.

A government member: Who started that debt?

We've just had an interjection from a member of the government, saying, 'Who started the debt?' That's the interjection from the government. It's not about how we're going to fix the debt and not about how we're going to lower the debt. We now have a government so intent on this that they have given up on debt management. They have completely given up.

Let's put the facts on the table. Gross debt crashed through half a trillion dollars on the LNP's watch for the first time in history. They're remaining pretty silent now as I give that fact. We know that will remain well above half a trillion dollars. Those opposite are proud of it. They are absolutely proud of it. After five years and six budgets being delivered, they are proud. They're proud that our debt is the highest it's ever been in this country. Look, I know they don't like it. I know it's painful. When the facts are placed on the table, they squeal and they yell. The community across Australia is demanding better management of our economy than we're getting from this Treasurer. It's not often that I would say this, but I would say bring back Joe Hockey. That's what I would say. That's how bad this Treasurer is.

This year's deficit, in 2017-18, is six and a half times bigger than what the members of the government predicted in their first horrific budget of 2014. All of this was confirmed through a recent OECD report, which stated that the Australian government has added more to their debt over the past five years than almost any other developed country. The biggest problem overall is that the government has nothing to show for it. A mountain of debt has been delivered under the Prime Minister and the Treasurer. That's a huge amount of debt that Australians have to pay back under this government's watch, but they have nothing to show for it. There has been no global financial crisis for this government to deal with. Actually, rather than a GFC, they've had global economic conditions that have been improving, yet they have nothing to show for this enormous blowout in debt.

However, for some unknown reason, the days of talking about the budget emergency and the debt truck are never to be seen again. Where's the debt truck? That's parked at the back of someone's house at the moment. The wheels have fallen off. That's never to be seen again. They don't like it when we talk about that. Under Labor, it was a budget deficit emergency—I think that was their slogan. But when the debt is tripling under this government, they are remaining silent—nothing to be seen or heard here. We know that these cuts are as a result of their reckless mismanagement of the economy. In my own home state, we've seen a real cut to hospital funding. In hospitals right across Queensland, particularly in the Caboolture Hospital, we have seen cruel and savage cuts by this government. The government are not interested in the outer suburbs of our community. They're certainly not interested in the south west of Brisbane.

Thank goodness, we have Susan Lamb in Longman fighting for a decent health system for her community. In the south west of Brisbane, we have terrific candidates. We have Corinne Mulholland, who will be our new voice for the people of Petrie, and Ali France in Dickson. We have a whole range of strong advocates, rather than the do-nothing MPs who we see across the city of Brisbane. We know that the LNP, when it comes to infrastructure, really is trying to pull a swiftie on the people of Australia and particularly the people of Queensland. There is no funding for the Cross River Rail—zilch, zero. The Cross River Rail is the No. 1 infrastructure project in the country, which will mean families getting home with real time savings. This government is not interested in that at all.

So, this budget is one of lost opportunities. We know that it still contains the horrific cuts we have seen time and time again from this government—a real cut for hospitals in Queensland, schools across Brisbane and the wider metro region are facing some of the biggest cuts they have seen from any Commonwealth government, and no real funding for infrastructure for my state. I'm disappointed that this government has failed to deliver for my community and the wider community in Queensland. I will keep fighting to make sure that they have equity and fairness in a future Labor budget.

Jason Wood (La Trobe, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2018-2019 and the electorate of La Trobe. This is a great budget when it comes to more infrastructure funding for Victoria, with a number of projects continuing the good work previously announced by this government in regard to major projects such as the Monash. La Trobe covers up to Dandenong ranges, including the suburbs of Ferny Creek and Olinda, right across to Emerald, Cockatoo, and Gembrook, which are great suburbs. We have previous election commitments there. For Emerald it is the Emerald Discovery Centre, which is part of the Puffing Billy Railway. In total, they have over 500,000 tourists visit each year, which has an incredible impact not only on the local economy but on the economy of Victoria. A lot of the visitors are international tourists, so it helps all Australians when we invest in Puffing Billy.

In the electorate we also have Narre Warren South, Beaconsfield, Officer and Berwick. I make the point that when it comes to infrastructure we need to keep up overall in Victoria, and especially in my electorate of La Trobe, where we have 300 families moving into Casey and Cardinia council electorates each week, which is quite amazing if you consider the number of families moving in and the need to keep up with schools, with police and with infrastructure. One thing we have noticed in my electorate, sadly, is that there has been a lot of criminal activity when it comes to gangs and home invasions, and I know that Deputy Speaker Vamvakinou is well aware of this. The Migration Committee, which I chair, had recommendations for something that is very important to me: the Australian Criminal Intelligence Database. This is part of the budget for helping law enforcement right across this country. In my maiden speech I raised the need to ensure that police agencies are able to capture the data from other departments. It could, for example, be what we saw as the failings of 11 September, where agencies such as the FBI were not immediately aware that terrorists were actually undertaking pilot training. You need to have this direct link in a database where agencies can look at it. Prior to my role as a member of parliament I was in the counter-terrorism unit with Victoria Police. I remember there was a domestic situation where the police from Malvern contacted our unit and said it seemed a bit bizarre to them that they went through 'domestic' and weren't aware that the person involved in the domestic had access to explosives. Why? Because that person had a licence to possess explosives. So, the Australian Criminal Intelligence Database is very important.

The crime figures in Victoria are something we really need to look at. Since the election of the Daniel Andrews government, crime overall is up 12.5 per cent, robberies are up 32 per cent, sexual offences are up 24.9 per cent, home invasions are up 54 per cent—that has had a huge impact in my electorate—assaults are up 17.2 per cent, and thefts of motor cars are up by 20 per cent. In actual fact, while the population of New South Wales is obviously greater than Victoria's, I believe their rate of theft of motor vehicles is something like 25 per cent lower than ours, and firearm offences are up by 14.6 per cent.

The key issue that I've raised time and time again is: how do we make Australia safe? This database is something that will help not only in Victoria but nationally. The NCIS will weed out foreign thugs, terrorists and youth gangs. This system is a crime database, providing agencies with new intelligence on potential suspects. I'm sure that this is happening right across the country at the moment. The police will be interviewing a person at a police station—laying charges or allowing the person to leave on bail or summons—and the police will not be aware that that person is on a visa. This raises a few issues. First of all, the immigration department is not aware of the person being in custody. If it were a minor offence and Immigration were aware, they could send a warning notice. If it were a theft, they could tell the person basically that if they continue down that path they are potentially jeopardising their chance of becoming an Australian citizen. In more serious cases it will alert the immigration department that action needs to be taken in preparation of cancelling that person's visa—something which is very important obviously to protect Australian citizens.

NCIS will be a whole-of-government capability operating in a secure national information-sharing environment. Let's look at one thing this database can actually do. For example, there could be a very specific way a criminal is committing an offence—we call this their modus operandi. It could be a sexual offence or an armed robbery. If that person moves interstate, the data exchange is not what it should be. This National Criminal Intelligence System will be able to wash through all the databases across the country and find a potential link with the modus operandi. All of a sudden you could have police in the Northern Territory realise that there were similar offences committed in Victoria and then the agencies could start working together. This is very important.

I go back to the Russell Street bombings. Sadly, this is where police Constable Angela Taylor died. This was just before my time in Victoria Police. The homicide investigators were trying to determine who the offenders were. They had the vehicle that had been used in the bombings. It was stored at Dawson Street. In those days there was the stolen motor vehicle squad. One of the detectives was walking through and out of curiosity looked at the car. He noticed that the vehicle left by the Russell Street bombers had very individual characteristics—I think there was drilling on the identification plate of the vehicle. The detective straightaway realised it was the same people they had been looking for 12 months ago for stealing cars. So then the investigation went from a homicide investigation to a stolen motor vehicle investigation, and that was how they eventually identified the offenders. This is the sort of thing this database can do if you have offences committed in one state and they wash right across the country. This is something I have been very excited about.

I very much want to thank the Home Affairs minister, Mr Peter Dutton, who has invested $59 million over four years. We need the states and territories to get on board. I acknowledge Deputy Speaker Vamvakinou because this was one of the recommendations of the migration committee. The great news is that this recommendation has now come to light. It's great to see that the government is very much focused on this. This will be a game changer when it comes to law enforcement. I know Victoria Police and the AFP are very excited about this. It is such a great tool that will dramatically help law enforcement across the country.

There is one thing I very much like about it. I was talking about gangs. Some 18 months or two years ago we had the Apex gang in Melbourne. This database will enable law enforcement to identify a potential gang that is emerging. Police officers can identify the gang and add to it. If the gang is growing quickly or becoming more violent then police can put more resources towards it. That was missing with the Apex gang. I again congratulate the minister, the PM and the Treasurer for ensuring this was included in the budget. It's an easy thing not to include in the budget, but law enforcement and security are so important to me. This is a great initiative.

When it comes to infrastructure in Victoria, the government committed $1.75 billion towards the great North East Link Project. This connection is a key missing link in Melbourne's outer metropolitan road network. The project will create approximately 10,000 jobs and save 30 minutes of travel time. Rowville Rail is another project that has always been talked about but no federal government has ever decided to put funding towards. Even state governments have not put money towards it. This is a crucial project. The route would see trams running in the central median strip of Dandenong Road, along the Princes Highway and down the centre of Wellington Road, beyond EastLink to Stud Road. $3 million has been invested for the design and planning works to examine details such as locations, park-and-ride options, and the travel time benefits that will be very much needed at this stage. The route will carry roughly 3,000 people per hour in peak times. The project will create another 2,000 parking spaces at Melbourne railway stations. This is a very good project, because so many people need this to go to Monash University. The Turnbull government has also provided tax relief to encourage and reward working Australians: 17,800 taxpayers in La Trobe stand to benefit from low and middle income tax relief in the upcoming 2019 financial year. That's a very important part of the budget.

When I talk to families, I hear that the Monash Freeway is a great concern of theirs. It's something I've been lobbying about for a number of years. The great news back in March 2016 was that we were able to secure $500 million from the Prime Minister and the Treasurer. The only annoying aspect is that the money came from the East West Link, which we're still committed to, but it was sitting there doing nothing, so we passed that money on to Daniel Andrews and the state Labor government. It's annoying that it has been sitting there for two years, and pretty much nothing has happened. Finally the state Labor government has committed to start the Monash Freeway Upgrade Stage 2. Stage 1 was from Clyde Road to the South Gippsland Highway. Stage 2 will be an extra lane from the South Gippsland Highway to Warrigal Road and from Kardinia Road to Clyde Road on the other side, where my electorate has this amazing growth in suburbs such as Officer and Clyde North. This project wasn't on the radar, and this is where I very much congratulate my federal Liberal Victorian colleagues and national members for understanding that, in an area growing so fast, we want the infrastructure to keep up. That's something all governments have always seemed to fail at. Very importantly, though, it also includes money for the Beaconsfield Interchange and the extension of O'Shea Road. This will make life so much easier for residents living in Berwick, but to be honest, it will just be keeping up with what we need.

Back in 2007 I committed $10 million for overtaking lanes on Wellington Road between Clematis and Lysterfield; sadly, the Labor government diverted this funding when they got in power in 2010, and only $2 million was spent. I'm on a mission to finish the job we started, and I'm in the process of sending a survey to residents in Cockatoo, Gembrook and Emerald to see whether they want full overtaking lanes or a dual carriageway the whole way through. That's something I'm very focused on.

The other big budget announcement was $5 billion for the airport rail project. All Victorians will be very excited about this. It's something that has been talked about for many years, and only the Turnbull government has decided to put its hand up and make this happen. I always say that it's embarrassing when international and interstate visitors come and have no rail connecting them from the airport to the CBD. We just want to catch up with the rest of the world. To me that's a great announcement. I will continue to listen to the residents of La Trobe when it comes to putting extra funding towards road and rail, and I'll be surveying my constituents again to find future road and rail projects for La Trobe.

Emma Husar (Lindsay, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's great to be speaking on these appropriation bills, also known as 'filibustering by a government that doesn't actually have a program or any legislation that we could be otherwise debating in here'. I thought I would take the opportunity to talk about this budget that has just been handed down by this very out of touch and arrogant government because the people in Western Sydney—we were looking forward to something in the budget that may have—

A government member: How's your citizenship?

My citizenship is great—thanks for asking. Outrageous. I'll take that interjection, because clearly he's a constitutional expert.

But look, to support a great future for the residents of Lindsay we need a government that is actually committed to Western Sydney, not a bloke who gets on a train to go out there every election cycle and who, when he gets a difficult question, decides to get in a car and scoot back off to where he came from. This is the same fellow who went out there but wouldn't advertise where he was going to be holding his community meeting. It was all clandestine because he didn't actually want to face the people of my community. If he did, he might find out something about the real world.

This budget has been delivered and, after five years, you would think they'd had a good opportunity to take off the training wheels. Their L plates should firmly be in the back street. We should at least be riding with some P plates on. But, no, not this government, not PM Malcolm Turnbull. He defies all sense of normality when it comes to being a Prime Minister. He snubbed the Prime Minister's residence at Kirribilli; he's living in his Point Piper castle because Kirribilli is obviously not good enough for Malcolm Turnbull. And while he's over there in his Point Piper castle—not living in the real world—he's taken away crucial funding for high schools in my electorate. More than $1 million has been taken from Kingswood High School, which has about 20 per cent of Lindsay's Indigenous kids being educated there. It is also one of the lowest socioeconomic areas of my community. That school was doing marvellous things with the additional funding.

We've seen $5.7 million ripped out of Nepean Hospital. For anybody who hasn't heard me speak about that place before, I will put on record this reminder: it is the most under pressure hospital in New South Wales. Why would you take money away from a hospital that is already doing it tough? That money equates to 220 knee operations. People in Lindsay have to wait three years for a knee operation, but over in the eastern part of Sydney they only wait about 23 days for the same operation. That money is also the equivalent of 8,500 patients being seen in the emergency department.

But instead of funding hospitals and places like Kingswood High School, this bloke wants to give the big end of town an $80 billion tax cut—$17 billion of which will go to the big four banks. We haven't seen any arrests of these big banks' CEOs like we have with other royal commissions—I'm waiting for a raid on banks by the AFP to be televised. Unfortunately, I don't think we'll see that happen because these people are friends of this government, so they're not going to be served with the justice that the people who have been victims of the banks' malpractices need to see. In spite of that, these tax cuts are still going to go to the big banks; $17 billion to the big banks. They've had five years to get it right, five years to come up with something that is halfway decent, but instead they do this. It just goes to show how arrogant and out of touch they really are.

I'm incredibly disappointed in this budget and I'm disappointed on behalf of all of the residents that I work very hard to represent. It was a chance for him to set out his priorities for our nation, and to talk about the things that he wanted to change or the things that he felt needed to be improved. His priorities have failed the fairness test. It is clear that Liberals are putting everyday, hardworking Australians at the bottom of the barrel, but that is absolutely where those opposite should be put come the next election—and, indeed, in the by-elections that we have got coming up.

I was given the ultimate honour of representing my community of Lindsay in 2016, and every day since then I have seen this government fail, fail and fail again the people of my community. Being in government is all about choices and priorities. I said that during my very first speech to this parliament, and it is something that I will continue to say as long as I am here. We tax around about the same amount and we collect around about the same amount of revenue, but it is up to us as to what we spend it on. When you see spending of $80 billion going to big banks and big multinationals and not to schools and hospitals, you have got to ask yourself where their priorities lie.

They are not doing enough for what matters to everyday Australians. Locals in my community are struggling to make their pay cheques last. Wage growth, as we know and as we certainly talk about on this side, is at an all-type low. We just faced losing penalty rates and that affected a number of people in my community. Meanwhile, services are being cut left, right and centre. Labor has an alternative vision for this country. It is really great that a couple of members are here, and I do hope they spread the news far and wide. They have a clear plan to bring back the fair go to the heart of our nation.

Government members interjecting—

I can hear the interjections on the other side. If they did have a plan for a better Australia, we might actually be up here debating some of their proposed legislation rather than filibustering in Federation Chamber. Our plan is one that we can afford. When you are not handing out $80 billion in a big business tax cut, you can actually afford to deliver services. We did ask the Prime Minister and the Treasurer a number of times where this money was coming from and how much it was actually going to cost over 10 years. They had no answers. They were given opportunity after opportunity to give that answer and they refused. Now, we will reduce the taxes for low- and middle- income earners and invest in schools, hospitals, services that rely on Medicare, child care and aged care. Labor will deliver bigger, better and fairer tax cuts for 10 million Australians.

Government members interjecting—

Maria Vamvakinou (Calwell, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for O'Connor and the member for Bran will cease interjecting, and you most certainly will pay attention when the Deputy Speaker asks for your attention.

Emma Husar (Lindsay, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I wasn't sure where that member was from. I have never heard him make a contribution before, so thank you for pointing out where he has actually come from.

Labor will deliver bigger, fairer tax cuts for 10 million working Australians. Labor's tax refund for working Australians increases the tax cuts currently being offered under the government's current tax offset proposal. As our shadow Treasurer has said—I am proud to call him our shadow Treasurer—we will support the government measures that begin on 1 July this year. A Shorten Labor government will deliver bigger tax cuts from 1 July 2019, and they will be permanent. That's because we know that's how you actually help families and help the economy. With Labor, working and middle-class Australian also pay less tax because tax cuts for families are more important than an $80 billion tax giveaway to the donors of the Liberal Party. Everyone earning less than $125,000 a year will receive a bigger cut under Labor compared to the Liberals. I hear no interjections. Obviously, they know I am right. More than four million people will be better off by $398 dollars a year compared to under the Liberals.

In the health space, the Turnbull government has cut $2.8 billion from hospitals. Now, as I said before, that is just over $5 million ripped out of the Nepean Hospital, affecting the delivery of really critical health services for the people of my community. There would not be a week that goes by that I am not contacted by somebody who has needed the services of the hospital. They constantly tell me about how overworked the doctors and the nurses are, how underfunded the hospital is and how we need to do better for the residents in my community. We need a great hospital in Lindsay. We have huge disease burden rates and the hospital is just not coping.

When you cut $2.8 billion out of hospitals in favour of $80 billion for banks and multinationals in some trickle-down fantasy, this means longer wait times, longer waitlists and less doctors and nurses for every single patient. When you don't look after the health of your community—surprise, surprise—they can't go to work. Surprise, surprise, they can't get an education because they are too busy trying to get by when they are so critically unwell. What we have said to this government is they must drop their Medicare rebate freeze immediately. They must scrap the tampon tax once and for all. It is probably pretty hard to understand what that means with the low representation of women over on the other side. They also must fix the health insurance affordability crisis. We will cap the private health insurance premiums at two per cent over two years.

I already mentioned the education inadequacies and the cuts to education. We know—certainly, I know, coming out of a background as a former aspiring teacher—a great lifetime begins with a great education. We believe that it should not be determined by where you live or who your parents are. This government is cutting $17 billion from schools. Now, that is not logic that actually supports a ticket to a lifetime of good opportunity. In Lindsay, we will be $21 million a year worse off, thanks to these funding cuts. There will be $1.2 million out Cambridge Park High School, $1 million out of St Marys North Public School, $1.1 million out of Kingswood High School and $1.7 million out of schools in Emu Plains.

The schools in Lindsay are crying out for resources. I know firsthand that Cambridge Park High School, which I just referred to, was able to teach a group of year 9 boys how to read with the extra funding that they were given under the Gonski funding model, which saw more money flowing into schools. That program and others like it will not be able to come to fruition in the next few years, because of these cuts. It is incredibly galling to me to see Malcolm Turnbull take funding away from the education of our kids to pay for these massive handouts that are going to multinationals, millionaires and the big banks. I want to know: how is Malcolm Turnbull, the Prime Minister, actually able to look at himself in the mirror and justify making it easier for big business to pay less tax rather than supporting some of our most vulnerable Australians? Only Labor will restore the fair, needs based funding and replace the full $17 billion that we have seen cut out of the education system.

We also have a crisis in TAFE. Out in my area, TAFE is one of the most preferred methods of tertiary education, but in this budget we've seen another $270 million of new cuts to TAFE, on top of the $3 billion that has already been ripped out of TAFE. The government is just going in there and gouging it out. Instead of investing in local jobs and skills, instead of investing in people, the government continues to cut funding and vocational education. Since the Liberals came to office, there are 140,000 fewer apprentices and trainees in Australia—that is, 140,000 fewer than when you guys came to office. These cuts have affected my community. The decline in the number of apprentices and trainees is about 37 per cent, and it is continuing to climb. The Liberals are failing to support the apprentices and the trainees, yet again, and are relying on 457 visa workers to come into this country and fill what is going to be a huge skills shortage in future years.

We have said that we are going to invest $470 million to boost TAFE apprenticeships and skills for Australians. The Liberals are cutting $2.2 billion out of the entire university budget—that is $98 million out of Western Sydney University, of which I am a very proud alumni, and 10,000 fewer student places next year. A huge number of the students who go to the University of Western Sydney are female. Another huge cohort at that university are those who are the first in their families to go to university. They are not blooded into this system. They have overcome many things in their lives, and they are the first in their families to go to university. When you cut $98 million out of a university that is providing those kinds of opportunities, you are not really giving those people a fair go or a ticket to a lifetime of opportunity. Instead, you are going to give the multinationals an $80 billion lifetime to an opportunity at something, which is probably for their shareholders, their corporates and the pay of the CEOs.

Honourable members interjecting—

Oh, you know, 'all of those mum and dad shareholders' is what I am hearing on the other side. The other area of concern for me is the $2 billion cut from residential aged care. The government have dumped the $1.2 billion workforce compact and supplement. There are 105,000 older Australians who have been left waiting for care at home. For four years, the government have tried to increase the pension age, as we know, to 70. It might be fine if you have been a banker all your life to work until you are 70, but if you've been a brickie, a mechanic climbing under cars or a truckie climbing in and out of the cabs of a truck, it is probably not going to be in your best interest or your physical health to work until you are 70; if you are a banker, maybe that is okay. We've fought and we're going to continue to fight the government's proposal to make people wait until they are 70 before they can access the age pension. In its first four years, 375,000 Australians will have to wait longer before they can access the pension. This is a $3.6 billion hit to the retirement income of Australians. I hear that those on the other side of the chamber are so concerned about shareholders, but how about $3.6 billion towards the retirement of older people who have worked their whole life in this country? We see that the government are cutting $7 each week out of the energy supplement. They are cutting $7 a week from the pensioners of this country. We cannot trust a single word that this Prime Minister says. He's more interested in an $80 billion tax break to big business and the banks than he is in helping out the pensioners of this country, who have earned their pension.

It should also come as no surprise that there is no comprehensive strategy to deal with people movement in Western Sydney. We have a Liberal government in New South Wales who just want to toll and toll and toll their way to prosperity. We've seen this government come up with an airport plan for Western Sydney, but no infrastructure to go with it, and no money to build the railway line. We had a really fanciful announcement, but there was just $50 million in that budget to prepare a business case—not to actually lay a single piece of the rail line that is needed or the infrastructure. That is $50 million just to prepare a business case.

This government are not doing enough. They're letting down the people of my community, and I'm going to fight that every single day.

Rick Wilson (O'Connor, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to support the Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2018-2019 and to congratulate the Prime Minister, the Treasurer and the Minister for Finance on preparing what has been a great budget for my electorate of O'Connor. It's the culmination of five years of hard work on behalf of the government—a plan that has us on a realistic trajectory back into surplus. Given the situation that we inherited in 2013, with a $48.5 billion deficit, to get us on track to be back into surplus next year is an extraordinary achievement and, once again, I applaud the Prime Minister and the Treasurer for their hard work.

Part of that plan has been to get Australians back into work. In the last 12 months we've seen 413,000 jobs created, with 75 per cent of them full-time jobs. And as a former great Prime Minister said, 'The best form of welfare is getting people into work.' That's what this government has done and that's what this government is doing.

In relation to my electorate, which is home to 19,200 small businesses, we are seeing that plan really come to fruition. In the town of Kalgoorlie, the capital of the Goldfields and the capital of the goldmining industry in Western Australia, we see unemployment at 3.1 per cent. I'd like to say that that has fallen, but Kalgoorlie has been in full employment now for some time. The local chamber of commerce up there have identified around a thousand unfilled jobs, so I'd love to see some of the people from Western Sydney or other parts of the country who aren't finding work to maybe look at the option of coming to towns like Kalgoorlie. There are very well-paid jobs, a wonderful community and we'd love to see them. If there is high unemployment in those areas then we'd love to see them move to towns like Kalgoorlie.

Or, indeed, the town of Esperance. It's a beautiful coastal town with a population of 14,000 and it has an unemployment rate of 3.3 per cent. I'm struggling to think of a better place to live. Perhaps Albany, which is the largest town in my electorate. It has an unemployment rate of 4.2 per cent. And all of those jobs have been created by small businesses. We don't have large multinationals—the much-hated multinationals. We just have 19,200 small businesses. They are benefiting from our tax cuts, they are reinvesting those tax cuts in their businesses and they are employing local people. That's the plan that the government has put in place, and that plan is now starting to show fruition across the rest of the country.

A big part of supporting those small businesses has been to extend the $20,000 instant asset write-off, which not only benefits the small business which might be upgrading its equipment—the restaurant that's buying some new cooking equipment and so on—but it also benefits those businesses that supply those products. So that has been a wonderful asset to the business community across O'Connor, and over a thousand businesses have taken advantage of these measures.

Of course, the farming sector is very important across my electorate. Once again, they have taken advantage of that $20,000 instant write-off. There is a whole range of locally manufactured products, like silos, field bins, sheepfeeders and all of that sort of equipment that's used on farms. They're manufactured locally by local businesses, such as Birds Silos in Popanyinning. Popanyinning is a town of about 50 people, and about 20 of them work in that particular business. It's a great business, and they're benefiting from that instant asset write-off, because their sales have gone through the roof.

We're also trying to work our way through red-tape reduction, which has been a big part of this government's agenda, and we'll continue to do so. Small businessman don't want to spend all of their lives filling out forms and dealing with red tape; they want to get on with doing what they do, manufacturing great products across my electorate and creating jobs and profit for themselves.

Through our free trade agreements we're also boosting exports. The wine sector across my electorate—the regions of Plantagenet and the southern forests—produces wonderful wines that are now being exported in huge volumes, particularly to China. China is taking more and more of our wines. I think we're up about 50 per cent by volume and about 100 per cent by value, so it's a terrific result. We're seeing some of the fruits of our free trade agreements.

We're also investing another $335 million in skilling the Australian workforce. Obviously, training people is important. We are struggling to attract skilled labour to my region. As I said, there are wonderful towns with plenty of well-paid jobs, but, unfortunately, we're seeing people concentrate in places like Western Sydney. We want to skill them up and get them working in our regions.

I was out on the road last week selling the budget and meeting with various chambers of commerce and other groups. The budget was extremely well received, particularly because of our tax relief. Over 61,000 people in O'Connor will benefit from the government's tax relief—up to $530 for someone earning between $48,000 and $90,000, so for an average family that could be up to $1,060. The point I made to the chambers of commerce is that this money will stay in their communities. If it goes to Canberra, they're not going to see it all come back. They might see some come back in the form of infrastructure funding or whatever, but essentially they're never going to see that $1,060 come back to their communities. If we can leave that in people's pockets, they will spend it in the community and that will increase economic activity and provide more jobs and wealth in our communities. That's what we're about—creating wealth in those communities.

We've also made changes to superannuation. I've always thought it very pernicious that a young person in their first casual job, while studying or still at school, has their compulsory superannuation contribution paid into a fund—it's a small amount of money—and that fund tends to charge fees and also often charges for compulsory life insurance when that young person obviously doesn't need life insurance at that stage of their life. So we've made some changes to make that illegal. That will leave more money in those young people's superannuation funds so that that balance continues to build for the rest of their working lives.

We're also making changes to self-managed super funds. The limit of four people in a fund will be changed to six people in a fund. I think that will benefit family businesses in particular who want to keep family members together in a fund and pool their resources. It also allows for succession planning. Parents in a business can transition and allow the younger people in the family to take over. The super fund acts as a tool to allow that succession planning.

We're also delivering affordable and accessible child care with no annual limits on the childcare subsidy for families earning up to $187,000. As I've pointed out, we've got very low unemployment. We're looking for everybody to get back into the workforce in towns across my electorate. Allowing people, particularly obviously women, to access that child care and get back in the workforce is a major part of our plan.

One of the key features in the budget—and this is particularly pleasing for me because I've done a lot of work on this—is the overhaul of the independent youth allowance scheme. We've raised the parental income cap from $150,000 to $160,000 and we're allowing $10,000 per additional child. I'll explain this. A young person who does a 14-month gap year—another initiative of this government—earns $23,500 and then applies for the independent youth allowance has often been found to be ineligible because their combined parental income is in excess of $150,000. As we know, $150,000 is, effectively, two median wages—it might be a policeman and a nurse. These are people who are not considered wealthy, by any stretch of the imagination, but they are being told that their child doesn't qualify for youth allowance. Raising that cap to $160,000 and allowing an extra $10,000 per child, which, for a family of three children, lifts that rate to $180,000 is a marked improvement, but I'll be working, together with my regional colleagues and the Treasurer, to have that cap lifted further or removed completely in future years.

We've put in an additional $440 million to support 15 hours of quality preschool for all children. Preschool is a very important aspect of early childhood education. My wife, who is an early childhood educator, would very much support that move, and, hopefully, we will see that rolled out across O'Connor. We have seen 29 childcare and early-learning centres share in more than $6.7 million in the Community Child Care Fund. Just the other day I visited the Willi Wagtails Childcare Centre in Williams. It's a great little facility there. There are only 12 kids, because it's a small town. This money is helping them develop a plan that will guarantee their long-term viability. It's giving them three years of funding to assist the transition to that phase. We also dropped into the Narrogin childcare centre. Once again, it is a great facility. It services the Upper Great Southern region. They have shared in this funding to transition to a more sustainable funding model in the future.

With fair and needs based funding for schools—it has been referred to as Gonski 2—we have seen a 6.7 per cent increase in funding for schools across my electorate of O'Connor. In Gonski 1, the original Gonski deal—as the member for Brand would be well aware—Western Australia did very poorly. There were 23 or maybe 27 separate deals done around the country, and Western Australia missed out very badly. So Gonski 2, which has seen a 6.7 per cent funding increase across the board in my electorate, is wonderful news. We are blessed with a wonderful range of schools and educational opportunities across O'Connor, and I am very pleased to see that funding increase across the board.

The $247 million to continue the Schools Chaplaincy Program is one of the features in the budget that has been well received. I have spoken to many school principals, many of whom you probably wouldn't think would necessarily be supporters of the conservative government or voters for me. But one thing they have in common is that they strongly support the School Chaplaincy Program, because of the pastoral care that those chaplains offer the kids in their schools. They see it as an absolutely essential part of the make-up of their schools now, and they are very, very happy we have extended that funding. Brent Findlay and his crew of 20 chaplains across the Albany region do a fantastic job. I've met with them on several occasions, and for them it's great news they have some funding going forward and some surety about their own futures. We are also are assisting regional students with 685 additional Commonwealth supported places for students studying regionally.

The other headline feature that was very well received as I travelled around the electorate talking about the budget was that we have fully funded the National Disability Insurance Scheme. It's a wonderful program. It had bipartisan support, but when we came into government in late 2013 it was discovered that there was no funding allowed in the forward estimates for the National Disability Insurance Scheme. So, it's wonderful news that the Treasurer was able to announce that it is now fully funded and will be rolled out in parts of my electorate from 1 October.

I had the pleasure of taking Minister Tehan, the Minister for Social Services, to Kalgoorlie on Monday last week on Monday to meet with the Goldfields Individual and Family Support Association, which is run by CEO Robert Hicks. The Chair, Graham Thomson, was there as well as other board members. They had the opportunity to tell the minister about some of the challenges that they might be facing rolling out the National Disability Insurance Scheme in some of our more remote communities. They operate from Kalgoorlie 1,000 kilometres north to Warburton, and there are some particular issues around some of the Indigenous communities and how we're going to roll the scheme out there. They got a very good hearing from the minister, and I'm sure they will continue to work to make whatever changes we need to make sure those people get the services they deserve.

Affordable access to life-saving medication: there's a whole new range of drugs that have been added to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. I want to touch on one area that is not new, but is great news. I see it making a difference to families. (Time expired)

Peter Khalil (Wills, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the appropriation bills of the 2018 budget. Like every other Liberal budget—we've heard this over the last couple of weeks—it fails the fairness test. An $80 billion dollar tax handout to big business, including $17 billion to big banks; at the same time, savage cuts to schools and hospitals, and secret deals with Pauline Hanson, who is running our economic policy, apparently. It is not only unfair; it is short-sighted.

One of the areas where the coalition demonstrate this short-sightedness is in the cuts to the development assistance part of the budget. It's not often discussed, but they have effectively sacrificed long-term regional security for short-term political expediency. We've heard all the recent news about China's interest in a potential military base in Vanuatu. I don't know whether that's true or not—it's unverified. It's just the latest in a pattern of emerging powers using aid in the Pacific to assert their geopolitical influence. Now this is being extended to potential military bases.

We know that the geostrategic outlook for Australia and our region is uncertain and unpredictable. We need to integrate better all tools of state craft—development, defence and diplomacy, the three Ds—to safeguard our future in the region. The Turnbull government, and certainly foreign minister Julie Bishop, in overseeing a dramatic decline in our development assistance budget, have turned their back on this region and diminished our standing in the world and our influence. They have left critical tools of state craft unused and sitting idle in the toolbox.

In contrast, under the previous Labor governments, Australia's aid contributions grew at an average of seven per cent per year between 2007 and 2013. In 2012-13, under the Labor government, Australia's foreign aid budget reached its highest level ever, just above $5 billion. Yet this coalition government have cut $11.3 billion, ripped out of Australia's foreign aid budget over the past five years. Under this coalition government, since 2013 in cumulative terms that is a cut of just over 32.8 per cent of the aid budget since 2013-14. Under this coalition government Australia's proportion of aid spending is now at its lowest level on record. It is 22 cents out of every hundred dollars of national income or 0.22 per cent of gross national income. It is projected to fall even further to 0.19 per cent of GNI by 2020-2121. Under this coalition government AusAID was dismantled and dispersed into DFAT, which led to the loss of experienced aid management staff. Under this coalition government, the percentage of Australia's aid budget funnelled to managing contractors has grown to 20 per cent of all development assistance, and under this government foreign aid will be cut by a further $110 million over four years after the previous deep cuts in 2018.

It's little wonder that the former Danish Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt said last year on this topic:

When your development budget is at an all-time low, which it is right now, it feels like Australia is not taking its place in the world… We miss Australia. Australia should be big influential, taking your space, helping with humanitarian issues and disasters.

It didn't have to be this way. Either the coalition government fundamentally misunderstands or is wilfully blind to the fact that our aid and development assistance is critical to our national interest. If it is wilfully blind, it is blind to the fact that aid lifts millions out of poverty and works to create stability and security in our region and across the world. If they're wilfully blind, it can only be in order to direct their narrow, myopic vision to short-term raids on the aid budget to plug the gaping holes in their policy and budgetary agenda.

It's no excuse for Julie Bishop to argue that aid to the Indo-Pacific has been maintained in nominal terms with only a small cut in real terms, because these cuts that have been made have impacted sub-Saharan Africa, the Caribbean and Latin America. They could all, of course, have been invested into PNG and the Pacific regions if the government were so inclined to focus more on our region. In the wider Pacific, Australia is by far the largest donor of international development assistance, providing over $1 billion a year. Indeed, in the Pacific there are 10 nations whose principle relationship in the world is with Australia. Pacific funding in this budget has gone up to $1.3 billion, but around $200 million of that is for an underground communications cable. While that's important, this spending really does hide the cuts to education and health that we've seen in the Pacific.

Labor is not blind to the importance of aid to our national interest, nor its interrelated importance to humanitarian objectives. In fact, we can see the possibility that they are not mutually exclusive and that both can be achieved. There has been an acknowledgement of, and I think there is, a demonstrable link between the aid program and Australia's national interests. A report by Save the Children highlighted through statistics that inequality harms economic growth because it is a barrier to sustainable and inclusive growth and it entrenches discrimination, undermining social and political cohesion. It creates the conditions for political and social tensions, instability and conflict.

On issues around gender, Labor has consistently articulated a clear vision in relation to the importance of foreign development assistance in addressing gender equality. Throughout the developing world, women are confronted with a plethora of basic challenges that Australia ought to play a role in addressing through our provision of development assistance. This includes efforts to promote women's human rights in accordance with the Convention for Elimination of Discrimination Against Women. For instance, Australia's foreign aid contribution can have a meaningful impact on promoting women's empowerment by funding educational programs and initiatives aimed at ensuring that women have fair and equal access to education, training and employment. Labor supports eliminating the cultural and economic barriers faced by children, and, in particular, girls, attending school, such as child labour, child trafficking, child marriage, safety to and from school, community attitudes and teaching practices.

With respect to climate change, our development budget is effectively silent—the government's budget is effectively silent on this. Yet it is incumbent on all of us to play our part in addressing climate change. This is particularly so within the context of its impact on our Pacific neighbours. In the Pacific, the impact of climate change has the potential to actually reverse the reduction in poverty that has been made in the past 30 years. While a sea rise of a few centimetres would have an impact for us here in Australia, certainly, those same changes would be catastrophic and absolutely devastating, for example, to the people of Tuvalu. Indeed, according to some predictions, several island nations may cease to exist as we know them today in the span of just a few decades. And yet the recent OECD report noted that Australia spends less on development supporting climate change than many other OECD countries: 13 per cent of Australian aid in 2015, compared to 26.2 per cent average for all of the other OECD countries. Conservative estimates indicate that the impacts of climate change will result in more than 100 million additional people being pushed into poverty by 2030.

So, unless you are the coalition government, there is little doubt that climate change and climate-change-related disasters clearly pose risks to economic growth, poverty reduction, education, health and regional security in the Pacific. Addressing climate change is imperative if Australia is to mitigate the long-term cost of having to make adequate provision for the tens of thousands of refugees fleeing the impacts of that change.

Senator Wong, in the other place, our shadow foreign minister, has noted:

If our development assistance program is seeking to grow the social and human capital that lifts people out of poverty while the consequences of climate change continue to undermine that outcome, then disaster risk reduction must become a more prominent feature of our development assistance planning.

Climate change impacts every aspect of the Australian Aid Program such that we cannot be serious about tackling poverty in our region if we are not serious about tackling climate change.

And this government is not serious. In fact, they're going backwards as far as their discussion of climate change goes.

The issue of climate change is even being factored into defence planning. The 2016 Defence white paper mentioned climate change eight times, and warned:

Climate change will be a major challenge for countries in Australia’s immediate region.

From a Defence perspective, this could exacerbate conflict and fragility issues in the Pacific Island states. To address the strategic consequences of this issue, particularly with the increasing influence of outside actors with interests that are inimical to ours, it's important for Australia to:

… help support the development of national resilience in the region to reduce the likelihood of instability.

That assistance includes defence cooperation, aid, policing and building regional organisations. The ADF expects to be called upon more and more to provide humanitarian assistance and disaster relief. That is as a direct consequence of what we are seeing with climate change in the Pacific.

Balancing our humanitarian and our moral objectives with our more pragmatic political objectives, which are often tied to the national interest, is a difficult process, but there is a need to get that balance right. People familiar with the Venn diagram would note that there's a crossover point. If we can get our objectives—the geopolitical, the humanitarian and the business—all aligned in that crossover point in the Venn diagram, it shows where you get peak effectiveness and efficacy of our aid program. On business, too, there are efforts to partner in developments with companies already on the ground, to leverage private capital flows, ensuring enhanced dividends on commercial enterprises and development working together.

We need to understand what our national interest is, and why it's so. This is, of course, always open to analysis and debate. Senator Wong has articulated Labor's position on this: the security of the nation and its people; the economic prosperity of the nation and its people; a stable, cooperative, strategic system in our region anchored in the rule of law; constructive internationalism; and, of course, our values, which she points out: compassion, equity, inclusion, and mutual respect. These need to find expression in the rule of law, in the principle of the rule of law. That is, of course, the basis of our democratic practice and, as she points out, the social contract between the government and the people.

To answer the question: why do we invest in development assistance in our budgets? It is because it is unquestionably in Australia's interest to create a more stable and secure world by helping to reduce poverty, to improve health and education, and to fight inequality. Senator Wong also acknowledges that both developed and developing countries have something to offer each other and to learn from each other when it comes to ensuring equality and prosperity. This is the essence of social and human capital development.

A lot of studies have been done on aid and development assistance. Some of them refer to the head and the heart as the philosophies behind humanitarian assistance. The heart is the compassion, the moral underpinning of our aid programs. You could argue it's intrinsically linked to the Australian spirit and to the boundless plains that we want to share with people—our Australian values that promote egalitarianism and fairness. The head is the logical. The evidence based benefits of an effective aid program are trade, security, stability and prosperity.

Labor has agreed to improve the Australian aid program because we understand both the head and the heart of development assistance policy. Development is a critical tool of state craft and it works with the other tools at our disposal. Diplomacy and development, if successful, can establish peace and security in our region. You then don't need the sharp end of the spear, which is defence—the third D. The military is and always should be the last resort. But we increase the chances of having to reach into that defence tool if we don't use the other tools at our disposal well enough. This government is not doing that. Even General Mattis, President Trump's Secretary of Defense—who was described in a recent New York Times article as a person who was dismissed as a warmonger by the Obama presidency—someone you wouldn't really associate with supporting aid and development assistance, said in a summary of his views on statecraft and diplomacy, in 2013:

If you don't fund the State Department fully, then I need to buy more ammunition ultimately.

That's very true. There's elemental truth in this. If you don't fund development assistance and diplomacy, by extension you will need to utilise the tools of statecraft, such as defence, and you'll spend more on it.

At a relatively low-cost alternative to force projection, foreign aid and development can help to achieve our national interest goals in the Indo-Pacific. From the national security and defence perspective, funding programs intended to reduce poverty, improve access to education, enhance standards of living, can reduce the conditions for radicalism. In responding to potential cuts to aid, Allan Gyngell, a former head of the ONA, said:

Why is it that instruments of deterrence, the instruments of war-fighting, the instruments of national security—all of them—are considered a legitimate expenditure of taxpayers money but instruments of persuasion are not?

It's a very good question.

As a democracy, we should seek to promote the welfare of our neighbours. We can utilise the tools, the three Ds, especially development, to avoid the unnecessary violence and civilian strife these countries may fall into. Balancing our objectives—humanitarian, moral and political—and tying them to the national interest is something that we can do with a healthy development assistance budget. I'll say this: we can look to examples globally. You've got a conservative government in the UK that has successfully committed to 0.7 per cent GNI for its development spending. That government was put under enormous pressure to reduce that—some of the issues that Oxfam had. The UK government and Theresa May still stood firm and said, 'We are not going to cut our development budget.' They legislated for 0.7 per cent of GNI. At least that conservative government is doing the right thing and standing on principle. I think it's an example that this government should look at and take note of. The Australian Labor Party has committed to a national platform of 0.5 per cent of GNI. I'd like it to go beyond that, but we have a very good target to aim for. We engaged with the international development sector to do that work. My colleague the member for Brand here, among many other MPs, worked with NGOs in the sector on the important policy issues we need to deal with if we are to form government. We are committed to the development assistance budget for our neighbours and for the world.

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

I rise today to speak in support of these appropriation bills for a stronger economy, more jobs, tax relief for hardworking Australians and guaranteeing the essential services upon which Australians rely. Importantly, the coalition is ensuring that the government lives within its means. Let me be clear: the Turnbull coalition government is delivering for all Australians. No matter where you live in our amazing country, no matter what your line of work, no matter the size of your family, you will benefit from strong coalition policies. These policies promote the values of hard work, fairness and looking after those least able to support themselves.

Those living in my electorate of Ryan know all too well the benefits of good government policy, which seems to occur only under coalition leadership. It does not matter whether you are a small business owner, a parent using childcare or a superannuant downsizing their home; they all have one thing in common: confidence and prosperity as a result of well-grounded coalition policies. My constituents and the wider Australian public care about the future of our children, the cost of living, and ensuring their hard work does not go to waste, but in reality, if those opposite achieve government then Australians should worry about those basic tenets.

The Ryan electorate is home to world-class facilities at the University of Queensland. With cutting-edge research and innovation being undertaken, their achievements on a worldwide scale continue to materialise. As the member for Ryan I have continually advocated for funding to support science, innovation, research and commercialisation at local universities. I am proud that the prestigious University of Queensland, ranked 55th in the top universities of the world and in the top 10 for commercialisation, has increased its successes through direct assistance from the coalition government.

Only recently three University of Queensland professors were successful recipients of funding through the Medical Research Future Fund. With a combined total of more than $5 million, this funding supports the work of Professor Gandhi into a study of brain lymphomas, Professor Claire Wainwright and her clinical trial into multi-drug resistant organisms, and Professor Janet Hardy, whose study will examine the use of medicinal cannabinoids for advanced cancer patients. This very research undertaken at the University of Queensland will likely contribute to longer, healthier lives for Australians and people worldwide. I consider this a significant achievement to which I have contributed through advocacy and funding support as part of the coalition government.

UQ is also home to other state-of-the-art research facilities, including the Institute for Molecular Bioscience, the Australian Institute for Bioengineering and Nanotechnology, and the Queensland Brain Institute. Research like that by Dr Kate Schroder, whose breakthroughs in cell biology and molecular medicine are paving the way for cures and treatments for diseases like Parkinson's, is inspiring confidence for millions of sufferers globally. The development of the HPV vaccine by Professor Ian Frazer, Professor Maree Smith's oral treatment for chronic pain, and Professor Mark Kendall's nanopatch immunisation technology are all achievements of a well-supported sector underpinned by strong government policy and investment. I cannot claim to be part of UQ's world-leading research, but I feel honoured to have been their federal member during some remarkable advancements.

Following the recent redistribution in Queensland, postcode 4306 is no longer part of the Ryan electorate. I would like to talk briefly about my contribution to this mammoth, David-versus-Goliath fight. During my eight years as the federal member for Ryan, I have continually engaged with local residents in Karana Downs, Kholo and Mount Crosby, for whom their postcode causes mass confusion on a daily basis. Following on from work commenced almost 20 years ago by Bruce Scott, the former member for Maranoa, I've called on Australia Post to review this age-old issue. I'm pleased to report back to the House that some progress has been made. Given the dense population and growth of the southern zone of postcode 4306, Australia Post is actively looking for a site in the Ipswich area to create a new Australia Post delivery centre to optimise delivery services. Some postcode redistribution will be necessary when a site becomes operational. While this still does not resolve the matter immediately, despite what many of us see as an obvious solution, it certainly shows some light at the end of this 20-plus-year conundrum.

The electorate of Ryan is home to a diverse range of community groups which support the local region and contribute to social cohesion and culture. These community groups are run by dedicated volunteers, many of whom have jobs and family commitments as well. So it is vital that they receive government backing to continue their work. The Stronger Communities Program—an initiative of the coalition government—has provided me with opportunities to further assist local community groups and not-for-profit organisations through often much-needed grant funding. The latest round of SCP funding, round 3, saw 11 Ryan community groups successfully awarded funding. For a small investment, community projects deliver immense benefits.

The Bardon Girl Guides sought funds for an extension to their hut. This facility is also used by other community organisations for their activities and provides an inclusive environment to foster female participation. With an ever-increasing demand on their playing fields and seeking to grow participation, the Bardon Latrobe Football Club and Taringa Rovers soccer club were successful in their bids to upgrade facilities for equipment and fields for play. Wests Brisbane Junior Rugby League have received vital funds to upgrade water facilities at Purtell Park.

In the hot and humid Queensland summers, the situation has become unbearable for two local groups. Firstly, Ewaste Connection, which provides people living with disability an opportunity to learn and engage with others by recycling electronic waste, have been successful in their bid for funding to install a much-needed air-conditioner to keep participants cool, calm and on the job. The local Vinnies at Grovely in my electorate has also struggled through hot summers. Volunteers and customers alike work and shop in steamy conditions. As a result of this SCP round, Vinnies at Grovely will soon be installing new air-conditioning. The local Moggill Pony Club has very poor stable facilities, with white ant infestations. Through community fundraising and support, and some SCP funding, the club is in the process of constructing some brand-new, fit-for-purpose stables. I recently enjoyed officially opening these stables at their first club day for 2018. A big thankyou must go to local supporters James and Clare Robinson for the work their business did to demolish the former stables and construct the new ones.

A number of school P&C committees applied for funding as well, for projects which benefit their wider local communities. St Joseph's at Bardon is currently repurposing their library for community book clubs and community playgroups. St Andrew's Catholic School at Ferny Grove is also upgrading their sports oval with disability access. This will create a more inclusive space for the wider community to enjoy. And I must not forget the Pullenvale Progress Association, which is using their SCP funds to upgrade the facilities around the historic Pullenvale Hall. Help Enterprises, in association with the McIntyre Centre Riding for Disabled, is constructing disability access pathways at the centre for safer access for those participating.

Congratulations to everyone who successfully applied and are now delivering stronger communities for everyone. I'd also like to take this opportunity to thank all volunteers in the Ryan electorate for your ongoing dedication and contribution to our wonderful area. Volunteers truly are the glue that binds our community.

Earlier this year, I attended the annual Gaythorne RSL volunteers dinner, which celebrates their volunteers and the highly valued support of this age-old establishment and close-knit community. President Merv Brown OAM has worked tirelessly to keep this sub-branch connected with the local community and schools. In fact, it is with sadness that Merv steps down as president of the Gaythorne RSL after 11 years of continued service. From a distinguished career in the Australian Army, through to his community ties, Merv has been a significant advocate and voice for the veteran and widow communities. Merv truly espouses the values of the RSL. I congratulate him on his achievements and thank him for his service. No matter where you travel throughout Australia, volunteers are always in great demand. From volunteering at local sporting clubs and charities through to assisting people living with disability, the immense pride and sense of achievement gained by this type of unpaid work is fulfilling. And while on the topic of our Defence community, I recently had the privilege of attending the farewell parade for troops from 7th Brigade at Gallipoli Barracks, who are deploying as part of Task Force Taji. As the mother of a son currently serving in the Army, I'm all too familiar with the emotions of these events.

In March, the Prime Minister announced Rheinmetall was the successful proponent selected to deliver Australia's new combat reconnaissance vehicle, the Boxer, for Land 400 phase 2 mounted combat reconnaissance capability. During the 30-year life of the vehicles, Australian industry will deliver two-thirds, or $10.2 billion, of the acquisition and sustainment, creating up to 1,450 new jobs right across Australia. With Rheinmetall basing its manufacturing hub in South-East Queensland, local Australian-based businesses will support this major manufacturing and outfitting work. I would also like to take this opportunity to extend my congratulations to my good friend Lieutenant General Angus Campbell, who will continue his service to Australia as Chief of Defence Force starting in July. Lieutenant General Campbell has demonstrated the leadership and experience vital for this role. At the same time, Major General Rick Burr will assume Lieutenant General Campbell's position as Chief of Army. I compliment him on his career to date, which I'm sure will prove valuable in this role. My appreciation also goes to outgoing Chief of Defence, Air Chief Marshal Mark Binskin, who has made an outstanding contribution at the helm of the ADF.

When it comes to hard work and making contributions to Ryan, I acknowledge the determination of the more than 17,000 registered small businesses in my electorate. It cannot be forgotten that their contribution to the local economy and larger Australian economy is nothing short of significant. With business tax cuts, the very welcome $20,000 instant asset write-off, and red tape reduction to name just a few, I am proud to be a member of a government that is doing everything it can to ensure the future success of small business. I have many mum-and-dad small businesses locally that can now see a future for their operations as a direct result of coalition policy. Small businesses like newsXpress Kenmore, the Clean Bean Espresso Bar at Gaythorne and Ultra Tune at Indooroopilly are all enjoying the benefits of coalition policy supporting small business.

Unlike Labor—a threat to business, employment and investment in Australia—the coalition is getting on with the job of working with the sector, which strengthens our growing economy. However, there is one thing that stands in the way of business, small business and overall success: the renegade unions. I cannot tell you how often my office receives calls from local business owners, and even some employees, who struggle with unionised work sites. In fact, recently one local constituent told my staff he was a Labor voter, but could not stand the turmoil his business was facing at the hands of thugs, ruffians and generally abrasive union members. The very fact that those opposite are working at the behest of their union puppet masters gives a clear indication to all Australians that their interests are not in supporting families; they are in the back pocket of union bosses.

When will Labor realise that business confidence, investment growth and employment growth rely on a stable economy? Plucking money from the mystic money tree and using tips from the book of magic pudding economics simply do not work. Australians are not fooled by those opposite, who would squander their futures and the economic prosperity built by the coalition government. We have seen time and time again the ALP plague Australia with poorly-formed policy and economic mismanagement akin to an adult with mountains of credit card debt who constantly shifts debt from one card to another. It is the hardworking mums and dads in small business who are on the receiving end of Labor's attacks and unfair policy.

These bills are integral to ensure the continuity of the government's programs. As a strong coalition government, we are ensuring that Australia's taxpayers' money is being spent wisely. Unlike those opposite, we are creating a stronger future for Australians: for their safety, their health, their education and their employment prospects. We are creating foundations for investment in this country, we are reducing Labor's debt, and we are providing for those least able to do so.

Unlike the Labor governments of the past and the unions that those opposite represent, this coalition is delivering. I recently received an email from a local constituent comparing Anzac Day to Labor Day and questioning why Anzac receives more attention. This is the vile vitriol of those individuals in the unions which support the opposition leader. I have grown a thick skin during my time in politics, but it truly hurts deeply when some Australians believe that unions should be recognised on a par with veterans and members of our defence forces.

I have had pleasure serving the people of Ryan for the past eight years. During this time, I have established lifelong partnerships with people from all walks of life, and I feel privileged to have been able to deliver so many benefits for them and their families. I commend these bills to the House.

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

I thank the member for Ryan and also note her service to the electorate of Ryan for the last eight years.

Sitting suspended from 13:30 to 16:06

Pat Conroy (Shortland, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Infrastructure) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to talk about the appropriation bills, which are the budget bills for the government. This affords me a good opportunity to talk about the priorities for my electorate and my region of Lake Macquarie and northern Central Coast. I'd like to start my contribution today by reflecting on a picture of what my electorate is like. When you look at the budget and everything that's in it, its priorities, you'd assume that the typical worker in Australia earns $100,000, or $200,000 as the case may be, and that families earn much more than that. That's where the tax cuts are targeted, and that's where those opposite seem to think people are residing in terms of affordability.

The true picture is very different for my electorate. The true picture for my electorate is that the median worker—so if you lined up every single worker in my electorate end-to-end and picked the 50th percentile, the person in the middle—earns $47,300. Half of all my workers earn less than $47,300; half of all my workers earn more. The median household income in my electorate, including retired households, is $65,000—that is, they live on $65,000 a year. A very high number of pensioners, about 22,000, reside in Shortland—it's a fabulous place to retire to—and the average retiree household survives on $32,000 a year. That's for a couple; that's not for an individual. The median retiree household in Shortland lives on $32,000 a year. The median household assets for retired couples is $650,000. This includes the family home and all their assets, including car, couch, furniture, clothing and everything else. And the median super balance for retired households in my electorate is $165,000. It's very important to put these facts on the record, because this goes to who the people of Shortland are and what their priorities are, and it is my job to reflect and to deliver on their priorities.

I regret to say that one in five children in my electorate will go to school at least once a year without a meal, without having breakfast—not because they didn't want Corn Flakes or Weet-Bix, but because their family could not afford to have food in the fridge for breakfast. This is a sad indictment on our society, and it's an indictment that, along with every other member of the Labor team, I am intent on rectifying. That's the true picture of the people of Shortland.

I want to now go to some of their priorities. The No. 1 priority for the people of Shortland is affordable health care: being able to see a doctor when you're sick; being able to get into the hospital when, heaven forbid, something's happened to your child or your grandparent or your mother or your father. I'm sad to say that this government's budget bills contain $715 million of cuts to hospitals around the country, including $37 million of cuts to hospitals in my region. That is already having an impact. For example, waitlists are increasing and only 66 per cent of urgent emergency department patients are seen within the recommended 30 minutes. These cuts are having an impact, and it's something we need to rectify.

That's why I'm so proud that the Labor opposition, in our budget-in-reply speech by Bill Shorten, announced $2.8 billion of additional funding for public hospitals and $80 million for 20 new MRI machines in regional hospitals and outer suburban hospitals. This is so important. At a budget forum I held last week, I had a constituent who said that their partner had gone to a private hospital and they'd been required to get an MRI. Not only was that MRI not Medicare rebatable but they didn't have a licence so they couldn't even claim the cost of the MRI off their private healthcare insurance. This is unacceptable, and we need to do much more about that.

We also need to restore needed funding for Medicare. Under this government, Medicare has been cut and cut. The Prime Minister has broken his promise to unfreeze the rebate for specialists, despite making a cast-iron promise to do so. Out-of-pocket fees to see specialists have gone even higher. They've increased to $88, an increase of $12 since the election, and that will only go higher since the rebate has been frozen. If you freeze that pay specialists get from Medicare, they will charge their patients more. We've also seen the out-of-pocket costs for visiting a GP increase by $4 since the election as well. If this government was serious about health care, they would restore the vital funding needed to public hospitals, they would match our commitments around MRIs and they would ensure Medicare is adequately funded.

I will turn to the other great priority for my electorate, and that's education. This budget confirms the $17 billion in cuts to school education through the needs-based funding model. This is $17 billion in cuts against what the government committed to in the 2013 election. They proudly bragged about the cuts in the infamous 2014 budget, where their glossy document bragged about $80 billion of cuts to schools and hospitals. Their exact words were $80 billion of cuts—not reductions or increases, but cuts. That is having an impact. My schools are some of the poorest schools in the country. They made great use of the early years of the needs-based funding. One great example is St Pius X Primary School in Windale. I'm grateful to my colleague, the member for Lyne, in correcting me yesterday.

David Gillespie (Lyne, National Party, Assistant Minister for Children and Families) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No fibs!

Pat Conroy (Shortland, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Infrastructure) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I referred to a St Pius XI yesterday. I got carried away with my popes. It is, in fact, St Pius X Primary School in Windale. I want to congratulate St Pius X Primary School on their absolutely fantastic NAPLAN results. In the category of schools they are in, because they're one of the lowest socioeconomic schools in the country, their year 3 students came first in the whole of Australia in reading, grammar, punctuation and mathematics and second in writing and spelling. Year 5 also excelled, again coming first nationally in writing, spelling and mathematics. They were second in reading and third in grammar and punctuation. I cannot emphasise to the House how truly remarkable these results are.

St Pius X is a very special school. The school and the community face some very severe socioeconomic challenges. It's a small school of 50 students, and 57 per cent of students are Indigenous. Because of the early years of the needs-based funding, the Catholic Schools Office was able to allocate very significant additional resources and they employed two extra teachers in a school of 50. Two extra teachers in a small school of 50 is such an amazing investment, and that is having a positive payoff right now. I'm sure we can all appreciate the dramatically positive impact these additional staff are having in that school and the life-changing impact on these children. As I said, they are excelling. They are first in the nation in reading, grammar, punctuation and mathematics and second in writing and spelling.

I spoke to one of their teachers at an Anzac Day ceremony, who was brought on using the early years needs-based funding. She was adamant, as is the school leadership, that those results would not have been achieved, and that improvement would not have been achieved without those early years of the needs-based funding. Congratulations to the principal, Peter Brown; his staff; the community of St Pius X and most importantly the gifted and special students at that school. That's not the only success story out of needs-based funding. Lake Munmorah Public School have used the early years of the funding to specialise in teacher development and really invest in teacher development for their class teachers. I was talking to the principal of Swansea High School only last week, and she was saying that they allocate a lot of the money to additional tutoring for kids who are probably entering years 7 and 8 with the least developed literacy and numeracy skills. They know that, unless they get those kids back on track, they will fall even further behind on the path to year 12.

That is the power of education. That is the power of true needs based schools funding in this country. That is the opportunity that is being squandered by this government's $17 billion of cuts to needs based school funding. That is why I'm so proud that Bill Shorten in the budget reply reaffirmed Labor's commitment to restoring that $17 billion of funding. That means an extra $33 million of funding to schools in Shortland in the next two years alone. Let me repeat that: a Labor government means that in the next two years schools in the Shortland, Central Coast and Lake Macquarie area will get an extra $33 million of funding to boost educational opportunities. In December last year the government announced $2.2 billion of cuts to university education, ending the demand-driven approach to higher education. That means 200,000 fewer students will go to uni than otherwise could. Again, I'm proud that Labor has committed to restoring that $2.2 billion of funding.

The budget also contained $270 million in cuts to TAFE. This is a dramatic cut on top of the $1.5 billion this government has already cut out of TAFE. The Hunter region is dominated by mining and manufacturing. We are particularly dependent on tradespeople and their skills. Any cuts to TAFE hit my region disproportionately. That's why this $270 million cut to TAFE was so short-sighted. When I did my budget fora last week, it was the cut that received the most vociferous opposition from the audience, even though it wasn't as big as some of the others. That's why I'm proud that Labor's budget response committed $473 million of additional funding to TAFE, including $100 million to upgrade TAFE facilities. Some TAFE workshops are very old. I've said to some tradespeople in their 40s and 50s that they probably haven't changed much compared to when they went through TAFE, so $100 million to upgrade those workshops is great. Spending money to provide 100,000 scholarships means there are no up-front fees for students studying in areas of critical skills shortage such as carpentry. That's so important if we're to turn away from filling those vacancies through temporary skilled migration programs and employ Australians in those positions. That is a sound investment in our future that only Labor will make.

The other big change coming down the path at the start of July is the childcare benefit scheme becoming the childcare subsidy scheme. Something urgently needs to be done to reform child care. Child care is becoming increasingly unaffordable in this country. Unfortunately, instead of fixing the system this government is making it harder by changing the activity test, which means 1,372 families in Shortland will be worse off. For example, families earning more than $65,000 with one stay-at-home parent may fail the activity test and be ineligible for any childcare subsidy. Families that rely on seasonal, irregular, contract or casual work will lose access to 24 hours of child care if their hours fall under eight in any fortnight. That is a real possibility in the increasingly insecure work environment. There are many casual and seasonal workers in my electorate. My electorate is chock-full of tradies, aged-care workers, disability workers and nurses. Some of those jobs are hostage to changing and falling hours at very short notice. They stand to lose 24 hours of child care per fortnight if they work less than eight hours, through no fault of their own. That is what I'm concerned about: 1,300 families in Shortland becoming worse off because of this government's childcare changes. This is appalling and short-sighted.

The first five years of a child's development are the most crucial, so if we want to invest in our children's future, we need to invest more in child care, not less. Part of that investment is also boosting pay for early childhood educators. Early childhood educators do a phenomenal job under very difficult circumstances. With two kids in early childhood education, I'm in awe of their educators. They have to have a minimum of a cert III qualification. Often they have a cert IV. Some of them have university degrees. Yet they are paid as little as $21 an hour. It is an absolute disgrace to pay our early childhood educators as little as $21 an hour. It is unacceptable. It is selling them short. It is selling our children's future short. It's no coincidence that this is allowed to happen in an industry where 97 per cent of the workforce is female. It's another example of the gender gap that we all need to work much harder to rectify.

Unfortunately, the priorities for my electorate will go unsatisfied again under this government. The priorities for my electorate are adequate investment in health care and proper investment in education—school-age and early childhood, university and VET. Again, this government is selling them short, because, ultimately, this government is hostage to its true constituents. This government is hostage to high-income earners. It's hostage to large corporations. It's hostage to the hard Right that control the Liberal Party and that is threatening the preselections of many members of the Liberal Party right now. It's hostage to a shrinking minority of the population. The great majority of the population are suffering under this short-sighted, mean, arrogant and out-of-touch government. The election cannot come soon enough.

David Gillespie (Lyne, National Party, Assistant Minister for Children and Families) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The 2018 budget has delivered on our plan to make a stronger economy so that everyone benefits. It guarantees essential services like Medicare, schools, hospitals, the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme and it allows us to build the massive infrastructure that the nation requires.

Firstly, I want to compliment the Treasurer on his initiative in the tax plan. In my electorate of Lyne, we have 51,000 taxpayers. Most of them aren't from the big end of town. Most of them are hardworking mums and dads, running their small businesses or working in our hospitals and schools. They are going to be better off because of the low- and middle-income tax offset. Each person in that bracket will be $530 better off. We're also raising the tax threshold for when you go up to 37c in the dollar from $87,000 to $90,000. So that's addressing bracket creep. They're my people. Most people in my electorate are earning that sort of money. There is a plan in the future to extend the benefit and get rid of the 37c tax rate so that the expanded $90,000 limit will go up to $200,000, and you will only be paying 32c in the dollar. That is a long-term benefit for people who are working hard. We want to incentivise them. We want to let them keep more of their own money. It's not our money. The people on the other side treat it as though the government owns all your money, and they'll let you keep some of it. They've got it back to front.

We're incentivising small business. We love small business because, as in my electorate, they're the biggest employers. We've got to empower them. We've reduced the company tax rate to 27½ per cent for companies with a turnover of under $50 million. The other side want to put it back up and only allow it for businesses with a turnover of under $5 million. They've got to be joking. Anyhow, that's the way they think on that side.

For small businesses in my electorate like the many that turned up at the Dungog Business Awards, it was a celebration of so many great businesses. While I was there, I visited the Tinshed Brewery. Jimmy Cox and Haley Collis have got to be congratulated. The craft beer industry is getting a benefit, too, from this budget, because the alcohol excise for small boutique craft breweries is being reduced so that they can get the same deal as the bigger breweries. It means that he can now put his craft brewery kegs into restaurants and the smaller outlets. It wasn't viable for them to put their product into the smaller restaurants and bars, because those places don't have a big enough turnover. It means the amount that they are paying in excise is reduced and the level they get goes up to $100,000. But there are many other craft breweries in the Hunter and in the Hastings, at the northern and southern ends, that will benefit, like Black Duck Brewery and many others. Mad Abbot and lots of other boutique breweries will get big help from this so they can compete.

As I mentioned, we are also paying for the infrastructure that's allowing people to get home sooner and safer. We are building transport lanes and freeways, which means goods can get to market a lot more cheaply and efficiently. It means tourists from Brisbane and the Gold Coast can come down to the beautiful Mid North Coast. Whether they want to visit Hawks Nest and Tea Gardens or the beautiful Great Lakes area of Forster Tuncurry, they will soon be able to come all the way from the Queensland border on a dual-lane freeway without a traffic light. We've just announced $971 million to complete the Coffs Harbour bypass, the missing link. It means the roads will be safer and it will be great for business and great for transport costs. Things will be delivered into the region more cheaply and we will get our exports out.

We've also announced the Roads of Strategic Importance fund. There is money going into the north of Australia and Tasmania, but in our area, in New South Wales and the other states, there's $1.78 billion not yet allocated. We'll be able to use that to work on roads like the Bucketts Way and Thunderbolts Way, which is an avenue of commerce for beef, dairy and poultry, all the agricultural, horticultural and tourism industries around Stroud and Gloucester, down through Lorn, Largs, Bolwarra—all that area. From the south, they go into the Newcastle market. The middle of the electorate rely on the Buckets Way and Thunderbolts Way. A huge amount of tourism dollars flow into the Gloucester valley, Stroud and the area going down into the Hunter, and these roads connect the Pacific Highway; they connect Taree up to Tamworth. It's such a good idea.

We have got guaranteed extra funding for health. New South Wales public hospitals are getting an extra $39½ billion out of the new hospitals agreement. With that, they will be able to expand services. There is a 29 per cent increase over the five years of the hospitals agreement. That's $8.94 billion extra. That means places like the Manning Base Hospital, Gloucester hospital, Wauchope hospital and the New South Wales health department will have extra funds from the Commonwealth.

Our senior Australians are getting a better deal too. We have 40,000 people aged over 65 in my electorate. Everyone on a pension likes to earn a bit of extra money so that they can have quality of life and keep themselves active. We've raised the limit of the amount that you can earn without it affecting the amount you get on the pension. That amount has gone from $250 up to $300 a fortnight. We've also got new skills programs and entrepreneurial and mentoring schemes for senior Australians aged 45 and over who need to get back into the workforce. The Pension Loans Scheme allows people to draw down on the value of their house and contribute to super. So we are also looking after senior Australians. We have delivered extra nursing homes in the southern part of the electorate, at Peter Sinclair Gardens in Hawks Nest, at Largs, at the GLAICA development at Forster or up in Wauchope. We have extra beds allocated to Gloucester. I'm hoping that Anglicare can get on with it and build the nursing home that we've given the funds for. And we have allocated an extra 14,000 high-care home support packages around the country because people want to age in their own homes for longer. We are delivering in spades. For my small businesses, we have continued the instant asset write-off, because we know it's targeted. Businesses will only buy equipment that is going to help them grow their business. So we're empowering them to get more equipment or assets that will allow their businesses to grow.

Child care is getting a huge extra 3½ billion dollars. Senator Birmingham, the Minister for Education and Training, has spoken about this, but this budget will be what pays for that. We've got $440 million around the nation in the next year to allow 15 hours at preschool, or prep—whatever age you turn in your year before school. In the Lyne electorate, we've got just short of 2,000 children that will benefit from that. That means they'll get their 15 hours of preschool in the year before they go to school. And the childcare arrangements will mean that people are better off, particularly in the income band in my electorate, where I live.

When the new childcare system comes in, people who are earning $80,000 will get a benefit that will mean they're $8,000 better off. The $7,500 cap is being removed for those people. The more they work then the more they can get the subsidy to keep their children cared for, getting their early learning and education while the parents are able to work.

There is better funding for schools being delivered in this budget too. In the Lyne electorate, there is $30.9 million extra out to the year 2027 for all the schools—government, independent and Catholic schools—because we're delivering. We've grown the economy and we've got extra revenue in that allows us to pay down the debt that had been locked in through spending by the people on the other side before they left. We've controlled our spending and grown the economy.

That's part of our plan. The other side gives these Dutch-auction-giveaway prizes, but people see through that. They know you have to pay for it. We will come in with a balanced budget a year sooner. We know how to make the economy work. We empower small businesses and entrepreneurs, and people who work hard, and we want them to get ahead. You can look at the NDIS, which we are funding—we're not having to put up the Medicare levy. Again, everyone wins when we get a stronger economy. It's part of our plan.

In the health space, I've mentioned the extra funding for hospitals, but there is also the extra funding for pharmaceutical benefits—the drugs that we all rely on at some stage of our lives are so important. We have funded new drugs like SPINRAZA. I've got several children in the electorate who have spinal muscular atrophy, and I was speaking to one of their mums. She was in tears about how her son, Finn, was going to get the treatment that he deserves. But we have to pay for it somehow, and that's why growing the economy is so important.

There are plenty of people from my former life who I've treated and cared for and who have suffered from a cancer of one sort or another. Whether it's the new funding for KEYTRUDA in refractory lymphoma, or other drugs—KISQALI for breast cancer—there are thousands of patients who are going to benefit from this. Since we came into government, there has been an absolutely amazing explosion of new medicines that have been funded on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. That totals $8.3 billion of new drug funding. That is a fantastic outcome.

We are taking the recommendations of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee and finding ways to fund them. I congratulate the Minister for Health on his novel agreement, getting old drugs that were holding up funding the new ones off the PBS, so that we have a system of paying for them now. There are always going to be new drugs, but we have a strong economy with extra revenue coming in. There are 140,000 fewer people depending on welfare now than there were when we came into government. It's the lowest level of people depending on welfare. The best welfare is a job. With policies that have empowered the economy, small businesses and large businesses, we have got rid of red tape and reduced taxes where we can in a responsible, measured fashion. We've got over a million people working in new positions because of those policies. That's part of our plan. The other side gives away trinkets and things, but they don't address the fundamental reliance there.

For any budget, state or federal, you've got to have the revenue. That's why our plan to grow a strong economy is delivering dividends. It's a really sensible budget. Coming into surplus means we can start paying off our debt—the nation's mortgage—that has come as a result of all these locked-in spending programs that the other side left when they left government. They have blocked all the other things that we've tried to do to save and control our budget. But we've grown the economy and we've grown the pie, so revenue is up. Our multinational anti-avoidance legislation has delivered $7 billion in extra tax revenue. We are giving small businesses help by lowering their company tax and giving them instant asset write-off, and the growth in small business employment has been 23 per cent higher than other employment. We've got a lot more to do, but this budget has been a great budget. Everyone ought to rejoice in the fact that we're coming back into surplus.

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

Budgets are about priorities. Budgets are about choices. Sadly, with this government, this budget is about winners and losers. I don't really like to talk about winners and losers, but there are clear winners and losers in this budget. No-one in my electorate of Dobell is left wondering just who the winners and losers are. The winners are clearly high-income earners, big business and the big four banks. The losers are young people, pensioners and people living outside of the big cities in regional communities like mine on the Central Coast.

The government has pushed on with its plans to deliver an $80 billion tax cut to big business. It is a tax cut that just isn't fair and a tax cut that we can't afford. The government's plan to deliver tax cuts to big business is at the expense of young people, pensioners and people living outside of big cities. The government has failed to properly fund schools, failed to look after older Australians waiting for home care packages and failed younger people. This government has continued with its ideologically driven, trickle-down economics and the flawed notion that giving a tax cut to the wealthiest Australians will benefit other Australians. It isn't fair and it doesn't work.

There are some parts of the budget that Labor does support. Labor supports the tax changes for low- and middle-income earners that would come into effect on 1 July. We support the extension of the $20,000 instant asset write-off for small business and the tax cut for small businesses. We support the crackdown on the black economy and multinational tax avoidance and, to some degree, the changes on superannuation. I—more than most, as a pharmacist—support the new listings on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, knowing firsthand the importance of being able to afford your medicines and see a doctor close to home when you need one most.

Labor wants to see the economy grow. We want to see more jobs. We would prefer not to be spending billions of taxpayers' dollars servicing the interest bill on the government's record debt, which has doubled over the past five years despite positive global conditions. Labor does not believe the policy settings in this budget will mean more jobs or will pay down the debt. We are not paying down the debt fast enough, not going about it in the right way and not making the most of our opportunities. We have $40 billion of new receipts in the budget as a consequence of the global economy picking up after the GFC, but we don't know how long these positive conditions will last. Some of the assumptions in the budget are a bit rosy, given flat wages and international uncertainty. Labor is approaching the forecasts with caution. We also have record net debt that is twice what this government inherited and gross debt of over half a trillion dollars.

We don't agree with the company tax cut for big business, especially to the big banks, given the evidence that has been heard by the royal commission. It's important to note that Labor opposes the tax cuts for big business and high-income earners not on ideological grounds but for fiscal and economic reasons: we cannot afford them, and we can do better. Labor priorities are about targeting tax relief at low- and middle-income earners in genuinely small and medium enterprises. That's why we would introduce the Australian investment guarantee, to give tax relief to companies investing onshore, in Australia. We want people to have lower taxes so they can spend more on the things they need in local businesses in regional communities like mine.

We want businesses to have the workers that they need, so we will waive upfront fees to 100,000 TAFE students. Labor will rebuild TAFE—a TAFE system that has been hollowed out under this government. We will get more from those policies than from tax cuts to the wealthiest Australians and overseas multinationals.

Labor is ready to govern, to walk through the front door of the parliament with sound policies, having listened to people. We are making difficult decisions and getting them right. As Labor has always said, we are about a fairer approach. This budget won't make Australia a fairer place. This budget will help the rich get richer. On the question of tax, Labor will ensure bigger income tax cuts for 10 million working Australians. Labor will provide tax cuts to everyone who earns up to $120,000 a year. But Labor will not give an $80 billion tax cut to big businesses, and Labor will not give a $17 billion tax cut to big banks. By not supporting tax cuts for large corporations and by closing loopholes in our tax system, Labor will be able to restore $17 billion in schools funding, restore $2.8 billion in hospitals funding, restore $2.2 billion to universities and restore $473 million to TAFE.

The TAFE spend includes $100 million to update ageing TAFE facilities, as well as scrapping up-front fees for up to 100,000 students who choose to learn the skills that Australia needs. This will make a difference in regional communities. This is how we can transform regional communities. This is how we can provide opportunities to people living outside the big cities. And we will pay down government debt faster. We will fight for pensioners. Labor will not increase the pension age to 70. We will not abolish the energy supplement, as the government plans to do for new pensioners, costing a new pensioner couple $550 a year that they just can't afford.

We have been brave enough to reduce capital gains tax discounts, stop tax refunds where no tax has been paid, and crack down on multinational corporate tax avoidance. And, by taking those measures—not by giving tax cuts to big business—we can fund schools properly, we can better support hospitals, we can rebuild TAFE and support universities, and still pay down debt faster than the current government is promising to do.

Under this budget, schools on the Central Coast will lose $33 million. These are schools that have used needs based funding to make such a difference in our local community, schools that have employed extra teachers' aides and speech therapists, schools that have been able to provide specialist Aboriginal programs, coding and robotics classes, specialist support for students, and leadership and mentoring for teachers to give them the support they need to support our children in their classrooms.

I want to now turn to something that is very close to home for me—and something that means a lot to so many people in my community. At the moment on the Central Coast 750 older Australians are waiting for home care packages, and a third of them are waiting for high-need level 4 packages right now. Those are people—like my late father—who lived with young onset dementia. This is urgent. These people can't wait. The people that are caring for them are under enormous strain. And what has the government decided to do? They're not going to be better off under this government's promise of 14,000 in-home aged care packages over four years. How will that go anywhere near to fixing the current waiting list of 105,000 Australians? It's just not good enough. There needs to be a sense of urgency and a sense of responsibility to change this, and change it now. Incredibly, the small amount that these home care packages were increased by—and I welcome any increase in home care packages—has been funded by cuts to residential aged care. As a pharmacist, I've been visiting residential facilities since my first year of work. There are definitely areas and pockets of success where people get the support they need without financial strain, but I see so many people under enormous financial strain, particularly when one person in the couple has to enter care sooner than they thought. We need to help people living with early onset dementia, like my dad and so many of the people I've met through his experience. These people need support now. There is no more funding in this budget for aged-care services. It simply beggars belief.

Cuts to the Public Service lead to cuts in services to the public. That is exactly what we are seeing with this government. A further 1,200 jobs will be axed from DHS, even though unanswered calls to Centrelink increased from 29 million to 55 million last year, and wait times blew out. This government doesn't seem to care about people in regional centres. This government speaks about infrastructure, but there has been no new infrastructure spend on the Central Coast. There has been no increase in spending on health, education, aged care or child care; in fact, funding for all these essential services has been cut. On the Central Coast the youth unemployment rate is currently 18.6 per cent. Almost one in five young people in my community are looking for work, yet there is nothing for young people in this budget except a further cut to TAFE and higher education. TAFE, where my father worked as an engineer, used to be a trusted pathway to an education and a secure job, has been completely decimated under this government, as have apprenticeship opportunities.

This government has delivered modest tax cuts for some Australians, but these in no way make up for the job insecurity, record low wages growth and loss of penalty rates that Central Coast workers face under this government. Labor will deliver bigger tax cuts to those who need them most. We know the cost of living is making life difficult for many Australians, particularly those living in regional and remote communities. Nowhere is that more true than on the Central Coast of New South Wales. My community of Dobell has more older people, more very young people, more people looking for work, more people on low or fixed incomes and more people struggling to make ends meet. I saw this in my work at Wyong Hospital in the mental health unit. Each and every day there for almost 10 years, I saw people whose circumstances were contributing to their being unwell. One in five people on the Central Coast are aged over 65, and one in five are aged under 15. Our median household income is $1,258. We have more than 21,000 small businesses, more than half of which are sole traders. We aren't a rich community, but we work hard and support one another.

Last week in Dobell I hosted Labor's shadow minister for finance, the member for Rankin, where he introduced a number of our small business community on the budget and Labor's alternative plans. I share you with you a telling comment from one person in that room. Ernest told Jim that, while tax cuts for low-income earners would be more than welcome in many households, the national debt was top of mind for many people. Ernest said:

People are worried. They are worried about the national debt and they would like to have it paid off as soon as possible. The community will make sacrifices if they have to, but we must pay off the national debt.

Ernest is not the only person to have said this to me. A retiree, John, said that while he was happy with the tax cut and would welcome the $10, he has preschool-aged grandchildren and would much rather that $10 tax cut provide better services in early education and to schools, and that there are much bigger priorities for many Australians, particularly those living in regional and remote Australia.

Labor has those priorities front of mind, and those priorities are not the winners in this year's budget. This budget is about high-income earners, big business and the big four banks. Labor's priorities, and those of most middle and working Australians, are the losers in this budget. Labor's priorities are with students, and with older Australians waiting for aged care. Labor will look out for the regions—regions like mine on the Central Coast of New South Wales; regions where the quality of the NBN connection matters, where affordable housing matters, where good schools matter, where access to health services matters, where vocational education matters, where jobs matter. This budget does nothing for the regions. Labor is committed to the regions.

We are committed to rebuilding TAFE to provide the skills base for employers to hire the workers that they need. We are committed to a pre-apprenticeship program and an advanced adult apprenticeship program to help workers, young or mature, to get the training or retraining they need. Labor is committed to securing pathways into work for those apprentices, with one in 10 jobs on Commonwealth priority projects to be filled by Australian apprentices.

Labor will not oppose these appropriation bills. Labor will support supply, but Labor will never put tax cuts for big earners—for big business and the big four banks—ahead of vulnerable Australians who need our support; young Australians looking for a start or a chance to get a job or an education; older Australians who are looking for work, secure housing and dignity; Australians who live in our regions; Australians who have been put last by this government.

This budget is about winners and losers. In this budget the winners are the big end of town, the big four banks and big business. In this budget the losers are the people in communities like mine. They are young people looking for work, older Australians who are waiting on the queue for home care packages, people who need support from Centrelink, people who are doing it tough, people who really need support now from a government that cares about people and wants to change things and improve things and make them better in our regions.

Andrew Gee (Calare, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to support these appropriation bills. This budget delivers for Australia, and it certainly delivers for the electorate of Calare as well. It will make life better for Australians and people in central western New South Wales. Making life better for the people we represent is the reason we are here. It's the reason we're in politics. It's the reason that this parliament exists.

For the people in my region, one of the highlights of this budget was certainly the delivery of a new medical school in the Central West to be delivered by Charles Sturt University. It's part of the Murray-Darling medical schools network, which is a five-medical-school network. At its heart is this new medical school, which will be a partnership between Charles Sturt University and the University of Western Sydney. Folks out in my neck of the woods have been campaigning for this new medical school for a decade. For 10 years we've been trying to get this over the line. For two years I've been making speech after speech in this chamber and in the House of Representatives, trying to raise the profile of this issue and stress its importance.

Why is it important? It's important because there is a chronic shortage of doctors in country Australia. It's raining doctors in Vaucluse and Wahroonga and Toorak, but there's a chronic shortage in country Australia. Country people know this. They are the ones that have to put up with not being able to see a GP or a specialist for weeks or months. They are living in the communities that can't get new doctors to their towns when the existing ones leave or retire. They're living this issue, and they've been living it for years. They've known about this issue for a long time, and they're crying out for a solution that can change this and make life better.

The cold, hard truth is that country people die younger than city people. That's the way it is. Their health outcomes are worse on just about every single measure. That's what's been driving this campaign for this new medical school. It's been the community which has come together over a sustained period of time to lobby, to fight, to plan. And finally this budget has delivered it. The new medical school will open its doors in 2021. The capital spend will be in the tens of millions of dollars. It will train doctors in the bush for practice in the bush. The curriculum will be designed to train country doctors. It will be a country curriculum. Of course, we believe that, by putting more country students through the training pipeline and filling postgraduate training places with country students, more of them will be likely to stay in the country, work in the country and raise their families in the country, if that's what they choose to do.

We know that it works because James Cook University in Far North Queensland has been a pioneer in this field. Charles Sturt University plans to quarantine 80 per cent of its places for students from rural and regional Australia. It's going to be a partnership with the University of Western Sydney, which already has a presence in Bathurst. I commend the University of Western Sydney for the constructive way that it has worked through this issue with Charles Sturt University.

The resistance has in some cases been very fierce. All sorts of medical organisations, student organisations and doctors groups have been dead against this proposal, but it has prevailed because it has been the will of the community. People power has driven this. I say to those folks who may not be that keen on the new Murray-Darling medical schools network: 'Let's put down our swords and beat them into ploughshares. Let's work together now because we have an opportunity in central western New South Wales to make our area a world leader in rural medicine.' This is an extraordinary opportunity that we have. This new medical school and new medical school network will change the practice of medicine in country New South Wales and country Australia. That's how important I believe this initiative is. That's how worthwhile I actually think it is.

We now have about seven years before the first students graduate. If there are any issues in terms of postgraduate training places or hospital placements, we have seven years to sort that out. Indeed, the work on the new Charles Sturt University medical school is now commencing, with the formation of a steering committee. I think we now need to come together in good faith and in goodwill and let our region achieve its full potential now in terms of medical training, medical research and the provision of medical services. We can do it. This is a profound and transformational change. It's a change the community has sought for a long time. We've done it—it's mission accomplished.

I take this opportunity to again thank all the individuals, community members, community groups, doctors, local councils and local council groups like Centroc. So many have contributed to the campaign and been so supportive that I can't name them all in this chamber today. They have all been very active. Schoolteachers and school principals have been writing in their school newsletters about the need for this medical school. That's how community driven this campaign has been. I'm not sure that the folks who make medical policy in this country really appreciate how deep this campaign ran through our communities. They probably did towards the end.

It's been a long and hard road and it's been a long and hard fight, but I think it's been worth it. Sometimes in politics you get the opportunity to be involved in something that will make true and lasting change for people in our communities, and this is one of those moments. I hear people talking down the budget and saying that there's nothing in it for country Australia. There's a lot in it for country Australia. This is a profound change and a profound and transformational initiative, of which country people can be very proud.

The effects of this will start in 2021 when the school opens its doors, but the effects of this will be felt for generations. This will reverberate through the generations. The graduates from this medical school will train to become specialists. I believe that they will, hopefully, become the people involved in making medical policy in this country. They may even become MPs. But we are starting something now which will have a profound effect through the generations, and I think that's something that we can all be very proud of.

In terms of other initiatives in the budget, one of them is the Roads of Strategic Importance initiative, a $3.5 billion fund designed to get key road projects going, including those that link regions. I welcome this initiative, because I've been fighting for such a fund for a long time. When I first became federal member for Calare, one of the first things I did was to invite then roads minister, Darren Chester, to our neck of the woods. We drove across the Bells Line of Road and over the crossing at Dixons Long Point, between Orange and Mudgee. I said, 'We need some money for these, Minister.' He said, 'We haven't got a bucket of money we can do this with.' I said to him, 'Wouldn't it be great if we could create a bucket of money?'

And so former Minister Darren Chester, and those who followed him, worked hard to create it, and it has been delivered in this budget. For example, the crossing at Dixons Long Point, between Orange and Mudgee, is currently dirt for most of the way. There is no crossing: you've got to drive through the river to get across it. I did it a couple of weeks ago on my way to help launch the new mobile phone tower at Hargraves. The river was down, so it was pretty easy to get across. But there has been many a four-wheel-driver who has come adrift—they've come off the side of the crossing and floated downstream. We can see the photos on the internet.

People have been trying to get this crossing built for a hundred years—100 years! Sir Charles Cutler, former Deputy Premier of New South Wales, former member for Orange and war hero, was an early proponent of this road and crossing. Russell Turner, who was my predecessor in the state seat of Orange, was another fierce advocate for this. But we haven't been able to do it. What I'm hoping to do now is to bring all levels of government together. We've just got the consultants' reports back. I'll be meeting with Cabonne Council next week, and in June I hope to bring local governments and the state government, and we'll be there as well, together at the table to discuss how we can progress these key projects. I'd also like to see continued upgrades of the Bells Line of Road. I'd love to see a new fast road across the Blue Mountains. But until that is secured, I think that what we need to do is keep upgrading. So I believe that the Roads of Strategic Importance initiative was also a very significant item that this budget delivered, and I was very pleased to see it.

The $20,000 instant asset write-off was another big win for country Australia, including small businesses in my area. It's expensive to run a small business, as we know, and anything that we can do to make life a little easier, and also to kick along economic growth, we should be doing. The extension of the instant asset write-off is a great way to do it. It allows our small businesses and our farmers, who are small-business people as well, to write off instantly the cost of assets up to $20,000 in the financial year in which that cost is incurred, rather than having to write it off over a series of years.

It has been welcomed very warmly. For example, by small businesses like Angus Barrett Saddlery in Orange. It is run by a young couple, Angus and Sarah, who built that business from scratch. They are going to be able to take advantage of the write-off. They buy a lot of equipment and machinery for their workshop. It's the small businesspeople like that who are really going to find this extension useful. And I should point out that Angus is often referred to as the next RM Williams. In fact, I'm wearing an Angus Barrett belt as I deliver this speech in this chamber today.

So it's the small businesses like Angus Barrett Saddlery in Orange that are going to find the instant asset write-off very useful. When the member for Gilmore visits my area, we will go out to the factory and meet Angus and Sarah, and they will warmly welcome her.

There has also been good news on the youth allowance, and this is a very important one for country students. The means test threshold has been increased by $10,000 to $160,000—it is a big one for country students—and that is increased by $10,000 for each additional child. We've also made it easier for students to work out whether they need to take a gap year to work out whether or not they qualify as being independent. I think that is really important, as well. The assessment of parental income will now be undertaken in the year prior to any gap year, so they will know whether their parental income is above or below the cut-off figure before they decide whether to take a gap year. I think that is a big improvement. And, of course, we've reduced the time that students need to have a gap year—that time frame has been reduced. That is another important initiative in this budget for country students, and I applaud the relevant ministers.

Not only does this budget deliver for Australia but it certainly delivers for country people and those folks in the Calare electorate. It is a responsible budget. It helps to reduce our debt and bring the national debt under control. As I have said, it has some profound initiatives that will benefit country Australia for generations to come and I commend it to the House.

Ross Hart (Bass, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the appropriation bills. Two weeks ago this government delivered its federal budget, its economic plan. This is a government that fought against establishing a royal commission into the banking system, a government that refused to take action with respect to cuts to penalty rates for low-paid workers, and the Liberal coalition government persists in pushing $80 billion worth of unfunded corporate tax cuts while pensioners receive a cut to their energy allowance. This government trumpets its plan—it is proud of it. It doesn't recognise the unfairness now proposed to be baked into tax cuts that disproportionately favour those on higher incomes. This is a government for the wealthy, while maintaining the fiction that a strong economy is the only thing that will pay for the essential services that ordinary people rely upon and quite reasonably expect a competent government to provide.

What they actually mean—the underlying code—is that a strong economy is necessary, otherwise essential services will be cut. They want you to believe that if you are a single parent in part-time to work, struggling to bring up children, your access to essential services like Medicare, to public hospitals and to public education being properly funded depends upon the strength of the economy, an economy that might be subject to external shocks, just like those we saw here in Australia during the global financial crisis. Australians know that institutions like Medicare and access to public education and public hospitals should be paid for by competent governments making choices as to how best to expend public money. This government consistently fails lower-income and middle Australia in making those choices. But, most of all, this government fails the people of my home state, Tasmania.

This budget of missed opportunities doesn't do anything to address the potential to relocate public service jobs into regional areas like north and north-western Tasmania. This budget, a budget by press release with no detail as to specific projects, announces projects that will receive funding, such as $400 million for Roads of Strategic Importance, without identifying any project whatsoever.

Tasmanians know better than anyone that this government cannot be trusted on its promises, given that it cut $100 million from funding for the Midland Highway in the first Hockey budget. There is absolutely no attention to strategic investment in Tasmania, whether it is in health, such as support of the Launceston General Hospital, or in regional infrastructure, like funding for the West Tamar Highway traffic relief, or in freight roads to the north-east by upgrading the sidling within my electorate. Even when there is a road map detailing possible future investment, such as the redevelopment of the northern suburbs of Launceston, as foreshadowed in the government's own Launceston city deal, this government comes up short.

There are areas of disadvantage in Tasmania that require a sustained, long-term investment, such as education, particularly public education, rather than $17 billion less being devoted to education over 10 years, which was exposed in last year's budget. There is nothing in this budget to address housing affordability and the present housing crisis in Tasmania. It is shocking to hear that rental affordability in Hobart is worse than Sydney. It is an indictment of state and federal government commitments to the relief of poverty generally and housing more specifically to hear that there are no homeless services available, particularly crisis services, for people who present to our hardworking but overloaded community services, like the Launceston City Mission at the weekend.

It is an often repeated phrase that budgets are about choices. You can tell what the priorities of this government are when you realise that this Prime Minister would prefer to allow $17 billion in tax relief for the large banks rather than reinstating $17 billion to the education budget over the next 10 years. You can tell the priority of this government when you realise they claim that the ability to schedule or fund new medicines is conditional upon the prudential management of the budget and the economy. That is why they are prepared to pay $80 billion worth of corporate tax cuts to the largest corporations in Australia.

Even when this government recognises that it has a problem with fairness by insisting that large corporates receive a tax cut before low-paid workers receive a wage rise, its plan for tax cuts stills favours the higher paid. We know, for example, that it wants to hold lower paid workers hostage in order to guarantee tax cuts for higher paid people. The government is prepared to deny tax cuts to lower paid workers, unless tax cuts are delivered under a future government for higher paid individuals. In other words, tax cuts that are way down the track for higher paid individuals are more important than delivering real taxation relief to lower paid workers. In contrast to this, Tasmanians will be better off and will always be better off under a Labor Shorten government.

Tasmania is a place of great beauty, and it has now experienced a great tourism resurgence. It has become the place to go to experience the finest food and drink in the country. In my electorate alone, there is some of the finest seafood, beef, wine and beer, I would challenge, on offer anywhere on the globe. Being a great tourism destination doesn't, however, guarantee quality of life for the residents of Tasmania. Tasmania has its problems. We have the lowest average incomes in the country, the lowest number of university graduates, the highest youth unemployment and the fastest ageing population. This is why a plan to address these shortcomings has the opportunity to transform Tasmania. We have the opportunity to offer fantastic tourism experiences and also unparalleled opportunities in business, employment and lifestyle, not just for an ageing population but also for those who choose to make their career in Tasmania.

Strategic investment in infrastructure and investment in education to improve educational outcomes and address long-term disadvantage will improve the lot of all within our state. Investment in services, particularly health and public education, will ensure that all can receive access in an equitable manner to good-quality public health and public education. The experience internationally demonstrates that long-term investment in health and education do more to address long-term disadvantage than any other measures. These are just some of the reasons why Tasmania will be better off under a Shorten Labor government.

Under Labor, the majority of Tasmanians will pay less income tax because Labor believes that they are more important than multinationals, big banks and big business. Under Labor, Tasmanian workers with incomes between $48,000 and $90,000 will be $928 better off, which is $398 better than the tax cuts offered by the Turnbull government. Cuts to personal income tax mean more disposable income, which is good for local Tasmanian businesses. Tasmanians' average annual income is $53,357, but the median annual income is just $29,796. The government's second round of tax cuts to high-income earners won't help Tasmanian businesses. Economic modelling has found that Tasmania will miss out simply by virtue of the fact that our lower average income means that less benefit is delivered from consumption within the economy. The majority of Tasmanians will be better off under Labor, as will Tasmanian small businesses, by virtue of the fact that Tasmanian consumers will have more money in their pockets to spend.

Australians believe in a fair go for all. Our tax and transfer system is one of the most progressive in the world. This means the tax we pay as well as the benefits we receive are highly targeted to those who need it. Under this government, our egalitarian society that we're all so proud of is at risk. A flat rate of tax will not address rising inequality; it is a move in the wrong direction. The effect of this is obvious. Labor doesn't believe that a cleaner on $40,000 a year should pay the same tax rate as a CEO on $200,000 a year. It's just not fair. This budget is like every other Liberal budget: it consistently fails the fairness test.

Labor is opposing the Turnbull government's $80 billion tax cut for big business and big banks. This tax cut will be of no benefit to more than 13,000 businesses in Tasmania. According to the ABS, there are just over 2,800 businesses in Bass; only nine of those businesses will benefit from the government's $80 billion tax cut. Labor believes there are better ways to use the $80 billion tax cuts slated for big business. That tax would be better used with wise choices made to support the services that we need and those who are in need.

In my hometown of Launceston we have one of the best regional hospitals in the country. I know because I was on the board of Tasmanian Health Organisation North. Workers at the LGH are to be commended for the outstanding work they do despite cuts to funding. Under the Liberals, the cuts to our hospitals are putting those workers under pressure and the lives of northern Tasmanians at risk. The personal stories I hear almost daily speak of the stresses placed upon our emergency department. The story late last year of a patient left waiting outside the LGH for treatment informs me the cuts to health that this government has overseen need to be seriously addressed now. Instead, this government's budget prioritises tax cuts to big business instead of the health of the Australian people. As Labor is not giving big business an $80 billion tax cut, Labor can afford to reverse the Turnbull government's cuts to hospitals and create a $2.8 billion better hospital fund—a practical step to address those daily pressures. Labor has already committed to a $30 million investment to slash Tasmania's elective surgery backlog.

Labor will also invest in your education—in schools, TAFE and university—because when people get the opportunities, Australia gets the benefits. As part of my election campaign I argued for funding for two important projects in Bass: $150 million for the University of Tasmania northern campus relocation and $75 million for the Tamar River improvement plan. I believe that with appropriate planning these two projects would have given long-term economic growth to northern Tasmania. Of concern to me are the reports that there are many trades facing skills shortages, from carpenters to bricklayers to bakers to pastry cooks, but, despite high unemployment in some areas, workers can't learn the skills that industries are crying out for. Over the last five years, the government has cut $3 billion from TAFE and training, including $270 million in this budget. Northern Tasmania has 1,300 fewer apprentices today than it did when the government was first elected. Labor recognises that the number of apprentices needs to increase dramatically if Tasmania is to reach and deliver its full economic potential.

This is why, under a Shorten Labor government, we will scrap up-front fees for 100,000 TAFE students who choose to learn the skills that Australia needs to become a modern, advanced manufacturing economy. Labor will invest $470 million in a plan to boost TAFE apprenticeships and skills for Australians. Labor will invest $100 million in modernising TAFE facilities around the country. On projects like the University of Tasmania relocation, one in 10 jobs will be filled by Australian apprenticeships. Labor will also provide 10,000 apprentice programs for young people who want to learn a trade. With a changing economy and an uncertain future of work, we understand that workers need to retrain, which is why Labor will provide 20,000 adult apprentice programs for older workers. Under Labor, Tasmanians will be better trained.

Tasmania has the highest proportion of pensioners and is ageing faster than anywhere else in the country. Pensioners are some of the biggest losers in this government's budget. The government persists with the former Prime Minister's energy supplement cut of $14 a fortnight for single aged pensioners, whilst giving tax cuts to large companies. They're also telling Australians they have to work until they are 70 with no thought for what that means for people doing jobs that are hard on the bodies. We know 105,000 older Australians are waiting for home care packages. The government is only offering 14,000 and no more, with no extra funding to pay for those places because their priority is an $80 billion tax cut for big business. I'm proud to stand here in parliament representing the hardworking people of northern Tasmania. The people who I represent will be better off under a Labor government, which will be a government prepared to invest in people, invest in infrastructure and invest in jobs.

Michelle Landry (Capricornia, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise in absolute support for these appropriation bills and implore those on the other side of the House to join me in doing so. This is a bill that seeks to right many of the wrongs within in our system and deliver a new age of economic growth for us all to benefit from. Politics was not my first choice of career. It probably was not even my second. What politics was to me, and to many others who serve in this place, was a calling to help better provide for my community. I grew up in Rockhampton in a loving family that relied on their small business to survive. That's the beginning of a story for so many people across Central Queensland today, just as it was when I was a child. Small businesses keep the wheels turning. That's why there are a range of policies in this budget that I'm so happy with, particularly when it comes to taxation.

As I get around my diverse and large electorate, the single most popular policy is the $20,000 instant asset write-off for small businesses. This policy has been a godsend for businesses right across this region, not only for the businesses that decide to buy something that they would not have without the policy but for the businesses that they buy it from. This instant asset write-off has allowed farmers to buy motorbikes, cafes to buy espresso machines, accountants to buy new computers, chippies to buy new vehicles and so on and so forth, right across the local economy. As I said, this is a benefit not just for these businesses that take advantage of the write-off but also for the businesses that sell these businesses the equipment, allowing them to then go on and purchase their own. The sales team of the expresso machine, the computer store and the car salesman all get that extra sale, helping their bottom line as well. The only downside of this instant asset write-off is that its future is not certain. Each year it is extended, but we don't know for how long this will done. To make it permanent would be nice, but perhaps it would lead to businesses not being quite so keen to take advantage of it. Only time will tell.

This budget is not just about a single policy, though. It's about a plan. This is a plan that delivers on the promise we made to the electorate to turn the debt ship around and to deliver jobs to more Australians. It is a plan that has seen over one million jobs created since 2013. Just let that sink in for a moment: there are one million more jobs in the economy. Here in Australia, since the coalition took control of the Treasury benches, that includes over 400,000 jobs created in 2017—a monumental achievement and one only possible through real, sound economic management.

In my electorate of Capricornia, we are seeing the benefits of implementing a corporate tax plan that makes Australia more competitive on the global stage and of a real, no-nonsense approach to developing real job-creating infrastructure. In the Mackay SA4 area, which accounts for the vast majority of the Capricornia electorate, 6,500 jobs have been created in the last 12 months, driving the unemployment rate down from 5.7 per cent to an incredible 3.9 per cent. This does not happen overnight and it doesn't happen just because government decides to make it happen; it happens because over the past five years we have given businesses the confidence to hire, given them the confidence to strive to do more and given them the confidence they need to help turn our local economies around. Businesses like Coxon's Radiator Service in Rockhampton, who, over a short period, have diversified and grown their business, taken advantage of opportunities within the resources sector, and employed local workers to help them do so. It's a family business, and while what they do is very, very big, what they take out of the business is quite small. By Julie's admission, she and her husband Gary took home more when Coxon's was a smaller operation with fewer staff and less awe-inspiring jobs.

What businesses like Coxon's show is what our small and family businesses do when they get a chance. They grow their business and hire more staff, and, in many cases, they take home less money themselves. That's why our corporate tax plan is so important and has been so successful, because if government can take less out of our local economies, our local economies will be stronger and more resilient.

While the corporate tax plan has had and will continue to have a huge impact on the economy, it's important to address personal income tax as well. While a business will take tax relief and turn it into jobs, so too will people who are given the same. Shifting personal tax brackets to avoid the dreaded bracket creep is a good, sensible measure to help CQ families whose weekly budgets depend on it. Removing the 37 per cent bracket altogether is a bold and hugely beneficial move for the vast majority of Australians. This move will mean 94 per cent of Australians will never face bracket creep at all. This means more money in more people's pockets to be spent in more ways around the economy. Add to this an ongoing commitment to fully funding the NDIA and our hospitals and schools, and it is clear: this is a government committed to serving its purpose and improving the lives of each and every Australian.

One of the most important methods we are implementing to improve people's live, especially in Central Queensland, is to develop real job-creating infrastructure. Projects like Rookwood Weir and Urannah Dam are what this government is delivering. $352 million sits on the ledger waiting for the Labor state government to lift their finger and get the ball rolling on what is the No. 1 infrastructure project for Queensland. This green Labor government is committed to holding back the Central Queensland region, and the saddest part is why they wish to do so. This is a government that has delivered unconscionable tree-clearing laws that promise to effectively lock up 1.7 million hectares of productive country and put an end to agricultural development across the state. I'm sure this won't stop the concrete jungle of the south east continuing to grow, but it certainly will have a devastating affect on agriculture. This is the sort of green mentality we face in Queensland, the same mentality that drove the Premier to pull her support from the opening of the Galilee Basin, even vetoing a NAIF loan her own government applied for. This is a world away from the support Central Queenslanders find in the LNP. The LNP wants to build dams. The LNP wants to give farmers the tools they need to put food on their tables, and the LNP wants the Galilee Basin to be developed and to produce thousands of jobs for Central Queenslanders.

Labor knows it's pushing policies that will see thousands of Central Queenslanders worse off, but Labor doesn't care; all they care about is the prospect of clawing back the electorate they once took for granted, my seat and my home of Capricornia. Labor will do all they can to slow the progress already being felt in places like Clermont, Clarke Creek and Carmila. They will do whatever it takes to stop the state's most important water infrastructure project just so they can say that I have not delivered. Well, the people of Central Queensland are smarter than that. They have seen the way Labor have sold them out at virtually every opportunity, and they are sick and tired of it. They have seen the enormous investment and interest this federal government has shown in Central Queensland compared with previous Labor governments, who took the region for granted.

For the record, I will give a quick snippet of just a fraction of the funding I have attracted to CQ since 2013: $178 million for Rookwood Weir; $7 million for the Rockhampton Hospital car park; $5 million for Signature Beef to develop an on-farm abattoir near Moranbah; $1 billion invested into our military training facilities at Shoalwater Bay; $1.5 million invested into stage 2 of the Fraser Park development, giving Mount Archer the infrastructure it deserves so it can help sell Central Queensland to the world; $120 million in this budget for the Walkerston bypass so we can get heavy vehicles out of the tight town centre and make it safer for everyone; $5.8 million for Tropical Pines to develop a new fruit-processing facility at Yeppoon; $234,500 for the Middlemount Bowls Club to install new carpet; $100,000 for Spinal Life Australia to upgrade facilities in Rockhampton, delivering services to sufferers of spinal injury; $166 million to duplicate the Eton Range crossing on the Peak Downs Highway; $300,000 for Koorana Crocodile Farm to build new rearing facilities, taking one of the icons of Central Queensland, the crocodile, and turning it into a valued economic resource; $349,000 for upgrades at Sarina's St Anne's Catholic school; $60 million to duplicate the Capricorn Highway between Gracemere and Rockhampton, easing congestion and improving safety; $653,000 for Western Suburbs Leagues Club at Walkerston to finally realise their dream and develop a state-of-the-art undercover, all-weather bowling green; and billions of dollars poured into the Bruce Highway, with $10 billion more announced. The Mobile Black Spot Program, which didn't exist before the coalition took over, has delivered better coverage to stacks of CQ residents, especially in rural spots like Clarke Creek, Gargett, Mount Chalmers and Marlborough. This work continues to roll out and help support our growing coastal strip, as well as Yeppoon and Emu Park, which are set to benefit from new towers as well.

This budget is full of positive policies and an investment in the people of Central Queensland. From what I hear around the traps, people appreciate the mature, responsible approach we are taking, getting government out of their lives and giving them the opportunity to grow and get more out of life. I wholeheartedly support this bill and look forward to the ALP growing up and supporting it on the whole as well, for the sake of Central Queensland and Australia.

Tony Zappia (Makin, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Medicare) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Turnbull government's 2018-19 budget is a budget full of trickery which seeks to create a perception that the nation's finances are under control, that the Turnbull government is a government with a social conscience and that this budget will assist older Australians and working families. It also purports to be a nation-building budget, with big infrastructure projects. Nothing could be further from the truth. A close analysis of the budget will not only expose those perceptions as being false but also expose the budget as being a cruel hoax. Most of the tax breaks do not take effect until several years away, with the last phase of those tax breaks being in 2024, possibly three elections away. Infrastructure spending is equally a long way down the track, and mostly dependent on unsecured substantial commitments from state governments. The much-touted aged-care announcements, one of the cruellest hoaxes in this budget, are nothing more than a sneaky trick by this government. There is no new money for the aged-care system; what is happening is that one area of funding is being cut in order to prop up another.

Can I go to the detail of that, because that is one of the claims that this government has tried to hang its credentials on with respect to this budget. It claims it will fund an additional 14,000 home care packages over the next four years. That is 3,500 each year. There are currently almost 105,000 people on waiting lists for home care packages. In the last six months of last year alone, there was an increase in demand of 20,000 people added to the waiting list. On those trends an additional 14,000 new packages would not even meet the needs of the next six months, in terms of the new numbers that will come on stream. Waiting times for packages will get longer, not shorter. The House health and ageing committee currently has an inquiry underway into this very issue, and we have heard many submissions on it. This is an area of real need as of now. It's not an area that the government should be playing these kinds of tricks with.

We know from the inquiries thus far, and from numerous other reports that have been made available and other inquiries, that the aged care sector is riddled with claims of insufficient staffing numbers, poor access to allied health services, inadequate care and poor food quality. Yet there is no additional money for any kind of improved levels of care from the government. Rearranging the oversight of the aged care sector through a newly formed department will not of itself overcome the problems associated with the inadequate daily funding or inadequate access to allied health professionals and other needs of the sector. The critical industry problems will not be resolved by the establishment of an audit and safety commission. The government thinks that simply by rebadging the oversight body all the problems are going to be magically resolved. They won't be. It is simply kicking the can down the road.

I now turn to the overly exaggerated claims of this budget being an infrastructure budget. The nation is being conned, and in particular South Australia, my home state, is once again being dudded. I will quote directly from a post-budget press release issued jointly in South Australia by the RAA, the South Australian Civil Contractors Federation, the South Australian Chamber of Mines and Energy and the South Australian Freight Council. None of those organisations could be described as left wing, Labor Party stooges. Their press release states:

The Commonwealth’s re-asserted pledge to complete the North South Corridor by 2023 is now a seemingly impossible task with none of the $1.2 billion needed for the North South Corridor works making it into the forward estimates.

It goes on:

Only $52 million of the promised $177 million for the Regency to Pym project is included … Duplication of the Joy Baluch Bridge has also taken a back seat with only $60 million of the $160 million promised for its duplication … Rail electrification from Salisbury to Gawler has also been short changed, with only $50 million of the $220 million required accounted for … The new $3.5 billion ‘Roads of Strategic Importance’ program allocates $530 million over the forward estimates, and South Australia receives just $3.7 million, less than 1% of the funds allocated … Of the new $250 million ‘Major Project Business Case Fund’ only $75 million appears in the estimates, with SA allocated $4.1 million, or just 5.7%.

In closing, Evan Knapp, the Executive Officer of the SA Freight Council, said:

This year’s Federal budget is all smoke and mirrors and delivers none of the promise of the pre-budget announcements.

That press release sums up the real situation for South Australia in respect of infrastructure funding. Those bodies and organisations that put that press release together have scrutinised the budget because it is in their members' interest to do so. And in their assessment is the truth of just how poorly South Australia has been treated. What makes it even worse is that this is the second year in a row that South Australia has been so shamefully treated with respect to infrastructure funding for our state.

I turn to the government's much-touted tax cuts. Even the most modest tax cuts proposed will not make their way into households until July 2019. That is probably after the next election. So there is no immediate assistance to people who are struggling with stagnant wages and rising living costs. Even worse, when all of the tax cuts do take effect, 60 per cent of the money will go to the top 20 per cent of households—such are the priorities of this government.

At a time when many households are indeed struggling to make ends meet, when wage growth has stagnated and when the cost of living is increasing almost on a daily basis, there are two ways that householders can be helped. Either their taxes can be cut or their wages can be increased. Both put additional spending dollars in the pockets of households. And yet this government, at best, believes that by providing householders with a measly $10 a week, it will fix all of these problems. Well, it won't, and, quite frankly, when it puts $10 into the pockets of average householders, but down the track wants to give over $7,000 to those on very high incomes, it clearly shows that this government is totally out of touch with reality.

One of the cruellest parts of this budget is not so much what is in it but rather what is not in it. There is no additional support in this budget for welfare recipients and pensioners, other than to say to pensioners: 'If you want more money, you can go and work for it, because we're going to increase the amount that you can earn each week before it affects your pension. And you can also, if you want to, use your house as collateral to get money under the Pension Loans Scheme.' Can I say to the government that most pensioners—not all, but most pensioners—are not able to work? They are simply not able to because of their age. So increasing the amount that they can earn is of no use to them whatsoever. And for those many pensioners who are already in rental accommodation, the Pension Loan Scheme will also be of little assistance. And it is those pensioners, those who cannot work or who live in rental accommodation, who are most likely to be in the most difficult financial situation of all. So the government's pretentious support for pensioners will not help those in the greatest need.

And then we look at people on Newstart. There has been a debate in recent weeks about whether it's possible for a person to survive on Newstart. For many people, surviving on Newstart is indeed very, very difficult. We know that unemployment in this country is 5.6 per cent at the moment. In my home state it is 5.9 per cent. Many of the people on Newstart are on Newstart because they can't get a job, and they can't get a job because, in many cases, they have no skills or they have limited skills. They already find it incredibly difficult to get work. For them, the option of even relocating is sometimes not possible. Perhaps they might have a disability of some sort or they might have other medical problems. For example, for a single mum, perhaps with a couple of children, transferring schools and finding a suitable home in a new region in order to get a job, is just going to make that person's life even more difficult than it already is, and possibly add costs to that person that they simply cannot afford.

Likewise with respect to young people, who often have strong ties and responsibilities in their place of residence. Indeed, I know some young people who actually act as carers for their parents, so moving out of home and moving to another region is not possible for them. And yet for them, Newstart has remained stable for years and, indeed, there are attempts to cut the benefits that they might already have access to.

The other matter that has totally been neglected with respect to this budget is any real commitment to climate change. I accept that not everyone supports the view that the climate is changing and, if it is, what the causes are. But the reality is that the climate is changing and whatever the causes are we need to be taking steps and have a strategy in place to help with adaption to climate change. But, again, this government has totally neglected that.

Lastly, I turn to the government's claim that conservative governments are better economic managers. We know that net debt in this budget is going to reach $350 billion in the year 2018-19 and gross debt will hit close to $600 billion in a couple of years' time. If this government believes they are better economic managers, why are they allowing those debt figures to grow at the rate that they are?

The most damning criticism of this budget is that the Turnbull government is a government that clearly is not only out of touch with Australian sentiments but has its principles and priorities absolutely wrong. For a government to be saying that the highest income earners in this country, and the corporates, can get huge tax cuts—$80 billion for the corporates and tax cuts of over $7,000 for higher-income earners—at a time when $17 billion is being cut from schools, hospital funding is being cut, the ABC is being cut, the $14 energy supplement assistance for pensioners is still on the books to be cut, $77 in possible cuts to people who are currently earning penalty rates, the Medicare freeze continuing with respect to specialists, and increased child care costs of about $40 a week to most householders. With all of those cuts being made, this government, the Turnbull government, says it can find money to hand out big-business tax cuts, $17 billion of which I might add is likely to go to the four big banks, but it can't find the money to help people struggling out there in the community.

Budgets are about priorities but they are also about ideology. The problem with this government is that it is too much controlled by the big end of town in this country. It has been for too long. This budget totally reflects that and it totally reflects a government that has completely lost touch with Australian households and Australian working people.

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

'Age is not an issue. It is just a number': Roger Federer, probably one of the most exciting tennis players of our generation. Before I start, if you hear this address and identify with the stories I'm about to tell or the issues I'm about to address, I would like to hear from you. My name is Russell Broadbent and I'm the federal member for McMillan, in Victoria. I'm a government member, but don't let politics get in the way of contacting me.

Ageism is alive and well in our society. It makes people lose a sense of belonging, a sense of value and a sense self-respect. It deprives society of skills, knowledge and experience that take decades to learn. It goes to the heart of how prepared we are to value and accept people, based on their good character and capacity to contribute, not based on their gender, race, religion or age. Take Robert. Robert is a 55-year-old CEO with decades of experience in the manufacturing sector. He has built businesses, led teams and implemented change in many businesses making iconic Australian products. When in his mid-40s, Robert went to see a recruiter, who said to him, 'You've got some fantastic experience, but once you get a five in front of your age employers won't want you.' Robert went for a CEO role in his 50s, the same CEO role he did exceptionally well at many times over. The job was a perfect fit. He was enthusiastic about wanting to work there. The job went to a man 10 years younger with 10 years less experience.

Take Joan. Joan is in her 60s and lives in my electorate. She has enjoyed a successful career as a planner in local government. Joan is known for her skills, experience, good character and good judgement. Upon entering her 60s, she has struggled to find full-time employment in her chosen area of local government. Joan often gets looked over for someone substantially younger. Sometimes Joan is offered a short-term contract. Often Joan is asked to come in and fix other people's mistakes. The upshot for Joan is that she now has full-time employment, albeit a long way from where she lives.

Robert is enjoying working as a consultant. Robert and Joan are good people. They are very good at their jobs. They are resilient, reliable and respected, and they both feel redundant because the first thing employees see is not all of their exemplary qualities but their age. As an economy, we need Robert and Joan to continue working. As a society, we need Robert and Joan to feel valued for their character and contribution—not counted out for their date of birth.

The Australian Human Rights Commission's national prevalence survey results provide clear evidence of discrimination in Australian workplaces. The findings clearly indicate that age discrimination discourages older workers from remaining in and re-entering the workforce. Over a quarter or 27 per cent of Australians aged 50 years and over indicate that they have experienced some form of age discrimination on at least one occasion in the workplace in the last two years. The highest incidence of age discrimination was observed in the population aged between 55 and 64. The results also suggest that discrimination is part of the culture of some workplaces and some work practices. It is common for Australians aged 50 years or older to witness someone else experience age discrimination in the workplace. Further, a substantial number of respondents who were employees and managers reported that they would regularly take an employee's age into consideration when making decisions about hiring, promoting and training staff. The most commonly experienced forms of age discrimination were related to limiting employment promotion or training opportunities and to perceptions that older people have outdated skills or were too slow to learn new things. Jokes and derogatory comments based on age were also among the most common discriminatory behaviours reported.

Age discrimination has significant negative impacts on most people who experience it. The most commonly reported factors are a negative impact on self-esteem, mental health and stress. A negative impact on family, career and finances was the second most common effect of discrimination. A significant proportion of people believe that taking action about discrimination would be too stressful or embarrassing, or it is easier to keep quiet. For the majority of those who had experienced age discrimination and took action with regard to the most recent event, their response in most cases was to think about leaving their job, changing career or discussing it with family, friends and colleagues. Relatively few raised the issue within their organisation or approached an external organisation for assistance.

Women are more likely to be perceived as having outdated skills, being slow to learn new things or being more likely to perform unsatisfactorily in their job. Women are also more likely than men to report that their most recent event of discrimination affected their self-esteem or mental health or caused them stress. These results are of concern, given the increasing emphasis on encouraging women to return to the workplace or to continue their participation in the workforce beyond the traditional retirement age.

Ruth Williams, a research fellow at the Centre for Workplace Leadership, University of Melbourne, reports that ABS data consistently shows that, despite their wealth of knowledge and experience, older workers are overrepresented in underemployment statistics. They experienced countless problems such as being denied additional work hours or experiencing unwanted cuts. Consequently, they are unwillingly locked into part-time or casual work. Mature age workers often face limited training and promotional opportunities and, as a result, they are left with outdated skills and minimal career progression. They are often denied flexible working conditions, with less of a chance to assume responsibility within the workplace. With such obstacles, older workers are sometimes unable to have productive impacts in their workplace. This is just the tip of the iceberg of age discrimination in the workplace.

Work-related age discrimination and mature-age unemployment and underemployment can have complex and far-reaching outcomes. Many often overlook the wealth of knowledge, experience and skills that equip mature-age workers to apply leadership in workplace settings and projects. Most older workers have crucial business relationships and industry contacts. These cannot be recorded in a manual for others to read and easily implement. Industries requiring specific skills and knowledge, such as the mining sector, are deeply concerned about losing this specialised knowledge as older workers retire.

HR and line managers need to apply an understanding and positive approach to how the ageing workforce can improve business. There are considerable economic costs associated with low labour force participation of older Australians. According to Deloitte Access Economics, an extra three percentage points of labour force participation among workers aged 55 and over would result in a $33 billion boost to GDP, or about 1.6 per cent of national income, and a five per cent lift in paid employment among this group would result in $48 billion in extra GDP, or 2.4 per cent of national income. These gains are on top of the expected $55 billion, or 2.7 per cent, boost from participation amongst the over-55s already factored into the latest Intergenerational report.

At the individual workplace level, lower participation rates and experiences of employment discrimination impact in a variety of ways, including loss of knowledge and highly experienced and skilled staff, high costs of recruitment and training, loss of productivity in the workplace, levels of job satisfaction, and limiting diversity and its associated benefits in the workplace. The Australian Human Rights Commission's research found that many people who experience age discrimination in the workplace subsequently give up looking for work or think about retiring or accessing their superannuation. Other impacts include involuntary early retirement, unemployment and long-term unemployment, social exclusion, outdating of skills, barriers to accessing benefits and the age pension, and housing stress.

Certain groups within the community may experience discrimination on the basis of their age differently from others—for example, people with disability, women, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds, and LGBTI people. The 2015 Intergenerational report projects that the proportion of the population aged 65 and over will more than double by 2054-55. As a result of the growing population of older people and increasing life expectancy, there will be greater pressure for older Australians to remain in the workforce for longer. Labour force participation rates for older Australians are currently low. As a proportion of the whole population, one out of three Australians over 55 participate in the labour force, approximately 1.9 million people. This accounts for 16 per cent of the total labour force. Statistics also indicate that labour force participation declines with age.

In the year to June 2010, 71 per cent of Australians aged 55 to 59 years were participating in the labour force, 51 per cent of 60- to 64-year-olds were in the labour force, and 24 per cent of those aged 65 to 69 years were in the labour force. Referring again to the national prevalence survey of age discrimination in the workplace, the commission found that over one-quarter—27 per cent—of Australians aged 50 years and over indicated they had experienced some form of age discrimination on at least one occasion in the workplace in the last two years. The highest incidence of discrimination was observed in the population aged between 55 and 64 years. Furthermore, managers aged 50 years or older reported that they took an employee's age into consideration on a regular basis when making decisions. Overall, one-third—33 per cent—of Australians aged 50 years and over who were in a role responsible for decision-making about staff took an employee's age into consideration always, frequently or occasionally when making those decisions.

People in vulnerable circumstances are more likely to experience a negative impact of discrimination. Workers in the lower income bracket were more likely to experience a negative impact as a result of the most recent episode of discrimination—90 per cent versus 77 per cent respectively. In addition, one in two—50 per cent—of people in the lower income bracket gave up looking for work as a result of experiencing discrimination, as opposed to one-quarter of those in the higher income bracket. Of people in a single household with no children, 91 per cent were more likely to report negative impacts as a result of discrimination when compared to those who were a couple with children, which was 71 per cent. Of those who were a couple with no children living the household, it was 80 per cent. For people in a single-parent household, 87 per cent were more likely to be negatively impacted by the experience of discrimination when compared to those who were a couple with children, which was 71 per cent.

As a society, we need to better understand and prepare for the impending issues facing ageing populations. Older people in this nation are not being given the opportunities in the marketplace that they deserve. Today, I heard a commentator in the National Press Club say that older Australians were not making the contribution to the tax base that they should. I say today that they have already made that contribution for all of their years. This nation needs to reform and work hard to revitalise older Australians to take their place in society, take leadership roles and use their experience for the national benefit. We need to change the focus of ageing from catastrophe to opportunity and remove barriers to older people leading healthy and productive lives.

Speaking of opportunities, it is relevant that I mention the Labor Party's policy to increase collections on older Australians. This is their intention, if they are elected to govern. In regards to older Australians, they're going to reduce the negative gearing tax discount, reduce the capital gains discount and further reduce superannuation concessions. There are going to tax family trusts, end cash refunds of unused franking credits, abandon the cut in the company tax rate to big business and increase the top income tax rate from two per cent to 49 per cent. These measures alone will increase the tax take of a future Labor government by $30 billion over four years.

Ross Gittins' article in The Age today should be compulsory reading for anybody who has worked hard and saved for their retirement. You are the people who will pay for Labor's largesse—yes, you. These people are the risk-takers, the investors, the innovators, the builders, the businesspeople and the employers and their employees. It is you who will have to cough up your hard-earned money to pay for the Labor's redistribution of your wealth—or, should I say, the redistribution of your wealth to others in our community. The fact is that 47 per cent of taxpayers pay no net tax in Australia. The top 10 per cent of taxpayers will pay 55 per cent of all tax in Australia this year and the top 20 per cent will pay a staggering 80 per cent of the tax burden, which will increase under a Labor government, which Labor says is just fine. I say it will dampen the enthusiasm of entrepreneurs and the risk-takers to have a go and create the jobs and opportunities of the future.

A report I read said that 80 per cent of the new jobs of the future will created by these people through small- and medium-sized business start-ups. The Liberal-National government is determined that these enterprises will be given every incentive, every freedom and every opportunity to flourish and be the drivers of job opportunities for the benefit of all Australians. There it is: not only do they discriminate on the basis of age but they are now proposing to take from older generations and transfer that to the younger. Age is not an issue; it is just a number. Let us today reverse this ageist sentiment and redraw the line in the sand to benefit us all. In passing, I have to say the government will pay employers $10,000 if they employ an older person. It's time we gave older Australians a fair go.

Rob Mitchell (McEwen, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's always interesting to note when those opposite talk about hard work. They neglect to tell you there are three MPs over there who, in between the three of them, have given themselves a bigger tax rise than one pensioner earns in a whole year. When they talk about entrepreneurs, they're actually talking about lining their own pockets and not those who actually need it. They could live on $40 a day, apparently!

In the latest budget, the government has shown its true colours. It's proven has once again—as we've seen time and time before—that while we on this side of this House are about giving Australians a fair go, those opposite are only here to look after the top end of town. There's not a lot to talk about when it comes to what the government has funded in my electorate compared to what it hasn't funded. It's pretty hard to talk about nothing—zip, zero, zilch. That's the funding this government has given to the community in this budget. There is not one road, not one school, not one TAFE, not one hospital and not one mobile phone blackspot tower. There is nothing. All they are doing is cutting money from workers and pensioners and giving tax cuts to their big banker mates. We've said it all before, and we'll say it again: this budget does not pass the fairness test. The budget was an opportunity for the government to show the nation what they believed in, and they did that.

In his last speech, Hubert H Humphrey said:

The moral test of government is how it treats those who are in the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the aged; and those in the shadows of life, the sick, the needy and the handicapped.

The morals of this government are clearly on display with this budget. There's no secrecy. There are no hidden agendas. We see their priorities front and centre. They believe in backing big banks and big business over children, pensioners and working Australians, whereas we believe in a fair go.

I represent one of the fastest-growing regions in our nation, with Whittlesea, Mitchell and Hume shires all being among the fastest-growing local government areas in the country. This growth brings with it pressures. Pressures that can only be relieved by proper funding of infrastructure, school and health care. We know that this government doesn't listen to anyone because one in five businesses have said outright they don't need a company tax cut to secure their business future—that's businesses telling the government they don't need this tax cut—and four in five businesses are saying they won't pass on the extra profits to increase employment or increase wages. So why is the government arrogantly pushing ahead with tax cuts for multinationals and overseas investors? This isn't ideological position. It's not a nation-building or an economy-building position. It's just their values to look after the top end of town.

These cuts will be done at a time when inequity is higher than it's ever been before; stagnant wages and insecure work in this country are only getting worse. And not only that, the so-called tax cuts they want to give to workers won't be fully effective for about another 25 years. The Treasurer points to the 1.1 million underemployed Australians in his budget. He says himself, despite global growth being the best in six years, underemployment will still remain elevated. So, Treasurer, after five years of Liberal-National government, when global growth is at its best, why is unemployment at the same rate it was when you came in? Why is wage theft and wage stagnation so high when you're telling us the economic situation is better than it was six years ago? Why is it you would rather fork out $80 billion to tax-dodging big businesses, including overseas investors, than fund pensioners $14 a week for a winter energy supplement?

Not only did this budget not deliver a single dollar to McEwen or the rest of Australia in infrastructure, it also admitted the government failed delivery on any infrastructure funding promised in the last budget. Down in Victoria, we've been working hard to get our fair share of funding. There's a much longer list of what hasn't been done than what has. We've been asking for the Wallan interchange, we've been asking for the E6 and we've been asking for safer and better access to our outer suburbs. We've had three infrastructure ministers this year alone, and not one of them can answer a call. Instead we are left to deal with the mess of single-lane roads and dangerous intersections while this government commits nothing to the communities in McEwen. Even the flailing PM finally seems to understand the need to get on with the North East Link so that we can give local roads back to local residents. This was a project that Labor championed at the last election and, boy, wouldn't it be nice if the government did just one thing right by McEwen's residents? In the latest Infrastructure Priority List compiled by Infrastructure Australia, only 13 projects out of 96 were in Victoria, and only two of those benefit McEwen. And yet both of those have again received no actual funding. Two out of 96 is simply not good enough.

Unlike those opposite who came to the last election with no funding for vital roads in our communities, Labor committed $120 million to the Bridge Inn Road complete duplication, and funding for the O'Herns Road interchange. Why? Because we understand that growing communities need this access, and we know how to deliver it. The government talks big on its plan, but in five years it hasn't delivered a thing. It's like the Blackadder comedy. 'We have a cunning plan. A plan so cunning you could put a tail on it and call it a weasel!' But Treasurer Baldrick is delivering nothing that actually helps our communities. That means each and every year they deliver nothing; it gets worse and worse and worse.

We have mobile phone blackspots. Much of Australia has had a small taste this week of what happens when your mobile phone doesn't work—it's been front-page news for days—but it's all too common an occurrence in our communities. It's what we face each and every day. This government put not one cent in the budget towards a mobile phone blackspot program. In fact, what it did do in the last round was mislead Australians in round 3 in delivering towers. By its own criteria, it failed to deliver. But it ensured that the money it had put aside for round 3 was put into a pork-barrelling exercise for marginal Liberal and National seats. We meet every single criterion listed by the government, yet we've received two in three rounds. You need to ask why. Why did the government take taxpayer funds and fund this pork-barrelling exercise at the expense of communities who can't get phone reception? Instead, 75 per cent of the mobile phone black spot towers have been in Liberal and National seats. This means for the next four years this government is not putting one cent towards improving coverages across Victoria. The message to the Prime Minister and the Treasurer is: the jig is up. Victorians are tired of the lack of transparency and consultation in this government's delayed black spot program. While the government turns a blind eye to the fact that McEwen residents are being left off the grid, fortunately the Victorian Andrews Labor government is committing where the Turnbull government refuses to do so.

The attacks don't stop there. The Turnbull government has had it out for young Australians from child care all the way through to university and TAFE. Those opposite don't seem to know or don't seem to care if kids start off on the wrong foot for their very first day of child care, cutting $6 million over the next three years from childcare early learning projects. Instead of putting that money into fixing the budget, they're giving that to the banks in the form of tax cuts. As if child care isn't bad enough, the government good is cutting $17 billion from our schools as well. McEwen is one of the top 10 electorates nationwide for students attending government schools. We know firsthand how many kids and parents will be affected by these brutal cuts. We know how devastating these cuts will be to schools squeezing every dollar to deliver excellent learning outcomes for our kids. While those opposite think mummy and daddy should pay more for schools, when people can't, they're still entitled to a good quality education. That's why we will restore fair needs based funding to all schools and put back that $17 billion the government is robbing from our kids' future. The choice is clear: Liberal government, $17 billion to the big banks; Labor government, $17 billion into education. Our TAFEs are under attack, with out-of-touch ministers who have never worked a day outside of a cushy office. It's an utterly bizarre attack on TAFE. The Minister for Education and Training said that funding the TAFE system is like funding basket-weaving. With comments like that, no wonder the government feels so comfortable cutting $270 million from TAFEs, on top of the $3 billion they've already cut from TAFEs and apprenticeships. Australian tradies—

A division having been called in the House of Representatives—

Proceedings suspended from 18:12 to 18 : 28

Australian trades are facing massive skills shortages, from carpenters, to bricklayers, to bakers, to pastry cooks. Despite high unemployment, this government's cuts mean workers can't learn the skills industries are calling out for. I wonder if the Prime Minister has ever thought about who will build his fifth, sixth or seventh investment property. That's why we are committed to putting $100 million into modernising TAFE facilities around the country and to the scrapping of up-front fees for 100,000 TAFE students. We will also reverse the cuts and uncap the student places in universities. This will open up around 1,500 more places for McEwen residents to head off to university. We won't stand for the $80 billion being handed to the top end of town when our universities' and TAFEs' budgets are brutally slashed. We understand that education is the key to securing our economy and creating opportunities.

For our pensioners, this government's trademark of consistently being out of touch has not left retirees unscathed. You can always rely on this government to take from the needy and give to the rich—that's their trademark. In what world does increasing the pension age while also cutting the pension energy supplement make sense? Instead of rewarding those who have worked hard for our nation, the government is ripping $14 per fortnight out of their pockets and telling them they just have to keep working until they're 70. In McEwen, there are 17,000 residents over the age of 70, who will no doubt be affected by the government's tax cuts—that's 17,000 nation-builders in my community alone who are worse off under this government. Australians who have worked hard to enjoy their retirement shouldn't be made to continue to slave way because of the Prime Minister turning his back on them.

The health care system is no different. Under this government, average waiting times for elective surgery are the longest on record, the number of hospital beds available for elderly Australians is the lowest on record and the number of people arriving in emergency departments is the highest on record. Instead of fixing this and making health care more accessible to Australians, this government has locked in further cuts to hospitals from 2020, joining the ludicrous $715 million cruel cuts they already have in place. If you make huge cuts to health care and health care outcomes are getting worse, what possible argument can be made to double down and cut even more? They are keeping the Medicare rebate freeze in place. Many families in Mernda, Wallan, Sunbury and Kilmore are going to be forking out their savings just to see a specialist. Seeing a GP is costing families in Romsey and Whittlesea 20 per cent more than it did a couple of years ago.

Under Labor's Better Hospitals Fund we will invest an extra $764 million over the forward estimates to fix our public hospitals. That means that over the next six years we'll be committing an extra $2.8 billion in funding for more beds and shorter waiting times. We'll invest in every single public hospital across the country.

I was in Whittlesea just last week talking to Luscombe Automotive about Labor's plan to give all mechanics access to the technical information they need to service modern cars. This will expand opportunities for people in our communities to shop locally, supporting local businesses, local people and local jobs. It's so important that we do this in rural and regional areas in order to make sure our economies grow and that we end the scourge of high unemployment, something this government has totally ignored. We have communities with 42 per cent unemployment for young people. There is not one cent in this budget to actually help them find work or to improve services to allow them to get to work.

In conclusion, while the Prime Minister sits in his harbourside mansion, content with the havoc he has wreaked on the working middle class, sussing out the latest happenings at Ugland House, Australians like the ones I have in my community are out there working hard, struggling to make ends meet, week in week out. By now, hardworking Australians know that the economy is not working for them. The only way to fix this is to remove this Prime Minister, this greedy Treasurer and this government at the next election.

Back in May 2011, Sid Maher and Jared Owens wrote in The Australian:

Senior Liberals have declared that Malcolm Turnbull will never again lead the party …

They were right. This Prime Minister does not lead.

As I said earlier, the moral test of government is how the government treats those who are at the dawn of life, the children, those who are in the twilight of life, the elderly, and those in the shadow of life, the sick, the needy and the handicapped. On every moral test this government and this budget are absolute failures.

Julia Banks (Chisholm, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2018-2019 and related bills, and I'm delighted to commend the Turnbull government's 2018-19 budget. In this budget we saw that, under the leadership of Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, Treasurer Scott Morrison and the entire coalition team, our strong economic plan is working for all hardworking Australians. The Turnbull government's budget outlines our government's clear plan to ensure that the benefits of stronger economic growth can continue to be secured and shared. It is a plan that will provide tax relief to encourage and reward working Australians, back businesses to invest and create more jobs, guarantee the essential services that Australians rely upon, and keep Australians safe, all while ensuring the government lives within its means.

The Turnbull government is on track to deliver a modest balance in 2019-20 and, outstandingly, a projected surplus of $11 billion in 2020-21. The budget delivers tangible outcomes for residents in my electorate of Chisholm. A strong economy guarantees the essentials the people of Chisholm and across Australia rely upon. The Turnbull government knows that the security of your job, the quality of your health care, your business and your retirement all depend upon a strong economy. That is why I have strongly advocated for the people of Chisholm. In response this budget is providing responsible tax relief to encourage and reward hardworking Australians such as the good people of Chisholm. Starting in this budget year for low and middle-income earners, the Turnbull government is ensuring Australians keep more of their hard-earned income. We are also lifting tax brackets over time to ensure wages aren't eaten up by higher taxes. That's why I'm proud to be part of the Turnbull government, which is delivering tax relief with a focus on low and middle-income earners and responsibly returning the budget to balance.

Under the Turnbull government's economic plan outlined in the recent budget, jobs are being created, investment is rising and the budget is strengthening. Our plan will deliver lower, fairer and simpler taxes to encourage and reward working Australians. It will back businesses to invest and create more jobs, building upon our legislated tax cuts for small and medium enterprises. It will guarantee the essential services that Australians rely upon, including record funding for hospitals and schools, a comprehensive approach to aged care so that older Australians can live to the full, and guaranteed funding for disability services. The plan will keep Australians safe by strengthening security at airports and investing more in our intelligence and security services. It'll ensure that we live within our means, with a forecast return to a modest budget balance in 2019-20, with the lowest average real growth in payments of any government in the last 50 years.

Our tax relief plan will encourage and reward hardworking Australians. More than 63,000 taxpayers in Chisholm will receive a new offset of up to $530 a year under our plan to reduce cost pressures on household budgets. There's also great news for the over 19,000 local businesses in Chisholm, with the $20,000 instant asset write-off continuing for another year, helping small businesses invest in new equipment. Over a thousand local businesses in Chisholm have already benefited from this measure which supports small and medium business. This is on top of legislated tax cuts for small and medium businesses that are helping them grow, create more jobs and pay higher wages. For example, a hairdresser in Chisholm earning $50,000 a year is set to have an extra $575 in their pocket from the budget year onwards, meaning an $4,055 in their pocket over the first seven years of the tax plan. Put simply, our tax relief plan is encouraging and rewarding hardworking Chisholm residents and Australians nationally.

While the economy is continuing to strengthen and the budget position is improving, many Australians are experiencing cost-of-living pressures. Tax relief for low and middle-income earners is the first priority of the Turnbull government's seven-year plan to make personal income tax in Australia lower, fairer and simpler. By 2024-25 around 94 per cent of taxpayers are projected to face a marginal tax rate of 32½ per cent or less, compared with 63 per cent if we leave the system unchanged. Tackling this tax bracket creep is essential. It is something that those on the other side have no idea about and ignore. It is essential in ensuring that Chisholm residents are able to keep more of their own money. It is their money. I'm committed to delivering for the good people of Chisholm, and know that providing such tax relief will encourage and reward working Australians.

The 2018-19 federal budget is building a stronger economy that guarantees essential services like Medicare, schools, hospitals, disability services and aged care that people across Chisholm rely upon every day. The government will continue to ensure that all Australians have access to high-quality, affordable essential services at every stage of their lives. I have advocated on behalf of Chisholm residents, and this budget includes record funding for hospitals and schools, a comprehensive approach to aged care so that older Australians are encouraged to live life to the full, and guaranteed funding for disability services.

In this budget, the government have continued our absolute rock-solid commitment to Medicare, with an additional $4.8 billion investment, building on the Medicare Guarantee Fund, which we established last year. Labor's 'Mediscare' campaign is absolutely unfounded and built on the premise of their fraudulent misrepresentations to the local community. Medicare spending is guaranteed by the Turnbull government and is increasing every year, from $24 billion in 2017 to $28.8 billion in 2021-22, to support health care for all Chisholm residents and Australians. Furthermore, indexation of the Medicare Benefit Schedule, which the government reintroduced in last year's budget, will deliver an additional $1.5 billion for Medicare services through 2021-22.

The 2018-19 budget will also deliver more choices for a longer life package, which will support older Australians to live longer and be better prepared, healthier, more independent, and connected to their communities. The government is supporting 26,337 people aged over 65 and their families in the electorate of Chisholm to live longer, happier and healthier lives. I have worked hard to deliver for older Australians across Chisholm, and I'm proud that the package gives older Australians more choice and greater flexibility, including an additional 14,000 high-level home care packages so older Australians can stay in their homes longer if they want to; allowing pensioners to earn more without reducing their pension; and providing greater flexibility to use home equity to increase retirement incomes.

A division having been called in the House of Representatives—

Proceedings suspended from 18 : 41 to 18 : 54

Since the last budget, the Turnbull government has delivered an extra 20,000 high-level home care packages to support people to live at home for longer. Now we are providing 13,500 new residential aged-care places and 775 short-term restorative places to be made available where they are most needed, plus $16 million for capital investment.

The government will also establish an Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission to ensure that older Australians receive the best possible care, with an additional $50 million to assist providers to implement the new standards. We will invest $32.8 million to improve palliative care for older Australians living in residential aged care, filling current gaps in support services and with $5.3 million committed for innovations in managing dementia.

The care of older Australians across Chisholm, from Mount Waverley to Burwood and from Blackburn South to Box Hill and everywhere in-between is a priority. I'm proud to be a member of the Turnbull government, which is ensuring best practice and better outcomes for our local seniors. Further, the government is helping Chisholm residents to work for as long as they want, laying the foundations for a secure retirement. We'll provide up to $10,000 in Restart wage subsidies for employing Australians aged over 50, and the Skills and Training Incentive will also provide up to $2,000 to fund upskilling opportunities for mature-age workers.

Indeed, the 2018-19 budget delivers measures to boost living standards and to expand retirement income options to give retirees confidence in their financial security. The Turnbull government is increasing the pension work bonus to allow aged pensioners to earn an extra $50 per fortnight without reducing their pension. The Pension Loan Scheme will be expanded, giving greater flexibility to use home equity to boost retirement incomes—for example, by up to $17,787 a year. These measures will significantly benefit Chisholm residents, placing important downwards pressure on the cost of living for ageing Australians.

More broadly across the health sector, the Turnbull government has committed record Commonwealth funding for public hospitals. The government will deliver more than $30 billion in additional public hospital funding under a five-year national health agreement, with funding increasing across Victoria every year. From 2021 to 2024 to 2025, the new agreement will deliver a record $130.2 billion in public hospital funding, which represents a more than doubling of public hospital funding under the coalition government, rising from $13.3 billion in 2012-13 to $28.7 billion in 2024-25.

The Turnbull government is also investing $2.4 billion on new medicines to build on our commitment to guarantee those essential services that Australians rely on. This includes a new $1 billion provision to maintain our commitment to listing all new medicines recommended by the independent Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee. Unlike Labor, we list, and we will continue to list, every single drug recommended by the medical experts—the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee—with approximately $9 billion of investment in new life-changing drug listings since coming into government, helping unwell Australians.

As the chair of the Parliamentary Friends of Women's Health, I'm particularly delighted that the Turnbull government will provide $703.6 million for the listing of KISQALI on the PBS to support women with breast cancer. Without subsidies, patients would pay $71,820 per year. This is a life-changing measure that will directly affect women across Chisholm and beyond, and these measures can only happen when you know how to manage the economy. Then you can put the funding and money towards life-changing medicines that help to save lives.

Mental health is also a priority of our government, and we are delivering $338.1 million in new mental health funding, focusing on suicide prevention, research and older Australians. Additionally, 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.

The government has outlined a clear plan from the high chair to higher education, to ensure that every student in Chisholm and across Australia can choose the best education path to help them reach their potential. Australia's education system needs to be better than it is today. Students, employers, families and the Turnbull government all recognise the challenges we face, and how a stronger economy enables us to invest more in education and child care. That's why our budget outlines investment worth $43.7 billion in 2018-19 to support the coalition's reform plans for Australia's education system, including an extra $1 billion for schools this year alone, tied to evidence based initiatives that boost student outcomes. The government is delivering a 50 per cent average increase per student in fair, real needs-based school funding over the decade. Across Chisholm, the Turnbull government and I are ensuring that 2,206 children will be able to access 15 hours of quality early learning in the year before school and that 4,985 local families will benefit from more accessible and affordable child care.

The Turnbull government is focused on building the roads, rail and other vital infrastructure that grow the economy and make life better for Chisholm residents. We're significantly investing in Chisholm's roads, rail and other vital infrastructure and will directly affect the daily commute and travel of thousands of local residents. We are busting congestion through a dedicated fund outlined in the budget, which will help Chisholm residents. The benefits of our infrastructure investment for the communities of Chisholm include a $5 billion commitment to deliver the Melbourne Airport rail link; $475 million for the planning and preconstruction of a new rail line to the Monash precinct, including Monash University; and $140 million for the Victorian Congestion Package. The budget is providing much needed funds to improve and enrich our infrastructure. As a born and bred Melburnian, I know that projects such as the Melbourne Airport rail link are essential in busting congestion, creating jobs and helping to maintain Melbourne's livability.

Only the coalition can truly deliver for the people of Chisholm. Unlike Labor, we are securing the economy so that the government can provide for our local community while living within our means. The 2018-19 budget is a budget that truly delivers for the people of Chisholm. I'm proud to be a member of the Turnbull government, a government that is ensuring strong economic growth, reducing cost-of-living pressures, guaranteeing essential services and keeping Australians safe and secure whilst ensuring the government lives within its means. I commend these bills and the Turnbull government's budget.

Amanda Rishworth (Kingston, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Veterans' Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm not sure how many big multinational companies are based in the seat of Chisholm. They certainly will benefit from this government's budget, but average Australians—Australians who rely on public hospitals, Australians who rely on decent investment in education and Australians who are doing it tough and haven't seen a significant wage rise for some time—will certainly not be doing better under the Turnbull government. This budget has been disappointing, at best, and unfair and sneaky, at worst. I think many Australians were hoping to see Turnbull 3.0 or 4.0, but what this budget has given is exactly what the Liberal Party and the National Party have given since they've been in government—a budget that fails the fairness test. It fails ordinary Australians and it fails people who rely on investment in services. What is the trade-off for that? The government thinks that big multinational businesses deserve support in this budget. Out of the $80 billion tax handout in this budget that goes to big business, $17 billion goes to the banks. If you could find a situation more perverse then this is it. At the same time we've got a government cutting from hospitals and cutting from schools.

We heard the previous speaker talk about how this budget will help older Australians work while they can. Of course, they're going to have to work, because in this budget there is still the sneaky proposal to increase the pension age to 70. I've spoken about this many times in this place. It is clear that members of the Turnbull government have not spoken to older Australians who have worked physical jobs. They haven't spoken to people who have had jobs in factories for a long time, people who have worked on building sites or people who have been tradies. They have put their body on the line for their work. Nurses have very physical jobs. Of course, their bodies can't work those same jobs until they are 70. It's just not feasible. Of course, this government, by increasing the pension age to 70, wants to make you work until you're 70.

We hear the Prime Minister talk a lot about older Australians—waxing lyrical about how he's the Prime Minister for older Australians. Well, he's also still got in his budget the axing of the energy supplement, which really makes a big difference to pensioners. It might not make a big difference to our Prime Minister—who doesn't need an energy supplement—but it certainly makes a big difference to the pensioners, including those on the disability pension, that rely significantly on this supplement. But, no, this is going to be cut. We saw some pretty serious trickery in this budget as well, with a big announcement about home care packages. Of course, this was money that was already budgeted for. There is not one new home care package—money for our older Australians—in this budget. It's merely repackaged, rebadged and put out there.

It's not only in aged care that we saw pretty sneaky reannouncements. Despite the government spruiking additional investment in infrastructure over the next four years, their budget did not include a single new dollar for rail or road funding in South Australia. The budget was all about spin when it came to South Australia, and the evidence—on page 141 of Budget Paper No. 2—clearly reveals that this year's allocation for South Australian infrastructure projects was zero. Next year, it's also zero, and in the subsequent years. The truth is that all of this money comes from unallocated funds set aside previously. So, despite the government talking up its infrastructure investment, we are seeing South Australia being seriously left behind. What became really clear is that, by 2021, South Australia will receive just $135 million in Commonwealth infrastructure investment. That is three per cent of the budget for a state that has seven per cent of the national population. In a joint statement, the state's leading industry lobby groups—the South Australian Chamber of Mines & Energy, the South Australian Freight Council, the Royal Automobile Association and Civil Contractors Federation South Australia—described the budget as misleading and untimely, and an inauspicious deal for South Australia. For my electorate of Kingston, once again, there is no infrastructure, no investment in infrastructure. It is disappointing that we didn't see any move towards the extension of the rail to Aldinga. They are just some of the highlights of disappointments for South Australia.

In my portfolio areas, there were also significant disappointments. Of course, this budget has failed Australian children. Despite what the government says when it talks about putting more money into schools, members on this side of the House were here when the budget papers clearly said that there was money being cut from schools. It was clearly outlined that $30 billion would be cut from schools in 2014. So, if the government actually think that they can make significant cuts—$30 billion worth of cuts—and then put a little bit of that back and that we should be cheering for them, that is just absolutely perverse. It is time government members stopped pretending that they are putting more money into schools—sure, compared to the massive cuts, they're putting a little bit more in—when they are not restoring the funding that they promised they would match dollar for dollar.

In early education, we see the budget express the government's values. It shows that it does not care or value early education. The government had an opportunity to demonstrate its commitment by providing long-term funding for our nation's preschools. But, after the calendar year of 2019, there is zero money in the forward estimates for universal access to preschool for four-year-olds. There is no new funding, and this will mean that potentially 350,000 preschoolers and their families will be in limbo when the funding runs out next year. Next year, families will have to start planning for their children to start preschool. Centres will have to start planning for enrolling children into kindy—for how many hours, for how many children? Of course, they can't plan for this, because the government refuses to commit.

There was another sneaky cut when it came to early education. That was the cut to the National Quality Agenda for Early Childhood Education and Care. The quality agenda in early education is a success story. This is a success story that Labor initiated in government, and it requires that all early learning centres meet strict safety and quality standards that are assessed in terms of performance. Since Labor established the quality agenda in 2009, the Commonwealth has provided funding to the states and territories to employ staff to conduct safety and quality checks. We know that that has been driving improvement in quality right around the country. We also know that there are improvements that come when a centre has been checked and found to need improvement in some areas, and that those centres, when reassessed, have improved. This money was driving quality.

This financial year, the Commonwealth provided $20 million for this vital work. But the funding runs out on 30 June, and this sneaky government has now torn up the agreement and has provided no money when it comes to quality. Last week, I met with the Victorian early education minister, who told me this means 50 monitoring and compliance staff in the department are now on the chopping block. There are more than 18,400 licensed early learning centres in Australia. How will the government now monitor the quality of early learning centres? What assurances can the government give Australian families and their children that they will not be educated in either dodgy or unsafe centres? This is a short-sighted measure. This is a reckless measure that does not put equality of early education—and, importantly, our children—at the centre of their policy. Instead, it is ducking and weaving about how the government can shirk its responsibility.

Of course, the budget also locks in the new unfair childcare system from 2 July. We know one in four families are going to be worse off as a result of these changes. Most of them will be vulnerable families. Families with irregular, casual or seasonal work will also suffer. Families with a parent at home with a child who may also be caring for an older family member or an older sibling with a disability may get nothing. From July, these families will start losing their childcare subsidy and will have to make a terrible choice: pay more out of pocket for early learning, reduce hours, or pull their kids out of care. Families may have many reasons for not working, but this government believes that if you aren't working, and if both parents aren't working, you're bludging and your child shouldn't get early education. This is not good enough, and it's time the government seriously reconsidered this unfair proposal.

Finally, I'd like to turn to the Veterans' Affairs budget. The budget has been a mixed bag for veterans, and there have been some welcome changes, such as the expansion of non-liability of mental health treatment for reservists. Side by side, though, there are cuts to allied health—$40 million worth of cuts in this budget. And that is very, very disappointing. These savings will be made by trialling a new treatment model, which will require veterans to return to their GP every 12 sessions to seek another referral. Veterans have raised with me—particularly those that have stable, chronic conditions—the question of why they have to jump through these hoops. It's pretty clear why: it saves the government $40 million. That is a significant amount of veterans who are going to miss out on allied healthcare appointments, and these are savings for the government.

The government needs to be up-front with veterans. We're hearing a number of stories about why this change was made. First it was to pay for the IT system. The next story that comes out is that it's been forced on the Department of Veterans' Affairs by the Department of Health. My guess is that these cuts were made to save money, and I think it needs to be made really clear what the impacts will be if this continues.

I seek leave to continue my remarks later.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.

Federation Chamber adjourned at 19:14