Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

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

The Government's lack of focus on the cost of living crisis facing Australian families.

I call upon those honourable members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places.

More than the number of members required by the standing orders having risen in their places—

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Government Services and the Digital Economy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The most urgent issue facing Australian families is the cost-of-living crisis. We see a drumbeat of pieces of evidence for this proposition. Just last week the Reserve Bank of Australia lifted rates for the eighth consecutive time on this government's watch to 3.35 per cent, and of course the actual rates that households pay are much higher than that. The last time interest rates were this high was when Labor were last in office.

The Prime Minister was forced to admit that 800,000 Australians will move from lower fixed rates to higher variable rates over the course of 2023, creating a serious shock to the budgets of many households. If you're presently on a fixed mortgage rate of 1.8 per cent and you're suddenly going to 5.8 per cent, that is a huge cost to the family budget. For a typical family that has entered into a new mortgage of $750,000 that means additional payments of $18,000 a year.

Just think about the likely knock-on effects for local restaurants and clothes retailers—in fact, all across the economy. Reports are showing that an alarming one in five Australian households are suffering mortgage stress, including an estimated more than 100,000 pushed into it after the latest rate rise under the Albanese government.

Many small businesses are in the same boat. The Prime Minister was asked about this very issue in question time. He has failed to tell us how many, but we know that a significant proportion of small businesses will have a loan that will move from a fixed rate to a higher variable rate this year.

We know that rents are increasing. Recent reports show that rental prices are at historic highs across most capital cities.

We know that energy bills are skyrocketing. The government itself admitted in its budget that it expects electricity bills to be up 56 per cent and gas bills to be up 40 per cent over the foreseeable future. We know from the instances that hardworking members on this side of the House have highlighted that Joe and Julie Siragusa, in the electorate of Flinders, are facing a $667 increase in their gas bill. The member for Barker told the House that the food manufacturer Nippy's is facing an increase in its gas bill of 92.5 per cent—$900,000. And today, of course, we learned that unemployment has jumped to 3.7 per cent, with over 30,000 people losing their jobs in the last two months.

So there is no question that this nation and Australian families are facing a serious and pressing cost-of-living crisis. But what do we hear from this government? The telling and grim reality is that this government has no answers or plan. What do they say when they are asked about these issues in question time? What do they say?

Sam Rae (Hawke, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There's a trillion dollars of debt.

Tony Pasin (Barker, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Calm down, Hairspray!

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Member for Barker, withdraw the comment.

Tony Pasin (Barker, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I withdraw.

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you. Manager of Opposition Business, you may proceed.

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Government Services and the Digital Economy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They tell us that they recalled parliament on 15 December. It was supposedly to come up with a plan on energy prices. But the simple fact is that these measures are hopelessly inadequate. If we just look at rising interest rates, on a typical mortgage a family is paying $18,000 more a year. You would need to have 1,400 scripts a year for the savings to outweigh your extra mortgage costs, and obviously almost nobody is going to be in that position.

Of course, child care is important for Australians with young children, but the relief won't start until July and, for millions and millions of Australians, they are not at a stage of life where that is going to be providing assistance.

What is the plan to deal with rising interest rates? It is increasingly clear that this government does not have a plan beyond repeatedly saying, 'The independent Reserve Bank of Australia.' Who says that? The Treasurer. The man who appoints the board of the Reserve Bank of Australia constantly says, 'The independent Reserve Bank of Australia.'

This government is in disarray in how they are dealing with the challenge of repeatedly rising interest rates. Last week the Assistant Treasurer had this to say about interest rate rises. He said he was hoping that 'if this is not the last it's near the last of the rate increases'. Hope is not a plan, and it's clearly not a very well-founded hope because, regardless of what the Assistant Treasurer in his bumbling fashion might say, if you ask the man who's actually got responsibility, together with the board, he says that further increases in interest rates will be needed over the months ahead. So we have this bumbling Assistant Treasurer saying that he is hoping it is near the last of the rate increases. What is very clear is that this government simply does not have a plan to deal with rising interest rates.

That's before we turn to the pressing problem of energy. On 97 occasions before the election, the Prime Minister promised that energy bills would be lower by $275. He arrived at that conclusion based upon modelling work done by the member for McMahon. What a distinguished track record he has had in this place! He's the same genius who came up with Fuel Watch, Grocery Watch and the Malaysian solution, and the Labor Party turned to him and said, 'Tell us what to do about energy prices.' He came up with dodgy modelling and, on the basis of that, on 97 occasions the Prime Minister told the Australian people before the election that energy bills would go down by $275. Exactly the opposite has been happening. As bills have been rocketing around the country, their solution was an urgent parliamentary recall in the middle of December. Supposedly the details were going to be finalised by the National Cabinet by March. We've now learned that's not going to happen until the budget in May. The New South Wales Treasurer, repeatedly quoted, I must say, by the Prime Minister, has come out and said the money promised by the Commonwealth has not yet materialised.

Let's be clear. Even if this relief is ever delivered, the simple fact is that Australians' power bills will be going up by hundreds of billions of dollars, even after whatever the government manages to deliver, not down by the $275 which the Prime Minister repeatedly promised.

Perhaps the single most troubling aspect of all of this is that, in the face of these pressing problems, which are urgently engaging Australian families around the kitchen table all across our country, it is abundantly clear that dealing with these problems is not the central focus of this government. They have their mind on other things. Indeed, the man who is supposed to be right at the centre of the response—instead of focusing on how he can drive down interest rates, how he can get inflation under control—has been writing 6,000-word essays quoting Greek philosophers. He does want us to know that he's really clever. He reads weighty books like Jared Diamond's Upheaval; he name checks cool leftie economists like Mariana Mazzucato. He's au fait with Nouriel Roubini's gloomy predictions. He has fascinating conversations with people like the Canadian central banker Mark Carney. He wants us to know that he's a big Labor thinker, because what big Labor thinkers spend their summers doing is writing essays for the Monthly. We know that because he pointed it out in the very essay. He said, in case we didn't know, that Kevin Rudd wrote one in February 2009, and that other big Labor thinker, also from Queensland, Wayne Swan, wrote one in March 2012, and Jim's very much in the same tradition—a big Labor thinker, pondering these complex issues over Christmas—

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Excuse me, Member for Bradfield—

An honourable member interjecting—

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Government Services and the Digital Economy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Not for Jim; he's got a big to-do list—

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Member for Bradfield!

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Government Services and the Digital Economy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Not for the Treasurer, Deputy Speaker.

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You will use the correct titles when you're referring to members in the House.

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Government Services and the Digital Economy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That's true, because—

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you. We're relying on you to set a good example here.

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Government Services and the Digital Economy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Indeed, Deputy Speaker—you are absolutely right; I am rightly rebuked, because I should acknowledge and respect the big plans of the Treasurer. He's not rearranging the sock drawer. Instead, he's going to redefine and reform our economy and institutions; he's reimagining and redesigning markets; he's renewing and restructuring the way that our markets allocate and arrange capital; he's going to build a better capitalism, uniquely Australian, and he's going to do it this year, if you read the essay carefully.

The simple fact is: if the Treasurer just got on with his day job and had a real plan to get the cost of living down, get energy costs down, get interest rates down and get inflation down, then maybe the rest of us might have quite the high opinion of him that he has of himself.

Ged Kearney (Cooper, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We understand that the rising cost of living is hitting a lot of Australians hard. Inflation is the defining economic challenge of 2023, as it was in 2022. Australians understand that we did not create these challenges, like the war in Ukraine. But they elected us to take responsibility for addressing them, And we are.

In this MPI, the opposition are leading with their chin. I'm not a violent person—I don't even like violent analogies—but I know that my colleagues and I today are going to look at that poked out chin and we are going to sock it to them. The Albanese Labor government is absolutely delivering the positive change Australians voted for, including sensible non-inflationary measures to tackle the cost of living. Those across the way just don't get it. Unless there's a colour coded Excel spreadsheet attached to a budget policy, they seem to have no idea. Managing the economy, of course, is far more complicated than that, and we are staying focused on easing pressure on households and helping Australians manage their budgets, fixing the mess that those opposite left, and getting on maturely and responsibly managing the budget.

We are focused on immediate household budget relief. Just last week in this House I was so pleased to see us pass legislation to improve the Paid Parental Leave scheme. I take the opportunity to thank the Minister for Social Services. As someone who struggled through a difficult time without paid parental leave, having four children, I can tell you that this would've eased the cost of living for me, and it has definitely eased the cost of living for families, including people like my daughters. Who would have thought that those on that side did everything they could to scuttle that scheme.

On 1 January, our cheaper medicines policy took effect—the first time ever there has been a cut to the cost of medicines, which most definitely leads—would you believe it?—to an ease on the cost of living for all Australians who rely on prescription medicines. Imagine, when those opposite were in government, on their watch, people had to make a decision: 'Can I afford my medicines this month or can I pay my rent or put food on the table?' They no longer have to do that. We have introduced cheaper child care. One point two million families will see a significant easing of their cost of living when the policy takes effect on 1 July.

And let's talk about energy costs, which they like to go on about. Can I say here, before I explain what we're actually doing with our superfabulous energy policy, that what people are experiencing now with rising energy costs is in no small way due to 10 years of complete incompetence and mayhem under the previous coalition government, which was incapable of setting up this country with adequate, secure renewable energy, which is the cheapest form of energy, the most sustainable form of energy and the form of energy from which we can draw the most energy security. It's thanks to them for nothing.

You see, we have an energy policy supported by the vast majority of people, businesses, peak bodies and unions. We've introduced legislation that will drive investment in cleaner and cheaper energy, which will without a doubt put downward pressure on prices and—dare I say it?—ease the cost of living. As well as that, we haven't wasted a moment upgrading the grid. Investing in renewables has increased by 50 per cent in a year—most of that since May—and already things like electric vehicles are cheaper and more accessible. We've taken urgent action, with our Energy Price Relief Plan, to shield Australian families and businesses from the worst energy price spikes, easing costs, protecting local industry and saving jobs. To think the opposition voted against that policy! Again, thanks to them for nothing. We now have Treasury data showing our policy is working.

Another vital part of easing the cost of living is making sure people earn decent wages, because they have been stagnant for too long, and we are getting wages moving. We have successfully argued for a minimum wage increase, the first cabinet submission of the Albanese government. The coalition would not back it. They opposed it. They cautioned that the sky would fall in from a $1-an-hour pay increase for the lowest-paid workers. We are about easing the cost of living. They don't seem to be at all.

We supported the aged-care wage case in the Fair Work Commission. We've now seen an interim decision pushing up minimum wages for some aged-care workers by at least 15 per cent—dare I say it?—easing the cost of living for some of the lowest-paid workers. We passed the Secure Jobs, Better Pay legislation, modernising the bargaining system so workers can get their fair share of the national income; their share of the national income had been the lowest it's been for decades. We've introduced paid family and domestic violence leave so that women don't have to lose their jobs when they are struggling with everything it takes to leave a violent home. We are going to make sure there are gender pay equity mechanisms, improving pay for women. We've introduced Revive, a national culture policy that ensures better pay and conditions and more financial security for people in the arts industry. We'll be allowing pensioners to keep more of their income. All of these things immediately ease the cost of living.

You see, we have a vision. We have a plan for this country, which those opposite simply could not manage in 10 long, sorry years, leaving Australia in a mess. We are cleaning up that mess. Not only are we relieving cost-of-living pressures immediately but we have a plan for the longer term to repair the economy. We have long-term plans that will make life easier for everyone and ensure the cost of living continues to ease. We are so proud to have our $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund, which, along with the National Housing Accord and the homebuyer guarantee, will see millions of homes made available, making housing affordable and accessible and tackling homelessness. But they on that side of the House would not support this. Unbelievably, they would not vote for that.

We know that keeping people healthy is an incredibly important part of making sure they can live their best life, and we are reforming and strengthening Medicare, ensuring Australians can get the health care they need, when they need it, where they live. And we are introducing a National Reconstruction Fund, making sure that things are made here, securing supply chains, creating jobs, restoring manufacturing and making Australia a leader in industrial innovation. What could be more vital for the economy? They on that side of the House will not support it. Anyone would think that they want to increase the cost of living, want to keep inflation high and want households to suffer.

We will be introducing 180,000 fee-free TAFE places so that people can get the skills they need to work in the better paid jobs our policies are creating. We will make sure that financial security is front and foremost in our policies by showing fiscal restraint with mature and sensible decision-making, mature and sensible government that goes beyond colour coded spreadsheets, beyond mere political pointscoring, beyond student politics style posturing, beyond cheap social media clips collecting likes and email harnessing, beyond jobs and contracts for the boys. The best thing we can do to ease the cost of living is to be prudent ourselves with the nation's resources.

Finally, I would like to add that the vision of a fairer, more affordable and secure future will be done with the advice and counsel of a First Nations Voice to Parliament and a commitment to treaty and truth-telling, because this is a pathway to reconciliation, a pathway to lasting change. We believe that pathway to a better future is done with people, not to them. Those opposite are so quick to throw barbs, so quick to accuse us of not addressing the cost of living that people are facing, but Australians know better. Australians know that the cost-of-living crisis is due to their inept policies, their mishandling of the economy and their incompetence—

Aaron Violi (Casey, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It was Russia.

Ged Kearney (Cooper, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

He's right; I'll take that—along with other external things that are out of our control. Thank you for reminding me. Australians know we are the government of great reform. We are the government that will always look after them. They elected us to manage these challenges, and we are taking up that challenge.

Kevin Hogan (Page, National Party, Shadow Minister for Trade and Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Deputy Speaker, I want to take you back—it wasn't really that long ago—to the election campaign we had through March, April and the early part of May of last year. If you were look at the news clips and the campaign slogans, there were a few campaign slogans from the other side. If you look at the press conferences that the now government and then opposition held, and if you look at what they were putting out into their campaign paraphernalia, they were saying some very specific things.

One of the main themes they ran with was that families and people were going to be better off under Labor. Now, when people hear that they are going to be better off, it has very clear connotations to Australians that they are going to be better off financially. They were quite specific, to give them credit. I will give the now government and then opposition credit because at least they did come up and say exactly what they planned to do. They said on hundreds of occasions—I think the Prime Minister was known to say it on 50 or 60 occasions, and many other ministers said the same thing—that they had one of the most extensively modelled campaign commitments that have ever done. They weren't just making it up, they weren't just having a guess at the figure; they said they had extensively modelled, better than any opposition in the country's history, that they were going to give every family a $275 cut to their power bill.

They were even saying that after the election. Some of the ministers after the May election were then saying, 'Yes, that's right.' The Prime Minister didn't, but some others were caught out in interviews still saying that. Then, of course, there was a dawning, and the now minister for climate change suddenly said, 'Maybe things happened,' and did a bit of a slow crab walk away from it.

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Hawke.

Kevin Hogan (Page, National Party, Shadow Minister for Trade and Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The joke about the other side is they say, 'The Ukraine war!'; but the Ukraine war started before the election, sunshine! The Ukraine war was going before the election. They were saying they were going to do a $275 power bill cut when the Ukraine war was on, but suddenly after the election they say, 'The Ukraine war means we can't do it.'

The Ukraine war was going before the election. Go back and google it.

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Member for Hawke, if I say it again, you're out.

Kevin Hogan (Page, National Party, Shadow Minister for Trade and Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The other thing they talk about is supply issues, but suddenly—

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Member for Page, I'm not deaf.

Kevin Hogan (Page, National Party, Shadow Minister for Trade and Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Good point, Deputy Speaker. I couldn't hear myself because of the loudmouth over there.

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am feeling it, so let's dial it down.

Kevin Hogan (Page, National Party, Shadow Minister for Trade and Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am glad you called him out. The other thing was, those opposite talked about the Ukraine war, which started before the election, but suddenly it was a problem after the election with their power bill promise. They then said 'supply-side constraints'. Well, wasn't that put into the extensive modelling that was done? Apparently not. I would have thought that a lot of the supply-side constraints got better post COVID. Not only that but in the October budget, a few months later, they said, 'Actually, your energy bills are going to go up 50 or 60 per cent over the next couple of years.' It was exceptionally deceitful of this government. What is their solution to that? Their solution—this is a smart—to the problems with power prices is actually to cut one of the supplies to energy transmission—that is, gas. In the gas industry, many people are saying those opposite have stuffed up the supply of gas into the system. That was their solution. We will see how that plays out, but I will not put anything on it to lower prices.

The other thing the government said was 'cheaper mortgages'. Can you actually believe they said this? In April and early May, they were saying, 'We're going to give you cheaper mortgages.' Now their line is, 'There are a lot of things in train that you did that mean it is not going to happen.' Could they not see it then? They couldn't see any problems with delivering cheaper mortgages before the election, saying 'you're going to have cheaper mortgages' but, suddenly, after the election, there have been eight interest rates increases from eight Reserve Bank board meetings. Before that, the government were saying 'cheaper mortgages' but, no, there are all these things happening. Did they not see that when they were saying 'cheaper mortgages'? Again, it was exceptionally deceitful to the men and women and families of Australia.

You would think, 'Okay, the Treasurer would have solutions to this.' His solution was a waffly 6,000-word essay. (Time expired)

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

I will try to tone it down a little bit and avoid inflaming those opposite. I am happy to speak on this matter of public importance brought by the member for Bradfield. It is interesting that something that is important enough to be introduced in parliament was not important enough for the member for Bradfield to stay and listen to. I think that goes to the nub of those opposite, really. They are happy to pay a little bit of lip service to cost-of-living issues but they will not actually vote for anything that will help. This is for the benefit of the member for Casey, someone a little bit younger. There was an ad back in the eighties for Stainmaster carpet, where there is a cleaning lady for Pro Hart comes in and says, 'Oh, Mr Hart, what a mess.' You could google it or look for it on YouTube. She says, 'You have left me this mess.' Obviously, those opposite are not Pro Hart—they are more no heart—but they have left us with a cost-of-living mess—and it certainly ain't art; I can tell you that.

Let's detail how the people of Australia were left with this cost-of-living mess by those opposite and it will help them. I am really keen to help a party of government. I am all for a party of government. I have seen what those extreme parties do when they come in here, but a party of government should listen because they are a little bit lost at the moment. They do not know where they're going. The first thing they need to know is where they are. If they are going to have any hope of being a party of government again, they need to work out why they would vote against $1.5 billion in support of the cost of energy. That is a cost-of-living issue.

People opposite have told me, 'You are sheep. You have to vote where the party goes.' They are the rules of the Labor Party. Those opposite get to decide every single time they vote on an issue—every single time. They are supposedly not sheep. Nodding like goats, I see, or like some other animal perhaps—a lemming or something like that.

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Moreton.

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

Collective goats, Deputy Speaker.

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think it might be easier if you just withdraw.

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

I withdraw both the lemmings and the goats bit. Why would they vote against support for people who have cost-of-living issues if they cared about the cost of living? Look at all the other things they've voted against. They are the pin-ups for political cynicism, even voting against their own energy policy. Well done, Angus, if you can vote against your own energy policy! Sure, they had 20 of them, but that was obviously bizarre. And they turned energy into a culture war, making scientists somehow a contested area—questioning the CSIRO. It was bizarre that they would do that. As I said, they've got a free vote every single time.

Let's look at some of the other things that the Labor Party have committed to, including manufacturing industries, which will result in secure, well-paid jobs, which is actually something that is good in a cost-of-living crisis. Secure, well-paid jobs are good for national security and our sovereignty because we're making more things in Australia. How could you vote against that? What about making child care cheaper? That is good in itself, but in terms of boosting productivity we've heard that investing in cheaper child care is the lowest-hanging fruit we have. What about social and affordable housing? I can understand why some extreme hypocrites would vote against it, but why would a party that saw the housing crisis that is being rolled out across the bush, in Bundaberg, in Brisbane, in Booval—everywhere there is a housing crisis—vote against our housing policy? Remember that election campaign where the member for Grayndler held up a dollar coin and said, 'This is what we're trying to give the people of Australia,' and their economic team started frothing at the mouth, saying that it was going to end up with cats and dogs sleeping together and the end of Australian civilisation. Mathias Cormann belled the cat when he said that low wages are a deliberate design strategy when it comes to the coalition. If you're going to keep voting no, you're going to end up in the wilderness forever. Those seats are going to be painted teal for the Liberals—sit down, sunshine; I'm not finished yet!

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You've got one minute.

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

They'll be teal forever unless you can find direction.

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Take a seat, Member for Moreton. Member for Barker, you have a point of order?

Tony Pasin (Barker, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The honourable member opposite should refer to members by their correct title.

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

Sit down, sunshine.

The DEPUTY S PEAKER: Could you please sit down. I'd like to take this up now. Member for Moreton, I ask you to withdraw that comment, please. It was made twice. You know it's out of order.

I withdraw.

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Member for Barker, I have also warned you about those sorts of interjections, so you are on red alert as well.

Keith Pitt (Hinkler, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We humbly accept the apology from the member for Moreton. I think it was the acronym he was intending to use: GOAT, greatest of all time. So we forgive him.

I want to start with some quotes, and we'll play a little guessing game about who these might be from: 'Look, it's the job of the Prime Minister to deal with the challenges Australia faces and not to constantly just blame someone else.' 'As your Prime Minister, I won't run from responsibility.' 'I think you've got to accept responsibility.' I want to step up to the plate. I will accept responsibility.' 'I'll take responsibility. I'll show leadership.' And, finally, 'I think that Australians want a government that does its job, that doesn't always blame someone else, that accepts responsibility.'

Who do you think that might have been? Well, it was the now Prime Minister, the member for Grayndler. They are quotes from the now Prime Minister. Every single question time, we put questions forward to the Prime Minister, to the Treasurer, to others, about, firstly, the $275 that was promised in reductions in electricity prices and, secondly, about the cost of living, because the people that I represent, and people right across this country, are hurting. They are absolutely hurting. We have seen significant increases. The most recent report I've seen is that the cost of living is up 9.3 per cent. I genuinely do not know how they are paying their bills. We have some 800,000 mortgage holders who are going to come off fixed interest rates onto a change of rate and have a substantial change in the payments they have to make every month. We continue to ask questions about what is a serious issue, yet those opposite don't answer those questions; in fact, they find them funny on occasion. They think it's more important to have a shot at the member for Hume, for example, or others. These are serious issues for the people of Australia, and I think they will see through the answers that are being put forward, because they are not taken seriously. There is nothing that matters more to the Australian people right now than their ability to pay their bills, and it is getting harder under this government, not easier. It is getting much, much harder, not easier.

Then, of course, we come to the great champion with the great solution of Jimbonomics. Now, Jimbonomics—

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Excuse me, Member for Hinkler. I think it would be helpful for you to withdraw that comment.

Keith Pitt (Hinkler, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I withdraw it. It's a description of a particular treatise, Madam Deputy Speaker, but I withdraw it if it assists the chamber.

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you very much.

Keith Pitt (Hinkler, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We see in this 6,000-word treatise that will rebuild capitalism that the priority of the new Labor government is to change the way that capitalism has worked in the country for a very, very long time, and worked successfully. We see proposals where they can take your superannuation—as in mine, not yours, Madam Deputy Speaker—to build someone else a house but not to pay for your own house. We see proposals where investments will be about social outcomes, not returns. I'm confident that those who are out there investing in superannuation want to maximise the ability for them at the time that they retire, so that they get more benefit, so that they can live for longer without looking for support from the Commonwealth and others. With the cost of living up 9.3 per cent, I'm advised that wages are up only three per cent. That is a significant differential, and it hurts.

What happens locally is things like this. This is a story from Bundaberg today on the School Savvy program. I congratulate CatholicCare's Shari Jackson and the rest of the team, but I am absolutely appalled that it's even necessary. The School Savvy program is in its fourth year. This time round, in the first half of a week they had a thousand people utilise these services. What are these services? They're services—essential school supplies, haircuts and second-hand uniforms—provided to people who are facing significant financial pressure. The fact that we have a thousand people in my local area who need this support is an absolute disgrace. I congratulate those individuals out there working hard to make sure they help individuals who cannot pay their bills. They are taking responsibility. Our local community is taking responsibility to help those less fortunate who are really struggling, whether because of power prices, gas prices, changes in wages or massive increases in interest rates. We've seen eight interest rate increases in a row in a very short period of time, and they affect everyone who has a mortgage.

I say to those opposite: next time you have a question in question time on cost of living, don't have a shot at the member for Hume; answer the question. Tell us what the plan is and how it will be fixed.

Sally Sitou (Reid, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I welcome the member for Hinkler's empathy towards his community. It's just a shame that it has only come now that he's sitting on the benches opposite. I welcome the focus from those opposite on helping families with the cost of living. It's just a shame it's only come now you're in opposition.

Let's look at your report card from when you were in government, firstly on wages. What happened to wages when those opposite were in power? They stagnated. It was a deliberate design feature of their economic strategy. How do we know? The former minister for finance Mathias Cormann told us. Well, the strategy worked—one of the few things you were able to achieve while you were in government. Wages flatlined. During the campaign, when those opposite were given an opportunity to back ordinary workers in this country, they baulked. Low wages were so ingrained in their thinking that they refused to back a wage increase in line with inflation for our lowest-paid workers: aged-care workers, childcare workers, cleaners—those who got us through the pandemic. Those opposite wanted to deny them a $1-an-hour increase. So on wages you failed.

What have we done? We passed the secure jobs, better pay bill to get wages moving. We supported an increase in the minimum wage, an outcome that has helped around 2.7 million Australians. That's because we on this side of the House will back workers. We will back good wages. We know that the best way to fight the cost of living is to have a good, well-paying job.

There's child care. Child care is one of the biggest expenses for families with young children. What happened to childcare costs while you were in government? They climbed 41 per cent in eight years. They were taking a bigger and bigger chunk of the household budget. Some parents simply dropped out of the workforce altogether. Just last year, 73,000 people who wanted to work didn't look for work. Why? Because of the prohibitive cost of child care. So, on one of the biggest expenses for household budgets, childcare costs, you failed again. What are we doing? We are investing $4.5 billion in early education and care to make it more affordable and accessible to families—96 per cent of families will be better off—because we know that the best way to fight the cost of living is cheaper child care. It's good for kids, it's good for parents and it's good for the economy.

There's gas and electricity. Events around the world have meant that families and small businesses have had to contend with higher power prices. The war in Ukraine, disrupted supply chains and increased international demand for gas have had an impact on energy prices. We can't control those events. So what can we control? Having one energy policy, not 22 attempts, is certainly a good start, so that we can give industry the certainty they need to make long-term investments; providing government commitment to and investment in renewable energy; and providing support to a bill that brings households relief on their power bills. These are all things that we can control to help bring down the cost of energy. These are actions that we on this side of the House are taking to help households and small businesses with power prices. But, again, those opposite refuse to support it. So, on gas and electricity prices, you failed.

So let's check the cost-of-living report card for those opposite. On wages growth, those opposite failed. On the cost of child care, those opposite failed. On the price of gas and electricity, what did they do? They failed again. You failed in government, you failed during the campaign and now you're failing in opposition. Lift your game. Come over and support some of these important bills that we are putting through. That's all I'm asking of you. If you care about the cost of living, if you want to show empathy to your community, vote for and support the bills that we are putting forward.

Keith Wolahan (Menzies, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's easy to feel like this place focuses on theatre. It's easy to forget that outside these walls is the real world, a real world where, from dinner tables to water coolers to checkouts, families are asking themselves one thing: how am I going to make ends meet? It is a question that has no easy answer but prompts many more tough questions, like these: Where will I find another $18,000 in mortgage repayments? Where will I find an after-tax wage increase of $24,000 to pay for that? What will my family have to cut instead? How will I tell the kids that there won't be a camping trip this year? How will I tell them that they can't go on a school excursion with their friends? How will I tell them that we can't afford to go to the cinema, go to the football, keep a streaming service or go out to dinner as a family, and, hardest of all, that they will be spending less time with a parent because the parent has to take extra shifts? For some, how do they tell them that they might even lose their home? Others will ask: 'How will I tell them that I've let them down?' This place is about politics, but for these families it isn't. It isn't about tactics, as the Prime Minister said today in question time. These are real questions that have been spoken out loud in every corner of our nation.

In a democracy, it is vital that the losing party acknowledge and respect the result, and we do. Australians placed their trust in the Albanese government to lead our nation and to put the people first. They did so at a time when the war in Ukraine was well underway, as the member for Page pointed out. They did so at a time when we were all well aware of the supply chain challenges that occurred during the COVID pandemic. They did so, because they listened to and trusted what the Prime Minister, then Leader of the Opposition, said. He said:

And—as your Prime Minister—I won't run from responsibility.

I won't treat every crisis as a chance to blame someone else.

I will show up, I will step up, I will bring people together.

They did so because they trusted him. They trusted him when he said that costs would be lower. They trusted him when he specifically said that energy bills would be $275 lower—97 times. They trusted him when he said that mortgages would be cheaper and that families would be better off under a Labor government. Day after day in that campaign they saw the now Prime Minister look down the camera, and they put their trust in him. They trusted you, as a Labor government, at your word—that it was not just puff, that it was not just a line. They trusted you as a government that would be capable of being like a statesman and not a brawler.

So what has happened since? A cost-of-living crisis has hit them hard. Electricity prices are going up and gas prices are going up. And many who have to drive long distances to get to work are seeing prices of two dollars or more as they put petrol in their car. We have spoken many times about the Treasurer's long-form essay. It has been instructive, but not for all of the reasons he might wish. He also wrote an even longer form paper for his PhD thesis—and I won't go over that. But neither of these papers have much economics in them. Neither of them are about the national interest. What they instead offer is an insight into the focus of this Treasurer and this government—a focus on power. The clue is in the title of his thesis, 'Brawler Statesman: Paul Keating and Prime Ministerial Leadership in Australia'. It even has an entire chapter entitled 'Throwing grenades'.

This is a Treasurer, Prime Minister and government more focused on power: how power is obtained, how power is wielded and how power can be retained. In last year's campaign, the Treasurer also looked down the camera and asked Australians to take him at his word. So we ask the Treasurer and the Prime Minister to close your laptops and to take your focus off the backbench and your ambitions for further promotion. We ask you to focus on struggling families; to stand with them at the dinner table, the water cooler and the check-out and to give them comfort about those questions. Give them comfort that, as the Treasurer, the Prime Minister and the government, you can be a statesman and not a brawler. We ask you to focus on the cost of living.

Sam Rae (Hawke, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The hypocrisy of those opposite in coming into this chamber and arguing about the cost of living is absolutely breathtaking! While I have regard, as individuals, for some of those opposite, that their collective intelligence propels them to come in here as a group to argue cheap political points on matters that are either irrelevant or entirely misleading in terms of this debate is truly extraordinary.

Despite what they say, Australians are very clear on the Liberal's record on the cost of living and whether they care about it. Indeed, as my colleague the member for Reid rightly pointed out, perhaps they come in here now, dripping with empathy, but they're a decade late. They had a decade in government in which to address these issues and they made an active choice not to. In fact, in many cases, they made active decisions, such as suppressing wage growth, to inflame and expose the Australian economy and the Australian people to the cost-of-living challenges that we now face.

That can be summed up by a very simple number, despite its magnitude: a trillion dollars of debt. The Liberals have left this country with $1 trillion of debt, and there is no economic dividend for it. We don't see the returns—we don't see social or economic returns for it. In fact, what they did with that trillion dollars—that trillion dollars which belongs to the Australian people—was flood it away on various rorts, with car parks, colour-coded spreadsheets and whatnot. They lined the pockets of big business and they invested poorly in projects that, ultimately, didn't stack up because they hadn't put the work into them to determine whether they would. That $1 trillion of debt hangs around their neck, and they hate it. They get very upset whenever we raise it. It has been well covered by a whole range of respected economic and fiscal analysts. One can only draw the conclusion that it affects them at a personal level in a way that many of the social issues that we raise in this place don't.

Ultimately I think we all know that their flaccid masculinity is splintered by the self-propelled myth of their own economic competence, and it doesn't exist. It just doesn't exist. It is an utter lie on their part that they are somehow superior economic managers. History does not bear that out in any sense whatsoever. So they come in here and essentially seek to put themselves forward as having some superior sense of knowledge or belief on these matters when in fact history shows very clearly that their economic credentials are extraordinarily lacking. The sad part about that is that the Australian people are now suffering for that.

We had a wasted decade under that government. They exposed us to international pressures which are now driving cost-of-living issues. That's on top of the rorts that we talked about and the very deliberate design feature of their economy that was zero wages growth. They set us back, and it is now up to our government to try to clean up that mess and to be the mature and responsible government this country needed for the last 10 years and didn't have.

Let's talk about the drivers of inflation. They are critical to why we're facing a cost-of-living challenge. In their most recent advice that the RBA put out, they acknowledge that supply-side inflation issues are a really significant proportion of the inflation and that it is purely driven by international pressures. The war in Europe is putting pressure on supply chains. It's putting pressure on global energy prices. It is having a really significant impact on inflation here in our country.

On the independent RBA, I note that a member opposite got up and sought to carry on about whether the RBA is truly independent. I would urge those opposites to show a little restraint and responsibility when it comes to the long-term belief in our institutions and the independence of the RBA. You are the conservatives of this country, apparently, and you should have respect for those institutions. The independence of the RBA is an underpinning institutional reality that protects our economy and protects the policymaking in that space. Nevertheless, those opposite seek to undermine that to score cheap political points. The RBA have made very clear in their public advice that international pressures— (Time expired)

Aaron Violi (Casey, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would agree with the member for Hawke that the independence of the RBA is very important. It's great for him to suggest to us that we should respect their independence! I would urge him to speak to some of his colleagues who may be in the chamber and also in the caucus and ask them to maybe not verbal the independent RBA and the governor. So I thank him for that contribution. I agree that the independence of the RBA is very important, although I do need to address this standard line of political spin from the ALP that I have addressed before—the $1 trillion in debt that they like to talk about. The only challenge with that is the facts. Facts get in the way of political arguments.

The fact is that the net debt stood at $517 billion at the time this government took power, and $517 billion is a long way from $1 trillion. But we know with this government that it's all about politics and spin. I commend all those government members who stood up to talk about this because they are actually choosing to disagree with the ALP national secretary, Paul Erickson. Even their national secretary said, 'You must look like you are responding first and foremost when talking about the cost-of-living pressures.' So he even acknowledges that this government has not been focused on the cost-of-living pressures. It is really important that we listen to his words. This was his quote: 'You must look like you were responding first and foremost.' Look like? So he's not advising this government to fix or address the cost-of-living crisis. He says they need to 'look like' they're addressing it and 'look like' they're fixing it. That is the reality of this government. It is all about politics. It is all about spin. It's all about playing the game.

We've got a prime minister that's spent his whole life in this place and a treasurer who has spent his whole life in this place. The member for Menzies addressed quite well the Treasurer's focus on power, so I won't talk about that. But I will talk about the Prime Minister and his focus on power. Don't take my word for it. For my sins—it was quite an interesting article, actually, so I shouldn't say that; that's not fair—I took the time over the break to read Katharine Murphy's Quarterly Essay No. 88 from November 2022 about the Prime Minister. She spent a lot of time with him through the campaign. I think it would be fair to say that I don't think anyone in this House would disagree that, generally, the Guardian and Katharine Murphy would be more disposed to this Prime Minister than to our side. I'm going to use her quotes here. To her description of Prime Minister Albanese:

Power is his natural habitat, and he's spent a lifetime studying all its forms, covert and overt. In order of preference, Albanese is fascinated by power, politics, parliament, policy and process.

This is what the Australian people have—a prime minister that puts policy and process at the bottom of his list. This is the challenge we have. If you don't have great policies and you don't have great process, you're not going to deliver cost-of-living relief for the Australian people.

We saw that on display today. Katharine Murphy said it in November, and the Prime Minister gave us a great example of it today: when he was asked in question time about the cost of living, he insulted Australian families. He did not address the question at all, did not offer any answers for the Australian people about cost-of-living relief. What did he talk about? He talked about political process. He talked about the order people ask questions in this House. Isn't it amazing? I'll give Katharine Murphy credit; she was onto it—cost of living, and he talks about political processes. He doesn't talk about the $45 billion in off-budget spending his government has committed to, that the IMF has warned will drive inflation.

We know that if government wants to reduce inflation by around a quarter of a per cent, it needs to reduce spending by $6 billion. But we're adding $45 billion to the Australian economy in off-budget spending. That's going to be, based on those numbers, a 1.875 per cent increase in inflation—so they're driving inflation up. What's that going to do? It's going to force the independent RBA governor to increase rates. We've got the governor putting the brake on in the car and we've got this government putting the accelerator on through increased budget spending, through increased off-budget spending, all so they can play political games. (Time expired)

Louise Miller-Frost (Boothby, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think we're all aware in this place, in the other place and certainly out in the community that we have rising cost of living. Things are pretty tough out there. I have to say, having worked in the homelessness and poverty sector, this has not suddenly arisen in the last eight months. Over the last decade I have worked with people who have experienced poverty, who have been on the streets, who have a superannuation balance of $4,000, who are unemployed long-term. This is not something that's suddenly arisen in the last eight months. Quite frankly I find it incredibly offensive that those opposite would use these people and their lives and their suffering to make these cheap political points.

Now I will get back to the speech I wrote! These increases have been a long time coming, in some ways. We know the rising cost of health care has been coming for a long time. We know that, at the last election, those opposite said 80 per cent of services through Medicare were bulk-billed. We also know that's rubbish! Your primary service—which is your actual appointment—is not bulk-billed, and you have a gap payment. Then maybe you have something sutured or a lump or a bump burnt off, and that might be bulk-billed. But the underlying actual appointment is not bulk-billed.

When I talk to Australians, when I talk to people in Boothby, and I say to them, 'The opposition says 80 per cent of your medical services are being bulk-billed', they tell me they can't find a doctor that bulk-bills. I have to say, having also worked in the health sector, that I don't blame the doctors for that. The doctors know that the cost of running these services has gone up. The rebate for Medicare has been frozen. Those opposite froze it for the last six years. The doctors are under pressure.