Gary Humphries (ACT, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

The hallmark of this government’s performance in the last 11 years has been unswerving attention to the state of the Australian economy and the capacity to manage the basic economic conditions facing Australians in a way that builds up the resilience of the Australian community through having a strong and secure fiscal outlook. What we have done with that has also been a very important part of our economic management. It is important to state that we have never seen the maintenance of good budget circumstances, the reducing of debt, the elimination of deficits or other good hallmarks of economic management as ends in themselves. We have seen these things as ways of delivering opportunities in two senses: firstly, opportunities for individuals, families and businesses in the Australian community to pursue ways of creating wealth, making those organisations and individuals self-sufficient and self-reliant; secondly, opportunities on the part of government to generate stronger safety nets for those people who are unable to take advantage of those marketplace opportunities of which I have just spoken. That is what this budget, I believe, demonstrates very clearly.

The matter of public importance before us today makes reference to tax cuts and payments to strengthen or support Australian families and carers. We look at this document, this budget, and see very clearly that we have pursued that philosophy. We have strengthened the economic conditions to continue to create opportunities out there but we have also strengthened the Australian safety net. As far as tax is concerned, this budget continues the trend of the last five Australian budgets, which have delivered tax cuts to the Australian community. That is on top, of course, of the very important tax cuts delivered in the 2000 budget, which was part of the new tax system around the GST.

The aggregate impact of personal income tax since 2004-05 is that a taxpayer on $30,000 has had their tax liability cut by 45 per cent since that time, and a taxpayer on $40,000 has had their tax liability cut by 23 per cent. That does not just compensate for bracket creep; that goes beyond bracket creep and delivers real buying power into the hands of Australians. It has done so as a pattern over the last six or so budgets. Since 2000, every tax rate has been cut and every threshold has been increased. It used to be the case that once their income exceeded $50,000 a taxpayer faced the top tax rate, but from 1 July next year that top tax rate will be incurred at $180,000.

This budget has been described as a budget that delivers a number of benefits to the Australian community, but they have been described in the matter of public importance debate as one-off. I want to run through some of the things the budget delivers to strengthen the support available to Australian families, to carers and to those people who are unable to take advantage of the good economic conditions. Let me run through them. There is $2.1 billion for childcare incentives, an increase in the rate of childcare benefit of over 13 per cent. That is not a one-off benefit. Payment of the childcare tax rebate has been brought forward. Necessarily, that is one-off, but there is also an additional $71.3 million for the inclusion support subsidy program for children with high needs. That is not a one-off initiative. There is $43.8 million to provide further financial support to kids in rural and remote communities. That is not a one-off initiative. There is $1.4 billion for seniors. There is $406.8 million for carers, which includes a one-off bonus of nearly $400 million, but an extra $6 million is in there for people needing immediate and short-term respite. That is also not one-off. There is $81.1 million to support volunteers, with an extension of the volunteer small equipment grant program. There is $128 million for disability services. There is $12.2 million over four years to increase the level of services delivered through the National Disability Advocacy Program. That is also not one-off. There is $116 million to ensure that up to 18,000 people with disabilities will be able to access employment services. That is also not one-off. The list goes on.

I think we make the point that these provisions are sustainable, are continuing and are about strengthening the support that Australian families and carers receive. That is all important. It is very important to have an effective safety net but, as I said before, it is also important to make sure that the general economic conditions sustain a sense of people being self-reliant and able to fend for themselves in an active and vital Australian economy. In a sense it is like the drought. What would you rather have to fix the drought—good measures to provide for emergency assistance to those who need it or rain? The Australian government has, in a sense, provided that rain through strong economic management over the last 11 years, but we also have an effective emergency net.

Our record has been outstanding, and I think it is fair in those circumstances to again contrast what we have done with what the Labor Party in office did in the same circumstances. Their record was falling real wages, high interest rates and high unemployment. How did any of that help families under financial pressure—the ones referred to in this matter of public importance debate? How did it help them? Of course, it did not. It created more families under financial pressure. There is nothing more important in our environment today than relieving financial pressure on families by creating opportunities for jobs, and that is what we have obviously done in spades.

A strong economy and fiscal discipline provide jobs, provide the capacity to increase services and family payments, and provide the ability to make sure that there is a real dividend to communities. Unlike what the Left of the Labor Party would have us believe, a strong economy is not only compatible with social justice but also essential for it. Productivity is important as part of that debate, but again I ask: where is the Labor Party on that issue? Where has the Labor Party been on all the big productivity issues and debates in the last decade? Where was the Labor Party, for example, on the critical question of water? (Time expired)