Mary Fisher (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

The key to maintaining a responsible economy and increasing housing affordability is having the experience and responsibility to run a prosperous economy. The Howard government in 11½ years has delivered unemployment at an all-time low, low interest rates and low inflation. The key to housing affordability is the release of affordable land by state governments. It is the reduction of the impost placed upon the cost of housing by state governments. The Howard government has both the experience and the policies to make a difference in the foreseeable future. On top of the Howard government’s experience, the Howard government has already talked about an audit of Commonwealth lands. The Howard government has talked about seeking expressions of interest in respect of public housing.

What is the alternative? Is there really one? The Rudd opposition would have the Australian electorate believe that there is one. But the Rudd opposition is a team of inexperience backed by, infiltrated by and dictated to by a union movement. What Rudd opposition policy will deliver a difference in terms of interest rates? What Rudd opposition policy will deliver a difference in terms of housing affordability? The Rudd opposition, and Kevin Rudd in particular, would have you believe that he cares. But Kevin Rudd and the Rudd opposition care about one thing—they care about winning. I do not see that they care about governing because I do not see their policies to deliver low interest rates. I do not see their policies to deliver affordable housing. Instead, I see a Rudd opposition that would turn to their union bosses to look for policy to take Australia forward, were there ever to be that very horrifying prospect of a Rudd government.

To see this writ large you only need to look at my home state of South Australia where, as has been outlined earlier today, new homebuyers—mum and dad buying their first home costing about $300,000—face a state stamp duty impost, straight to the Rann Labor government, of some $11,000. They have to scrimp and save for it in addition to the $300,000 purchase price. What does a Rann Labor government do with the money that it takes from taxpayers? It finds a way to funnel part of that money back to its mates in the union movement. Look no further than the Rann Labor government’s so-called initiatives to increase safety in South Australia’s workplaces. I am talking about the South Australian Rann government’s recent granting of some $3 million over three years to South Australian unions—to some 12 unions—supposedly to increase safety in South Australian workplaces, with no evidence that this would be the case.

Have a look at the 12 unions to whom this money has been given. Interestingly, five of those 12 unions were amongst the top 10 donors to the Rann-led Labor Party in South Australia in 2005-06. So it is a take from taxpayers by a Labor government that finds its way in terms of finances back to the union movement so that the Labor Party can ensure that it looks after its union mates and so that it can ensure, whether at state or federal level, that it focuses on winning rather than governing. The Labor Party focuses upon returning favours to its union mates so that when they are looking for some policy direction they know where to go, and they go straight to their union mates. We need look no further than what is happening in South Australia. It would appear that the Labor Party is set to welcome a Mark Butler from the LHMWU. (Time expired)