John Williams (NSW, National Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the so-called stimulation package that the government has proposed—or could we call it the debt package? I go back to 15 September last year, when I presented my maiden speech in the Senate. I intend to quote from it. I drew an analogy between running the family farm and running the nation. I said:

The family farm cannot carry too much debt; otherwise, when the tough times strike, the farm will be in financial trouble. So too with our nation. If governments build debt, they are mortgaging our children’s future away. It pleases me that the previous government paid off our huge debt. This is something that as a nation we can be proud of. It is surely the envy of many.

Here we are today with a Labor government once again in charge of the chequebook. Let us have a good look at what they are doing. They propose to spend $42 billion—$42,000 million in borrowings—on propping up the nation’s economy. Let us have a look at another analogy. We have what greed and reckless, foolish lending by financial institutions has caused around the world, especially in America. Now we face a situation where our economy is like a tyre with a puncture, and it is losing air and going flat. On 8 December the government released $10 billion-odd to blow into that tyre to inflate it. What happened to that $10 billion? We in the coalition supported it because it was money for our pensioners, money that we had called for for weeks or even months. We thought it was a disgrace that single pensioners were trying to survive on $273 a week and said they should receive some assistance. That is why we supported the package. But even with the $10.4 billion splashed around last December the tyre went flat. Now we have a situation where Mr Rudd and Mr Swan are going to inflate the tyre with $42 billion, and we know that in the months to come the tyre will go flat. What are they going to do then? Are they going to just keep borrowing and borrowing? It amazes me that the stimulation bills before the Senate allow the government to borrow up to $200 million.

Let us have a look at Labor’s history and at this stimulation package. We have $14.7 billion for our schools. Of course I support money going into our schools. It was a coalition government that brought in the Investing in Our Schools program to put in money because of state Labor governments neglecting our schools. I think $14.7 billion is too much. Let us look at the next item: $8.2 billion of handouts, $950 for all of those who have a gross income of less than $80,000. Going back to the package in December, I was amazed when one of the returned services clubs told me that in the week after 8 December they took an extra $46,000 through their poker machines. I was also amazed that one liquor outlet had customers ordering pallets of beer—not a carton, not a couple of slabs but pallets of beer. This is stimulating the economy the Rudd way. It is foolish, stupid spending that will only backfire. So we have a system being introduced by those opposite where if you are on $78,000 a year you are going to be handed another $950.

Thankfully, since 3 September we have had a four per cent reduction in interest rates, which has helped many of those people in business and farming and those with home loans. Because of the world meltdown, we have had a reduction in fuel prices. That has also helped. But I was amazed when my chief of staff, Greg Kachel, informed me that while speaking to his 21-year-old daughter last night she had said, ‘The money would be good but who’s going to pay it back and at what interest?’ This is how a typical young person, one whom I might add is apolitical, reacts to this package.

Let us go on a bit further. Let us say you are on $95,000 a year, a huge amount of money. You will get $300. Well, that will stimulate the economy, won’t it! This is just crazy. Let us have a look at rural Australia. Let us have a look at our farmers, who have suffered drought since January 2002. They are going to get a paltry $20.4 million out of a $42 billion package. Those in exceptional circumstances are going to get $950. Now $950 will buy you a tonne of fertiliser. Those over the other side would not understand the cost of fertiliser and the cost of running a farm. One tonne of fertiliser usually goes over 15 to 20 acres, so when you are sowing 3,000 or 4,000 acres of wheat it is a drop in the ocean. However, it will help to pay the phone bill, the utilities bill and the grocery bill, and I welcome that; something is better than nothing for those who actually feed our nation.

Let us go on to the 2.7 million homes that will have batts put in their ceilings, at up to $1,600 a house. I am going to tell you a little story. A very good friend—a very close friend; there is probably no-one closer, as we plan to marry in April—has a wooden home in the little town of Bingara. A couple of years ago Nancy put batts in the ceiling of her house. It has made the house substantially worse, and I will explain why. When you have a stone or brick home, your walls are insulated pretty well, but with a timber—cypress pine—home the heat comes in during the day through the walls and, because of the batts in the ceiling, cannot escape at night through the ceiling. The house is substantially hotter at night during summer because of the batts in the ceiling. That is a fact. I know and Nancy knows. If she had it her way and we had time we would probably pull the batts out. In a wooden house it is a waste of time and a waste of money, unless you do the sides of the house is well. But, if you are going to pull the HardiePlank off cypress pine, you are going to split every panel and it is going to cost you a fortune. So do not think that the batts in the ceiling are going to be the magic wand that will save the economy, give everyone a job and save a swag of greenhouse gas and electricity, because it will not. I know it through personal experience.

Let us move on to this $42 billion package, and I will explain why I will not support it. Our hospitals in New South Wales are in disarray. It was one Kevin Rudd who promised the Australian people prior to the election that the buck would stop with him and that he would fix our hospitals. Go out to Dubbo and explain to the people of Dubbo in western New South Wales that their hospital is fixed. There is actually a rally planned for Friday the 13th—what a suitable date—for the people of Dubbo to protest the conditions of their hospital. Let me tell you about their hospital. It is in the board of Greater Western Area Health Service of NSW Health—one of those magic, great boards that Bob Carr introduced—and it is another failure. Gilgandra and Coonabarabran hospitals, remember, had the meat cut off—they could not pay the butchers’ bills. Now we find that the security companies have not been paid and have threatened to walk out. This is where the doctors borrow the bandages from the local vet so they can actually bandage their patients. This is fixing the hospitals, Rudd style! We have a doctor practising in Bingara who was in the Dubbo area previously. He is owed $50,000 for his services by the Greater Western Area Health Service and cannot get paid. He has had to move out of the area, borrowing against his home loan to keep himself afloat. This is the hospital system that Mr Rudd is going to fix. It is an absolute disgrace. What is in this $42 billion package for our hospitals? The answer is simple: there is nothing in it at all.

What about our aged-care facilities? Haven’t we got an obligation to look after our elderly? Imagine an elderly lady in an aged-care facility in a country town—her husband went to war; they battled through the hard times. These aged-care facilities are doing it so tough they have threatened closure. Surely this parliament, this nation, has a huge obligation to look after aged care. What is in it for them? There is not one cent in it for them. But for someone on $78,000 a year it is: ‘We will give you $950. Go and have a night at a restaurant, buy a heap of booze, do what you like—that will help us.’ But do not look after our elderly.

What about our pensioners? How long have we fought here in our parliament to help our pensioners? As I said, we supported the package last December because it actually helped our pensioners and our carers. What is in this package for our pensioners? Nothing. A single pensioner has got to survive on $273 a week. How can you survive on that? These elderly pensioners, who have done so much for our nation, now live on or below the poverty line. What is in this package for them? Not one red cent. But I tell you what is coming: it is the big bill on the MasterCard. It is coming because Labor is in charge of the bank.

Let us have a look at Labor’s history. Let us go back to the late 1980s and 1990s. Let us look at our states. Victoria went broke, with $60 billion of debt under Labor; South Australia went broke; Western Australia went broke; Tasmania went broke; and, had it not been for the Greiner-Murray governments in New South Wales, it would have gone broke as well. They were conservative governments that actually kept the show on the road. Queensland did not go broke because they had 30 years of National Party government and were debt free. That is what got them through the tough times. That is a fact. I know the truth might hurt some around here, but that is a fact. They were debt free. Being free of debt is something that the Labor governments in Queensland inherited. The government in this place inherited it, too. But we are no longer debt free.

Let us look at the time of the Hawke-Keating government. I remember the big blue when Mr Keating wanted to become Prime Minister. The little squabble started and grew into the big squabble. They introduced a Treasurer by the name of John Kerin. We had him in primary industries; you would be familiar with the bloke. He budgeted for a $3 billion deficit. At the end of the year it was $10 billion, three times the amount. That is not even a good guess. We have people here now saying that they are economically responsible conservatives. The Australian people know differently, because they know the past of the Labor Party managing money, and that is what it is all about. I have no doubt that we are in for a tough year—