Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak on the address-in-reply to the speech by the Governor-General. The speech is designed to outline a new government's plan and vision. It strikes me as slightly ironic when you look at the government's policies before the election. Short as they were, I looked for a positive plan for Australia. Quite frankly, I could not find it. We are speaking today about the government's plan, whereas in truth this is a government that had no plan.

In fact, this government has snuck into office with the barest of policies ever taken by an opposition to an election. They did not treat the Australian people with the respect or courtesy, quite frankly, that they deserved. When you now look at some of the things that are unravelling before you, what is now occurring is the uncovering of the true nature of the government, the underlying DNA is pushing through. The Liberals and Nationals are revealing their true selves. This is not the government that the people voted in—far from it. Far from the harmless, half-baked ideas that were presented to the voters, this government is rolling out a radical agenda to unpick the nation.

We have already seen the threads of that. You see on education the work that they are now doing there. You see the work they are now doing on trade and transparency—both clearly giving you an indication of how this government is going to proceed. They have started already with their broken promises in just three short months in these three areas. On transparency we now have a cloak-and-dagger government. On trade we now have a hapless foreign affairs minister running around Asia. We will talk a little bit more about education shortly, but you can already see that they are finding how to spin a new word on better school funding.

Given they have broken promises in these areas, let's take the fair way. We must assume that other dormant, silent plans exist for this government in other portfolios. The empty rhetoric and hollow words that have been made in the address-in-reply, in the Governor-General's speech, may have gotten the government through that day. They may have been able to then outline their so-called 'plan', but in truth it is going to be a rod for their own back. You can see it very early in their speech:

My government has a clear and comprehensive plan …

We have not seen that yet.

It will be a purposeful government.

Purposeful in terms of wrecking the economy, yes.

Every day it will work in a way that is careful, collegial, consultative and straightforward, …

Can I be a little wry and say we have not seen much of that yet but I shall not hold my breath either.

You then turn to the commitments that have been made. First is the commitment to make Australia 'open for business'. It was a promise repeated often by Mr Abbott in opposition. We now have him again over the weekend on a range of radio stations. The first time, he comes out to defend Mr Hockey—nonetheless a little belated, but he obviously saw the need to rescue a drowning rat. He was trying to convince, I think, not only the public but himself too. He was really saying 'I think I can, I think I can, I think I can' when he used the phrase: 'We're open for business. We're open for business. We really, really are open for business.' I think the public can see through that. I think his actions speak far louder than his words on this issue between Mr Hockey and Mr Abbott.

The Nationals I would always call the doormats to the Liberals. In this instance they have proved me at least wrong on one issue. They have run an effective rearguard action on the Treasurer on foreign investment, and it seems as though they were victorious on this account. I think it is an empiric victory. Nonetheless, two weeks ago we had the indignity of the Prime Minister trying to influence the FIRB decision on Warrnambool Cheese by going on radio and giving a preference to particular domestic companies. Straight out of the blocks on Tuesday the Treasurer signed off on a completely different arrangement.

That was nothing, nothing, compared to the GrainCorp decision. I recognise there are many different views on this when it comes to the GrainCorp decision. I heard many of them in the previous government.

I understand there are different opinions in the community about this. I listened carefully to the now Treasurer's promise at the election. Mr Hockey promised that Australia would be open for business. Liberal Senator Dean Smith certainly agreed. In the chamber a few weeks ago he said—so this is the Liberal view:

The debate about foreign investment should not be used as a Trojan horse by those seeking to reverse the strong and obvious benefits that have resulted from the deregulation of wheat export marketing in our country.

The previous government thought that that debate had ended at that point, with the deregulation of the wheat industry and the removal of the WEA.

Mr Hockey got rolled on foreign investment—that much is plain to see. Whether you agree with the decision or oppose it, it is not what is currently before us. What is truly before us is how the government now acts in the national interest. It needs to act in the national interest and make decisions based on the national interest, not based on the National Party's interests. The business community, the agribusiness community and the public want consistency and certainty. This new government spent an entire election campaign—and probably a little bit longer, given the amount of rhetoric during the last couple of years—crowing about the need for business certainty. With the actions of the Treasurer on foreign investment that certainty had been ripped from the marketplace. Well, now we see it. What they have now done is ensure that that uncertainty will continue. You have already seen the repercussions of that uncertainty in the marketplace for GrainCorp now.

I turn to the next biggest issue than has confronted this government: education. Education reform is vital to this country. It is one of the things that I have been very passionate about. The Liberals and Nationals gave an ironclad promise. Mr Christopher Pyne's own website, Pyne online, stated the Liberals election policy in clear, stark terms. I quote:

Tony Abbott and the Coalition have confirmed that they will commit the same amount of federal school funding as the Government over the forward estimates. Every single school in Australia will receive, dollar for dollar, the same federal funding over the next four years whether there is a Liberal or Labor Government after September 7.

I will repeat the key line:

Every single school in Australia will receive, dollar for dollar, the same federal funding over the next four years …

Yesterday the Prime Minister told the public:

We are going to keep the promise that we actually made, not the promise that some people thought that we made, or the promise that some people might have liked us to make.

Mr Abbott has effectively told the Australian people: 'It's not me; it's you. That's the problem.' He has told the public that, if they make the mistake of taking the government at its word, it is their own fault. How extraordinary! (Quorum formed)

As I was saying, Mr Abbott told the public that, if they made the mistake of taking this government at its word, it is their own fault—quite an extraordinary thing to say. It is like a shonky used car salesman who blames the customer for being upset after they bought an absolute lemon. Mr Abbott is pulling funding out of schools across the country. That is the clear fact. His own conservative colleague the New South Wales education minister has called the backflip 'immoral'. Our schools deserve better, our kids deserve better and the voters deserve better than this shonky deal that this government is trying to proffer.

The rank hypocrisy of those born-to-rule types has started already to seep into this place, and I believe that they are not going to be able to temper it. They are not going to be able to do what the Governor-General's speech set out for them to do. They are not going to be able to say they are going to be careful, collegiate, consultative and straightforward. They have failed on every one of those, and we are not even into the first 12 months yet. They have not managed to be careful, they have not managed to be collegiate, they have not managed to be consultative and they are not straightforward. That is where we are: with a government that is obsessed with being opaque. This government is already showing the telltale signs of taking the punters for granted and being reckless with the economy, and the leaders of government have become obsessed with secrecy.

One of the first acts of the Labor party on winning government in 2007 was to put the ballasts under and around the economy to prepare for the coming global financial storm. One of the first economic acts of this government was to jack up the national credit card with no explanation to the Australian people. The contrast could not be starker. Before the election the then opposition leader, Mr Abbott, and the then opposition spokesperson on the Treasury, Mr Hockey, were like Henny Penny, running around telling everyone the sky was falling. On getting into office, what I can only describe as a hush fell over the government. It is the first time I have seen an incoming government so quiet. You would normally expect a little bit of hubris, a bit of, 'This is what we're going to do,' a bit of rally-rousing and a bit of good news for the troops—some good messages to come out. There has been nothing. It is dead flat. They must have either all gone on holidays or been told to shut up—one or the other. Either way, I suspect nobody was running the economy at that point, because you could tell when it stopped. When the hush stopped, the confusion started. It must have been when they picked up the levers and said, 'We ought to do something now,' because you can look at the confusion over education, over trade and foreign affairs, and over their Sovereign Borders plan—'We're not going to tell anyone about it; we're not going to talk about it; in fact we'll be silent about it, and hopefully it'll go away.' That is their plan.

The contrast between the early period of the government and now is just so stark. In fact, for most of the early weeks of the new government we heard more about the Prime Minister's bike riding, the Attorney-General's books and bookcase—or lack of a bookcase—and Mr Randle's canned safari than about the government's policies and plans for the Australian people. The transcript I have here of the Governor-General's speech will provide a useful reference for this government—because it is, apparently, their plan. It is very telling when you turn to the section dedicated to education. Their silence speaks louder than words—it really does. They do not talk about a better schools funding plan. They do not talk about how they are going to manage the education portfolio. What they talk about is how they are going to give school communities more of a say in how their schools are run, about how the government will work more cooperatively with the states—that is a laugh; they have not managed that so far, have they?—and about how, in the classroom, they are going to provide a vision for a national curriculum that is 'rigorous and challenging without being cluttered or prescriptive'. But there is nothing in the speech about funding: there is nothing about how the government are going to ensure that schools get the funding they deserve. The Pyne Online quotes are not mentioned. There is no mention of the fact that the government said before the election that they were going to meet our commitment. There is nothing about any of that in here. When you look back, you understand why it is not in here. It is not in here because the government had no intention whatsoever of doing it. Now the jig is up; it is quite plain that they do not intend to do it.

The government say about their small business deregulation plan that they will lighten the red-tape burden—they go on with their usual statements. But their solution, which we found out at estimates last, is to create little cabals—little consultative groups, unconnected and uncoordinated, right throughout all the departments—who will sift through regulatory burdens and try to remove them. I suspect that what they are actually going to do is create more bureaucracy to try to remove bureaucracy. That would, quite frankly, be a Liberal way of doing things. Coming back to this speech will be a good way to hold this government to account.

Under the heading 'Asia and the region', the speech says that the international policy focus will be on 'the advancement of Australia's core strategic and economic interests' with 'key partners' to bring a 'Jakarta, not Geneva', focus in our foreign policy. That is very true, isn't it? The government have managed to do that very quickly and very decisively! But I think what we need is a more responsible government—a government that is more meted—because this government is not showing the signs of being so at all.

We will be able to hold them to account on the following statement. To make sure that the 'moment is not missed', the Abbott government have said that they will 'fast track free-trade agreements with South Korea, Japan, China, Indonesia and India'. Time lines would be helpful here, but still we can hold them to account. I think that we do have to provide a strategic lead in the region which includes South Korea, Japan, China, Indonesia and India, and I will await with bated breath seeing the free-trade agreements come to fruition under a confused and hapless government whose foreign affairs minister is already in strife in Asia.

Their solution to everything is to create Productivity Commission reviews and white papers. They have done this on rural and regional Australia rather than come out with a clear, concise plan about how they are going to address issues in rural and regional Australia. There is no urgency—'We will take our time and develop a white paper over the next 12 months and see what happens out of that.' I think that rural Australia deserves far better. I think that rural Australia deserves a much more comprehensive and immediate plan to assist. That is what our government did when we were in government. This government thinks that it can delay it for 12 months, develop a white paper and see what comes of it after that. This rank hypocrisy is clearly demonstrated in broadband. We are going to get second-class broadband as a consequence of this government. This government does not understand that business, industry, research fields, health, hospitals and agriculture all need fast broadband.