Christopher Back (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

The age of hypocrisy is with us, and it will be here whilst this opposition is on the other side. The question of the age of entitlement has been raised by Treasurer Hockey, and it caused me to reflect on when the age of entitlement began. For those young enough and, perhaps, for those whose memories go back, the age of entitlement in this country commenced with then Prime Minister Gough Whitlam. It was during the Whitlam years, and from the Whitlam years, that in this country we saw the creation of, and then the maintenance of, the age of entitlement. We saw a Whitlam government that said to everybody—whether it was with money that they had, or with money that they borrowed, or, indeed, with money that they were to illegally borrow offshore from one Khemlani and his scaly mates—that the age of entitlement in this country started. I think it is absolutely amazing. It is good fortune, indeed, that Mr Whitlam lived long enough to see a government worse than his own. That government has been the last six years of the Rudd, followed by the Gillard, followed by the Rudd governments in this country.

When I speak of the age of hypocrisy, I find it absolutely amazing that the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate, in fact, the then finance minister of this country during a Labor government, could come in here and lead the speeches on behalf of the opposition about apparent vicious attacks on low- and middle-income Australians. The age of entitlement is over. It started with the Whitlam era and it is over with the Abbott and Hockey terms.

I can explain to you, for those who are not knowledgeable in this area, that in 2007 this Labor Party inherited no net debt in this country. We were probably the only developed country in the world that had no net debt. It had $20 billion to $30 billion on account of taxpayers' money. Mr Costello, after having paid back the $96 billion of Mr Keating's debt, then had some $6 billion of saved interest which he could spread into the Australian economy at the time. Where are we now in contrast to that no deficit, no debt and no interest being paid? Indeed, there was about $1 billion a year interest coming in. Isn't that amazing that an Australian government could ever have $1 billion of interest coming in?

Let us contrast that with what Labor left us in September last year. There was $190-plus billion of accumulated deficits and there was a debt rushing to $667 billion. But the figure that I want people to focus on is that we are currently paying interest alone of nearly $1 billion a month.

Let me put that into perspective for people: that is $30 million a day, every day of the year. What does it equate to? It costs $15 million to build the new primary school that is close to my office. A new primary school in Australia every 12 hours is what we are foregoing as a result of paying the debt. The new Fiona Stanley Hospital, a major teaching hospital in Perth, cost two months worth of interest on the debt—not repayment of the debt but interest on the debt. Imagine that, a new teaching hospital in every major city in this country every two months. But no, that money has been foregone as a result of the haphazardness, the hypocrisy and the poor management by the then Labor government. But worse than all that is the fact that what they squandered was borrowed money, money from lower-income families, money from middle-income families, money from high-income families and money from business. They borrowed against the future grandchildren of this country. And Senator Wong has the audacity to come in here this afternoon and talk about a vicious attack on low- and middle-income Australians when what the Labor government left us with was debt into the future and interest payments well and truly taking away from the very needs of all Australians, but particularly low- and middle-income Australians.

The opposition, together with the Greens, have in this place twice now refused to allow this government to do what it said it would do in a mandate to the Australian people and that was to get rid of the carbon tax. Which families are those most affected? The lower- and middle-income families, who would immediately have a $550 per year burden lifted from their shoulders in direct costs apart from all of the other indirect costs that we see coming through.

If you wish me to be specific about what this government did provide in the budget last night, Mr Kevin Andrews, the finest minister that this country has probably had—certainly in recent times in the social services area—delivered $19.3 billion to support families with the cost of living through family tax benefits. So we apparently have, from Senator Wong, a vicious attack on low incomes. There will be $19 billion for families through the family tax benefit—targeted, however, to those who actually need it. There will be $28.6 billion to maintain current childcare rebates and childcare benefits. The paid parental leave scheme paid for by business, not paid for by the tax payer, will help women have their children and spend that necessary time with them before they go back into the workforce. There will be a new $750 annual supplement for single parents for each child aged six to 12 years. Single parent families will receive $750. That will benefit some 86,000 families—through you, Mr Deputy President, to Senator Siewert, who has an interest in this.

The family tax benefit part B for children under six years of age will phase out but it will have a grandfathering clause. From 1 July 2015, we will see the primary earner threshold for families to be eligible for family tax benefit part B reduced from $150,000 to $100,000. It is a large family supplement that recognises those families with four or more children. Child care, as I mentioned, will receive $28.6 billion.

Recognising the importance of volunteerism in civil society in this country, the government has announced that we will abolish the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission, a body that simply put red tape around the very necessary and voluntary work of so many people in our communities. The government is investing $6 million over four years to re-establish the community business partnership to promote the culture of giving and volunteering, which we know is so often directed at low- and middle-income earners. For the aged, there will be strategies to keep people in their homes. Ninety-two per cent of aged people do not go in to aged care. Opportunities and funding will keep people in their homes where they want to be.

In the education space, there will be $20,000 loans for young people to do apprenticeships. We will increase the opportunities for young people to get access to universities through Commonwealth scholarships and the like. We see right through this budget the excellence of the Abbott government and we also see the fact that the age of entitlement is indeed complete— (Time expired)