Sean Edwards (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

This is a very good opportunity to reinforce the competent management of the budget, this $4 billion that is part of the coalition's agreement. It can only come about through prudent fiscal management. That is what this government has always been about. It has always been about repairing the budget so that there is this kind of latitude in there, so that when you identify different policy areas that are in need you can make the adjustment. That is what the Nationals brought to the table yesterday and that is what they negotiated.

It is no secret that the National Party enjoy a great deal of popularity on the east coast of Australia. They are represented there in numbers; therefore, it is not unusual for them. That may vary down the east coast. Water is one of those issues I can talk about. Under the six years of the Labor government we saw an explosion in desalination plants. In South Australia my own experience with water is that we now have a dormant $2.3 billion desalination plant that costs $1 million a week not to operate. That was the reaction on water policy that Labor came up with. It costs $1 million a week to run a desalination plant that the government cannot afford to turn on. It is the same deal in Victoria and the same deal in New South Wales. That is what happens when government policy on water goes into the hands of people who do not understand the water requirements of the bush.

There has also been some sniping across the chamber about the fact that the National Party took the opportunity to raise the issue of extra money for families. And why wouldn't they take that opportunity. It is no secret that many National Party members in this chamber have spoken quite passionately about the needs of young families in Australia. I find it somewhat disingenuous that people in the Labor Party no longer want to represent the views of young families in this country. It is quite amazing. They are disrespectful when they call the Nationals 'the doormats to the coalition'. It is appalling. All these people were doing was raising an issue at a time when the Prime Minister felt the budget could allow that money for young families.

The issue that we have in relation to family payments could only be seen as good government policy and a policy adjustment at a time when it was appropriate. The Leader of the Nationals, Mr Truss, is a very considered fellow, a very credible fellow and one of the most sensible statesman you could meet. I am sure that when they sat down to look at this the Prime Minister looked at it in terms of how he could help. They obviously feel quite strongly about it—as they do about the effects test with small business. That has been raised as well. And Senator Dastyari, on the other side, knows that the effects test was raised with us in a recent Senate hearing. There are a lot of people raising these issues about small business, and it is quite right of the National Party to raise this. Some might say that was opportunistic. It was not. It has been raised in this chamber in recent times. Their views on it are well known, and good on them for bringing it up.