Sue Lines (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Yes, and his own party—thank you, Senator Cameron. He could not be trusted on health. Despite his saying there would be no cuts to health, we saw the cuts from day 1. Despite his saying there was a unity ticket on Gonski—tricking the Australian voters to vote for him, believing that a vote for Mr Abbott would mean no change to Labor's commitment on Gonski; we saw those signs, and I certainly saw them in Western Australia—almost immediately upon his winning government we saw that broken promise. Very quickly it was: 'Nah. Sorry. You've voted for us. Now we've got our three years and we're not committing to Gonski.'

We saw cuts to SBS and ABC and we saw those ridiculous interviews with Prime Minister Abbott in which he tried to justify it, saying it wasn't quite a promise. The cuts were there. And then others were trying to break the bad news that it was a promise he should not have made. In fact, Mr Turnbull had to try and deal with that one. We saw the appallingly weak efforts of the Abbott government on climate change—introducing Direct Action. Not only was it a laughing stock in Australia—not supported by any kind of scientist or scientific body you would care to name—but now, after Paris, it is a joke among developed countries in the world. Was it any wonder really that backbenchers and those in marginal electorates got a little bit nervous and last year decided that Mr Abbott needed to go? So along came Mr Turnbull.

A lot is known about Mr Turnbull because he likes to talk about himself. He has been an absolute advocate for a republic. But are we going to see a republic? No, because, according to Mr Turnbull, who was the leading advocate when we had the referendum on becoming a republic, somehow things have changed. He was a leading sceptic on Direct Action and he has made well publicised comments about how useless Direct Action is and how it will not deliver, and yet what we see is that he is going to continue with that policy. It would seem that he is no longer a republican and no longer a supporter of action on climate change.

In his electorate of Wentworth there are a lot of same-sex couples, and he has advocated on their behalf as a supporter of marriage equality. But, no, he has decided—or Mr Abbott and his 44 supporters have decided—that we have to continue with this ridiculous plebiscite. Even members of the government cannot name it properly; we just heard it being called a 'referendum'. Perhaps those speaking notes that were leaked yesterday need to make sure that government backbenchers get the language right. Someone should tell Senator Macdonald that actually we are not having a referendum; we are having a $160 million plebiscite that means nothing.

What we have seen in the new year is Senator Abetz come out and say, 'We don't really care what the Australian voters think, because we're sticking to our guns and we will not vote for marriage equality'. We are a joke. There are many countries that are much more conservative and that have strong religious backing around the world who have moved on marriage equality, and yet we are dragging ourselves along, limping along. The plebiscite will deliver nothing. We do not trust the question; we have not seen it yet; we do not know when it is going to happen. There is still uncertainty.

So, for those couples who want to get married, who want to be like every other couple in Australia, it is those on the other side, it is the Turnbull government, it is Mr Turnbull himself, who are standing in the way of them and marriage equality. The time is long done. For a government that goes on and on and on about money, they are quite happy to throw at least $160 million at this ridiculous question, even though quite a number of their backbenchers have said, 'We don't really care what the plebiscite is; we are still sticking to our guns and not allowing marriage equality.'

Of course we have seen the attacks that former Prime Minister Abbott made on our health system and they have continued well and truly. In fact Mr Turnbull, who seems to think that women need supporting, over the Christmas break tried to put through changes to Medicare that would directly impact women: going after women's health, going after the diagnostic tools that are required to ensure that women are able to have pap smears so that cervical cancer is easily detected.

All of those are thanks to Mr Turnbull. They are his very own cuts. He has taken the legacy of Mr Abbott and moved it forward: Direct Action, poor policy, nothing on marriage equality, nothing on a referendum—supposedly things Mr Turnbull believes in, all crashed and burned. And now he is making his own draconian cuts that attack women directly.

I do not know how those opposite can think that it is okay to say to women, 'You will have to bear an up-front cost for a pap smear.' The thing they did not research—Turnbull government ministers do not really research very well—is that it says in the Medicare arrangements that if you are not bulk-billed for pathology and diagnostic services you have to pay up-front for them. That is a cost of thousands and thousands of dollars that they are imposing on every single Australian, particularly on women. That is who they have gone after. Is that any wonder? The Turnbull government seems to ignore women in its own cabinet and around the country. It might have put a few more women in, but it is a long way from being equal.

We saw the disgraceful behaviour of Jamie Briggs over the break. Some members of the Turnbull government tweeted, 'Never mind mate!', ignoring the fact that what he did was reprehensible and that no-one should have been supporting the disgraceful comments and actions of Jamie Briggs. Yet they did. A number of them came out in support of him. He has paid the price for that, as he should have. It is indicative of the Turnbull government, because women do not feature prominently anywhere on their agenda. Australian women, ordinary women, will pay dearly under the Turnbull government's cuts to health.

It was Medicare's 32nd birthday last year, but we know that right from day one Liberal and National governments have opposed Medicare. They think that people should somehow be paying for their own health, that it is not something that we as Australians should hold near and dear. Under Mr Fraser they tried to knock it down. They tried and tried and tried, but it is in place. Generations of Australians have taken Medicare for granted. What Australians have now learned is that under a coalition government you cannot take Medicare for granted, that the only governments that protect Medicare, that do not seek to run it into the ground, are Labor governments. We understand that health should be universal, that you should have access to health regardless of your income.

These cuts to pathology and diagnostic services will hit those who can least afford it. We know that we need more investment for pap smears, because women are not presenting for subsequent tests. Mr Turnbull's government has made it worse by saying to women that they are going to have to cop out-of-pocket expenses. What would men understand about this? They never have to have pap smears. They never have to front for the sorts of tests and for the sorts of health issues that women have. For breast cancer it is not just one X-ray that you have; it is several. It is three, four, five or six, until we get to the nub of the issue. All of those will have to be paid for up-front because of the savage Turnbull cuts. So women again will bear the brunt of these cuts. We have seen the savage attacks on women, whether it is women in the Public Service or women on parental leave being accused of being double dippers. Now it is women's health that is right there, front and centre.

Guess what? Women in our country vote, and when they go to the ballot box they will remember. They will not support the Turnbull government, which has done nothing but make life much harder for Australian women. It was a disgraceful attack on women over the Christmas break.