Chris Ketter (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

It's quite clear that the Turnbull government has failed Australian families. When we look at the latest Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia Survey we can see that there are growing levels of financial stress and inequality, and we are confronted with a government that either wants to pretend that the issue doesn't exist or, alternatively, comes up with ideologically-driven and misguided policies to address the issue but which ultimately end up being counterproductive.

We know that in July this year the Treasurer actually denied that inequality was getting worse. He actually came out and tried to argue the point on that. But we know that if a problem is identified by Labor, it's as if this government wants to say that night is day and day is night. What they're doing is applying out-of-touch thinking, and basically coming up with ideologically-driven and counterproductive measures, as I said.

We know that inequality is a real issue for our country. We only succeed when we succeed together. We won't see economic growth unless Australians—ordinary Australians—feel confident to spend and invest for the future. I never thought I'd see the day when we had the Reserve Bank of Australia governor coming out and saying that we have record household debt and low wage rises which are hurting the national economy, and calling on workers to demand higher pay rises in order to stimulate the economy. So when we have the Reserve Bank governor coming out and saying that sort of thing, it's incumbent on our federal government to take note and to try to come up with policies which address these issues.

We have household debt at the level of 189 per cent of GDP, amongst the highest in the world. So we have a huge issue, but what does the Treasurer say about that? In March of this year, the Treasurer actually said that low wage growth was the Australian economy's biggest challenge—which was a promising start, and at least on that occasion the Treasurer seemed to grasp that there is a problem with low wage growth. But what does this government do about the issue of low wage growth? Well, it hoes into the earnings of those who are amongst the lowest paid in our workforce. How is that any way to address the issue of low wages growth? Of course, what I'm referring to there is the Fair Work Commission's decision to cut penalty rates. That decision stands, and at the moment is on track to be inflicted on Australian workers—particularly in the retail and hospitality areas—whilst this government stands idly by, twiddling its thumbs and waiting for something to happen.

On the other hand, the Labor opposition under Mr Shorten has made our position crystal clear on this. For the benefit of those listening, I think it is always worthwhile reminding people that in the first 100 days of a Shorten Labor government, the government will take steps to legislate to restore penalty rates that have been cut under the Fair Work Commission decision. That is a very clear direction; it is a very clear policy measure to overcome the level of stress and inequality that's being experienced by Australian families.

On the other side we just see internal squabbling and policy paralysis, which is not good for our country. Australian families deserve to have a government which is focused on them, with laser-like precision. They want a government that is going to care about the pressures that Australian families are feeling. At the moment, the only pressure that the government seems to be responding to is its own internal questions about citizenship and a whole range of other issues which are distracting and not in the interests of getting the problems sorted out.

The McKell Institute has done a lot of work in relation to the impact of the penalty rates decision, and I want to go to that very quickly. I want to highlight the fact that there are some regional electorates which are worse impacted by the penalty rates cut. Some regional electorates stand to lose up to $21 million in disposable income. Regional and rural economies are subject to losing approximately $289.5 million when, as the McKell Institute says, businesses shift money previously allocated to labour costs within these regions into other jurisdictions. We know that in these regional areas retail and hospitality industries employ close to 20 per cent of the working population. Generally, a higher proportion of the rural and regional workforce is employed in retail and hospitality than the urban workforce. The data seems to suggest that a quarter of a million people will be impacted negatively solely by the Sunday rate cuts. This will concurrently affect the local economies.

Of course, the resultant lack of spending is hardly good for local communities and their economies, and all the while we're exacerbating the pressures and stresses that Australians are feeling, particularly in regional areas. One of the parts of Queensland I like to visit as often as I can is the federal electorate of Flynn, which has 2,884 retail workers and 2,458 hospitality workers. That, together with pharmacy and fast food, adds up to 5,800 workers potentially affected by the penalty rates cuts. Total income loss to the community is something of the order of $14 million from the federal electorate of Flynn. This is in an area of Queensland which is already struggling with a range of other factors, and on top of that we have disposable income being ripped out of the local economy. It's very hard to understand how that can be good for improving the situation of Australian families.

With the record-low wage growth that I talked about, we know that the government has failed to deliver for Australians. The HILDA Survey shows that median household and annual disposable income has declined for the past few years and reinforces the comments from the RBA governor that I talked about earlier. The survey has highlighted the fact that home ownership is getting out of reach. The survey shows that, for couples with dependent children, home ownership has fallen from 55.5 per cent in 2002 to 38.6 per cent in 2014.

What's this government's response to the issue of home ownership and housing affordability in general? Basically it rejects Labor's propositions in respect of negative gearing and capital gains tax and has come up with quite a strange policy which taps into superannuation and is entitled the First Home Super Saver Scheme. There is no legislation in place, but it's already out there. The ATO is sounding a warning to those people who may be contributing to their super accounts to try to take advantage of this scheme. The ATO is saying, 'We are unable to comment on policy that is yet to be enacted by the government.' This would appear to be another epic fail in a scheme that not only will not fix the housing affordability crisis but in the process and for good measure will undermine superannuation. We noted that, earlier this year, the Financial Services Council, normally the cheer squad for the government, has come out and made the point that tinkering with superannuation would undermine public confidence in superannuation.

So there are a range of findings in this report that show that action does need to be taken to address financial stress and inequality. When it comes to incomes, employment outcomes, home ownership, retirement and childcare, this government has failed to deliver. Labor has led the debate in all of these areas. We look after the interests of ordinary people, giving them a fair go with a decent safety net.