Paul Scarr (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I note that in ancient Greece there was an oracle in a town called Delphi, who travellers used to come to and ask for her view on their fortunes—what was going to happen to them in the future. On one famous occasion, King Croesus from somewhere in modern-day Turkey approached and said, 'Dear Oracle, tell us what will happen if I declare war on any neighbour?' And the oracle said, 'Well, surely a great kingdom will fall.' The king, of course, misunderstood what the oracle was saying to him, and the great kingdom that fell was the king's own kingdom, hence the oracle of Delphi's somewhat Delphic fortune telling. Then, in the Middle Ages, we had Nostradamus, the great French astrologer, who is frequently quoted in the modern day. Every time something happens, someone says, 'Well, Nostradamus predicted this.' But, of course, if one reads the poetry of Nostradamus, one can read into it what one will.

Here we are some one hour and—what time is it? I've just come back from Queensland, so I'm still on Eastern Standard Time. We're about two hours from the bringing down of the budget, and the Greens already appear to know what's in the budget. They already appear to know what's in the budget, and here we are debating what the budget provides for two hours out from the actual delivery of the budget. Fair enough; I'm happy to debate on first principles in relation to this matter. I'm quite happy to debate the Greens on first principles with respect to their philosophy and their version of equality.

Their version of equality is equality of outcome. They're levelling down; they're pulling down the successful, the entrepreneurial, those who create wealth, generate jobs, help provide prosperity, support charities. They will drag them down in the hope they can lift other people. Does this levelling process help? Has it ever worked anywhere in the world? No, absolutely not. What works is providing equality of opportunity, not equality of outcomes—providing opportunity to each and every Australian. Wherever they live, whether they live in the bush or the city; whatever their background, whether they're a new Australian or one of our Indigenous Australians; wherever they come from we want to provide them with the opportunity to access education and health, provide them with the opportunity to fulfil their potential. That's what I believe in.

That's what I believe in, and I've seen that in practice. I saw that in practice in my life before coming to this place. I saw that in a little country in South-East Asia called Laos, where the company I worked for—and the Greens would have you believe 'company' is a swear word. What is a company? A company is simply a collection of shareholders investing their capital in a common entity to progress some sort of commercial objective. That's what a company is. It comprises shareholders, employees and a range of stakeholders. It's not a swear word. The company I worked for lifted thousands of people out of poverty, provided them with training and skills, provided microfinance programs so women in the villages could bring their kids in from the fields and send them to school. That's the company I worked for. And what did that? It was the entrepreneurial spirit of investors here in Australia, investing capital, putting their faith in the management team which then went and invested that capital overseas and provided those opportunities to some of the poorest people in the world.

That's what I believe in: opportunity for all and support for those in need. That is a fundamental, core LNP value. It goes out on LNP emails with notices of meeting: 'opportunity for all and support for those in need'. It is support which is provided by wealth generated from entrepreneurial activity, which generates tax income and also provides people with the ability to contribute to charities of their choice and do their own lifting in their own communities.

Yet we have the Greens, in this modern-day, socialist articulation, seeking to drag our society down. We don't have to look further than Venezuela to see how these utopian policies work out. In Venezuela we have a modern day living hell for the people of that once-affluent country. I want to quote from a journalist I regard highly. His name is Anatoly Kurmanaev and he has written extensively on Venezuela. He spent five years in Venezuela and he has observed that what he saw in Venezuela was worse than anything he'd seen in the old Soviet Union as it was collapsing. I'll quote from an article he wrote:

By the end of 2018, it—

that is, Venezuela—

will have shrunk by an estimated 35% since 2013, the steepest contraction in the country's 200-year history and the deepest recession anywhere in the world in decades. From 2014 to 2017, the poverty rate rose from 48% to 87%, according to a survey by the country's top universities. Some nine out of 10 Venezuelans don't earn enough to meet basic needs. Children die from malnutrition and medicine shortages.

…   …   …

Caracas has long been a dangerous yet vibrant city, but the crisis has transformed it into a zombie movie set. When I moved into my neighborhood of Chacao, in the eastern part of the city, the streets were full of food stalls, cafes and shops run by Portuguese, Italian and Syrian immigrants. Groups of young and old stayed in the streets drinking beer or chatting into the small hours.

But Chacao's streets are now empty after dark. Most of the streetlights no longer work, and the only people outside after 8 p.m. are homeless kids rummaging through garbage bags.

There is your socialist utopia; there it is in action. There is the result of your politics of envy. There is the result of the ultimate equality: equality of misery doled out by government officials, who are the only exception to that rule.

I can predict the principles upon which the budget to be delivered tonight will be framed. I can do that because I can draw upon the track record of this government. I know it will be a responsible budget. I know that economically it will seek to target those who most need assistance at this point in time. I know that because of the way the government has responded to the COVID-19 pandemic, and the principles which the Prime Minister put in place back in March have been adhered to. Any government policy has been targeted, temporary, proportionate and scalable. There haven't been any pink batt disasters under this government's watch, no overly expensive school halls and no cheques sent out to dead people. It's been targeted spending using existing delivery services. I know that the driving force behind the budget will be a desire to make sure that people currently in a job get to keep that job and those who don't currently have jobs have the opportunity to find a job as quickly as possible.

I would like to make a few comments in response to Senator Pratt's remarks. I'd say to her that what she said does not reflect my experience on the ground in my home state of Queensland. I can draw on some experiences in just the last week which draw out the truth of the matter. A week ago I visited a building site where the land developer said their new sales of land had fallen off a cliff in March. When the government introduced its HomeBuilder subsidy, they went from a pre-COVID rate of sales of 20 per month to 100 sales in six weeks. It was absolutely transformative. As soon as a vacant lot of land in the greater Brisbane region is released, it is snapped up by, in many cases, first home buyers. So that policy is working. That targeted policy providing support to one of our most fundamental industries is working.

When I visit charities and assistance organisations throughout the region on which I focus, I also see the impacts of the Australian government's support in terms of emergency food relief and other aid which is being provided to the most vulnerable in our society. I expect that principle of opportunity for all and support for those in need to be reflected in the budget which will be delivered by the Treasurer this evening.