Matt O'Sullivan (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I take pleasure in rising today to actually address this issue that Labor senators are raising in this place. What the government are proving is that we're ambidextrous in our ability to deal with the challenges of the supply of vaccine, our ability to connect with reality—something that we don't see much on the other side of the chamber. Professor Murphy said that it is absolutely vital for Australia to be prepared for variants of the coronavirus, and the Moderna deal which has been announced provides extra diversity and redundancy in the country's vaccine arsenal. This is phenomenal. This is great. We know that there have been supply constraints. We know that there have been issues, and it's your ability to deal with them when they arise—and that's what this government is proving: its ability to adapt, to shift, to work towards solutions. And that's what our Prime Minister and our health minister and the other great officials that are involved in negotiating terms and negotiating deals are doing to see the delivery of these vaccines.

What the Morrison government is doing is proving its ability to be ambidextrous, to modify, to adapt as the circumstances change, and Australians can make sense of this. They get that. They respect the fact that, when circumstances change, you have to shift, you have to adapt and you have to move quickly. This is what the Morrison government has done in terms of this vaccine. With the announcement of an agreement for the Moderna vaccine, which secures a further 25 million doses, the total number of doses of vaccine that are going to be available to Australians has now increased to 195.4 million. That provides us with options. If there are issues, we can shift to others. There is opportunity that has been provided here by this government.

Sadly, Labor have proven yet again their inability to adapt. They come in here with their same old and tired tactics of fear and cynicism in some misguided attempt to score some political point, but really they have no clue. All they're doing is just revealing that they don't have a clue about what Australians care about, because if they did then they would be coming in here and asking questions and inquiring about the very substantial budget statement that was delivered by the Treasurer. Labor's ability to adapt and move to where we need to go is really in question right now. It's a question that's before Labor and Labor members and people that support the Labor Party when they're looking at what Labor's position is.

What will they do with the third round of tax cuts that this government has put forward? Where's Labor's position on this? Will they be ambidextrous? Will they present themselves with the ability to move and to shift and to recognise the times that we're dealing with? Australians care about this. This is something that Australians want to see. They want to be able to take home more of the money that they earn, but there is deathly silence on that side. We're not hearing what Labor would do. Mr Frydenberg said that if the opposition leader abandoned the government's tax cuts, which would abolish the 37 per cent tax bracket, leaving earnings between $45,000 and $200,000 taxed at 30 per cent, this would create a system that was unaffordable, and we must create a stronger system. Mr Frydenberg said that the Labor Party has not said if they have committed to stage 3. Even though at the time it passed through the parliament they said that they supported these tax cuts, there has been silence from the opposition leader. There has been silence from Labor senators as they've come and hid in this place.

If they abandon stage 3, it would mean that somebody on $80,000 a year, a middle-income earner, would be $900 a year worse off. These are the issues that Australians care about. These are the issues that are front of mind when Australians are working very hard and working hard to pay their bills. They want to know: can they keep more of the money that they earn? Where's Labor's interest in the Australian people, I wonder?