Andrew Bragg (NSW, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

It's a pleasure to be able to rise and make some comments about this particular matter of public importance. Without questioning the sincerity of any of the prior contributors, I will try to make this statement free of any political talking points, because I think people are over the bickering. I think people are over politicians whingeing about other politicians. When they look at this period in a few years—maybe even in a few months—I think people will look at the comparative data and they will say, 'Well, Australia went into the pandemic and came out with a pretty low death rate and a pretty low infection rate compared to other jurisdictions, and the economic disruption was minimised through a huge stimulus program and, because of that huge fiscal stimulus program, there wasn't enormous, sustained loss of employment.' On those key metrics, I think people will say that Australia tracked fairly well through the pandemic.

I think they'll say that the innovation of the national cabinet was largely a success, because it enabled there to be discussion and coordination across the Australian governments. I think people have learned the hard way—if they didn't already know it—that Australia's Constitution does disperse power quite significantly. Sometimes that works; at other times it doesn't. I think people will be rightly frustrated with the restriction on movement, and state premiers and leaders of the states will be accountable to the public that elected them for their decisions. I don't seek to run a commentary on any of the states; I think there has been enough of that. There have been different approaches used.

In terms of my own state, which I represent, I think Sydney had some unique characteristics going into the pandemic. As Australia's global city and as the city that carried 85 or 90 per cent of the quarantine, it was always likely to have the sort of exposure that we saw when the delta variant slipped into Sydney. That then subsequently spread around parts of the eastern states. The first point to make is that, comparatively, I think you'd have to say that our institutions held up pretty well when you look at the key metrics. In relation to the modelling and the national plan, there is a sensitivity analysis available on the website and there are the key assumptions. That plan, you'd have to say, is working. Consistent with the broad outline of the plan, New South Wales has hit 70 per cent and 80 per cent, and it is now reopening. In fact, without wanting to date this contribution too significantly, you'd have to say that, with the case numbers coming down, it has been a pretty good example of what you would have hoped could be achieved.

People will rightly look at the major health initiatives—how the health policies were managed and deployed. When the books are written, people will look at hotel quarantine and they'll look at the vaccination rollout. Then people will look at the border policies and the like, and they will be free to make their assessments. I'm more interested in the economic policy because I think that is where, frankly, there have been some very unusual steps taken—steps that I would support. But I would say that the amount of debt that has been accrued has been justified in the sense that, if that debt hadn't been accrued, I'm not sure there would have been the sort of bounce-back that we would expect. And, following the early-1990s recession, the Treasury advice has generally been that you do need to spend a lot of money to avoid a lasting recession. And we didn't want to see, as a consequence of this huge economic shock, a generation of people unable to work again. I think that is what JobKeeper has been able to do as a wage subsidy program.

I will make a political statement here. The Labor Party attacks JobKeeper, but JobKeeper was ultimately the lifeline that kept small businesses intact. It was the program that most Australians would say got them through the pandemic. There's no question that, in many cases, people who work for the public sector or in big business have had quite a good pandemic. If you can walk into your kitchen and stick your laptop on the bench, you've probably had a pretty good pandemic compared to people in personal care sectors—beauticians, barbers or travel agents. These are the businesses that really rely on this kind of support. So, when the Labor Party attacks JobKeeper, the people who most heavily relied upon that scheme will think, 'Hang on. That scheme actually saved my business. It saved my livelihood. It was hugely successfully.'

Ninety nine per cent of the businesses which achieved the eligibility threshold for JobKeeper were small businesses. That is a fact. So, when the opposition parties talk about wanting to have some sort of a clawback mechanism for JobKeeper, what they're saying is—