Maria Kovacic (NSW, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I'm taking note of a question Senator McGrath asked the Minister representing the Treasurer, Senator Gallagher, about OECD data and inflation. It's not news to any of us here that, as we heard yesterday, the latest CPI data shows that the price of food has gone up by 8.2 per cent. That's for food. That's something people can't budget-cut on—food, groceries. Housing costs are up by 10.4 per cent. Insurance is up by 17.3 per cent. Electricity prices are up by 18.2 per cent, and gas by a massive 28 per cent. These are all things you can't cut out of your family budget. These are things you can't cut out of your household budget. You can maybe fill up half the tank with petrol for your car or turn off the heater when it gets a little bit less cold and you can throw on another blanket, or you might put fewer things in your trolley. But you still have to buy those things. You still need to use those things. They are needs. I remember doing commerce at school—I'm perhaps giving my age away here!—and we learnt the difference between needs and wants. The things we're talking about here are all needs.

To Senator McGrath's question, Senator Gallagher sort of just gave a mishmash of different things but particularly focused on what the former government had and hadn't done. I'm fairly new to this place but, frankly, I'm sick of hearing it. I'm sick of hearing about what other people did or didn't do, and I think the Australian public are sick of that as well. I think they're quite interested to know what this government is actually going to do in order to facilitate having the cost of living not spiralling even further out of control.

The other thing that struck me was that there were some conversations around things that this government had delivered versus things that they had inherited. Senator Gallagher made the comment that they had inherited inflation but they had delivered a surplus. I actually think there's a bit of confusion here. I think that's the wrong way round. I think they inherited a surplus and have delivered an inflationary environment, because that is what is being shown by the evidence that we have before us.

Some of the commentary that Senator Gallagher used to substantiate the fact that they had inherited inflation was very confusing to me as I stopped to think about it. She made the comment that inflation in other countries peaked earlier, so it made sense that it ended earlier. That made me think: so it peaked later here and started later here, which was kind of in line with the new government taking control of the budget and the economy here. We've heard Treasurer Chalmers say on the record many, many times that the inflationary impacts here have nothing to do with what's happening overseas; they're based on decisions that are made here. So, on that basis and on the basis of the comments that Senator Gallagher made, the fact that inflation was largely under control whilst the opposition was in government, and it has spiralled out of control whilst the current government has been in government, suggests that this is something that this government has delivered rather than inherited. But that's just my observation of some of the facts that Senator Gallagher put forward rather than answering Senator McGrath's question.

But the important thing to take note of here is that, by not answering these questions, the government are not telling everyday Australians when and how they are going to stop the pain that they are feeling. That hurt continues daily—at retail outlets when they go to buy things, or in the letterbox or the inbox when they get their electricity or gas bill or their insurance renewal. Everything is costing more. Interest rates increase because inflation is too high. Australian mortgage holders and small business borrowers can't continue to do all of the heavy lifting to curb inflation via increased interest rates. A family with a $750,000 mortgage is now paying $24,000 a year extra.