Helen Kroger (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek leave to incorporate for the information of honourable senators the Leader of the Opposition's response to the budget speech delivered by Mr Abbott in the House of Representatives earlier this evening.

Leave granted.

The speech read as follows

Tonight, I want to directly address you, the Australian people.

While it's easy, and understandable, that you should be pessimistic about this government, everyone should be optimistic about our country.

Our health researchers have saved hundreds of millions of lives through breakthroughs in everything from infectious diseases to cancer vaccines to ulcer treatments.

Our military personnel stand ready to protect people in some of the world's worst trouble spots.

Our universities are educating the future leaders of our region.

Our musicians, artists, actors and film-makers are making their mark all over the world.

Our resource exports have helped hundreds of millions to move from the third world to the middle class.

And, with the right product, our manufacturing, too, is capable of competing with the best in the world, even with the high dollar – as demonstrated by Cochlear, Blackmores, Murray Goulburn and RM Williams, whose boots I'm wearing tonight.

We are a great country and a great people let down by a bad government.

Bad governments always pass.

What should never dim is our faith that Australia's best years are ahead of us.

So my purpose tonight is to assure you that a Coalition government will do what's needed to restore the hope, reward and opportunity that should be your birth right.

Our Real Solutions Plan will build a strong and prosperous economy for a safe and secure Australia.

Margie and I know the pressure that every Australian – that each one of you – is under.

We're not crying poor but we run a household with power bills, rates, health and education costs to be paid all the time.

Margie runs a community-based occasional care centre which has to live within its means just like every small business and every family.

Governments' first job is not to make your life harder.

But this government has – with its carbon tax, broken promises, and skyrocketing debt.

Australian families are paying for this government's mistakes yet all you ever hear from the Prime Minister and the Treasurer are excuses and promises to do better next time.

Should the Coalition win the election, there will be no nasty surprises and there'll be no lame excuses.

No surprises and no excuses.

The Coalition's Plan has two objectives: first, to take the budget pressure off Australian households; and second, to strengthen our economy so that, over time, there's more to go round for everyone.

Only by delivering a strong economy can government deliver a sustainable National Disability Insurance Scheme and better schools.

You need certainty to plan your future and you need cost of living relief.

So tonight I announce a major initiative to ease the financial pressure on Australian families.

A Coalition government will keep the current income tax thresholds and the current pension and benefit fortnightly rates while scrapping the carbon tax.

The carbon tax will go but no one's personal tax will go up and no one's fortnightly pension or benefit will go down.

So with a change of government, your weekly and fortnightly budgets will be under less pressure as electricity prices fall and gas prices fall and the carbon tax no longer cascades through our economy.

This will strengthen our economy – because there'll less tax hitting Australian businesses but not their overseas competitors.

And it will help families – because you'll have tax cuts funded by smaller government, not by taking money out of one pocket to put it in the other.

Our plan starts with recognition of economic reality.

Government doesn't create wealth; people do.

Government doesn't spend its own money; it spends your money.

This year's spending is either this year's taxes or it's this year's borrowing – that's next year's taxes.

Government spending is not a free gift but something that everyone is paying for, now or in the future.

That's why good governments are at least as careful spending the money they hold on trust from the people as you are when making decisions that affect your family's budget.

Parents don't mortgage their children's future and neither should government.

Last year, the Treasurer began his budget speech declaring, and I quote: "the four years of surpluses I announce tonight are a powerful endorsement of the…success of our policies".

Well, surpluses would have been a vindication.

But there are no surpluses.

Not this year.

Not next year.

Not the year after that.

The Treasurer now says that there will be a surplus in four years' time.

That's four years after the Treasurer and the Prime Minister said that it had already actually been delivered and spent tens of thousands of your dollars boasting about it in letters to their constituents.

If a public company made these sorts of claims its directors would most likely face serious charges rather than asking to be re-elected.

If this had been the only dodgy promise, they might have got away with it but this government never gets it right.

It got the mining tax numbers wrong.

It got the carbon tax numbers wrong.

And last year's budget commitments to boost family payments and to cut taxes didn't even make it to this year's budget.

This year's supposed revenue shortfall went from $7 billion, to $12 billion to $17 billion in just two weeks – so how can ministers possibly predict a decade ahead?

The Prime Minister guaranteed there would be no carbon tax – but there is.

She guaranteed there would be a surplus – 165 times she guaranteed there would be a surplus – but there isn't and there never will be under the government.

After seven deficits totalling $220 billion, the Treasurer can hardly congratulate himself over an almost invisible surplus, if nothing goes awry, if he's still there, in four years' time, in his ninth budget.

The government originally said that the deficit was "temporary".

With seven in a row, the Second World War was more temporary than this government's deficits.

The government promised a surplus over the cycle but this isn't a cycle – it's a spiral, deeper and deeper into debt which is now surging towards $400 billion even on the government's own figures.

The last time a Labor Treasurer stood in this parliament to deliver a surplus was way back in 1989 so it's hardly surprising that this year's Labor surplus promises are no more believable than last year's.

In the second line of this week's budget speech the Treasurer said that it was a budget for jobs and growth.

In fact, unemployment increases and growth decreases.

The Treasurer spent much of his speech complaining that he was the victim of a sudden collapse in government revenue.

In fact, revenue is up 6 per cent this year and will be up 7 per cent next year.

Next year, revenue will be up $80 billion on six years ago.

That's right, the Treasurer has $80 billion more to balance his budget than Peter Costello ever had – yet Costello delivered surplus after surplus.

We have a $20 billion deficit now rather than the $20 billion surplus then not because revenue is down but because spending is up: by $120 billion.

Madam Speaker, in 121 days, there will be an election.

It will be a tipping point in the life of our country.

The choice could hardly be more stark: three more years of broken promises, nasty surprises and weak excuses.

Or change for the better with an experienced team that will not just rebuild the economy but also the bonds of trust that should exist between you and your parliament.

The last Coalition government grew GDP per person by well over two per cent a year – under this government it's limped along at well under 1 per cent.

The former government grew jobs by two and a quarter per cent a year – or enough to create over 2 million new jobs within a decade.

Since then, they've grown by just 1.6 per cent a year.

With the Coalition, you could trust government to save.

With Labor you can be sure government will spend which is why worried households are saving at the highest rate in a generation.

During the Howard years, real wealth per person more than doubled – since then, it's actually declined thanks to weaker growth, subdued house prices and lower share prices.

Change won't come overnight but a Coalition government will do what's needed to strengthen economic growth and prosperity.

All the Coalition's main policies are designed to make it easier for you to get ahead and for businesses to be more productive.

We will abolish the carbon tax – because that's the quickest way to reduce power prices and take the pressure off cost of living and job security.

Let me repeat: We will abolish the carbon tax – because it's a kind of reverse tariff that hurts local businesses but not our overseas competitors.

There is no mystery to how this will happen.

What one parliament legislates, another parliament can repeal and the carbon tax repeal bill, should we be elected, will be the first legislation that a new parliament considers.

We will reduce emissions with targeted incentives, not clobbering business with the world's biggest carbon tax.

We will abolish the mining tax – because that's the quickest way to support investment and jobs.

We will cut red tape costs by at least $1 billion a year – to give small business a much-needed break – and we'll have parliamentary days dedicated to repealing laws, not passing them.

By cutting tax and regulation, we will boost productivity.

That will give Australian manufacturers the more level playing field they need to remain at the heart of a five pillar economy along with services, education, agriculture and resources.

We will have a once-in-a-generation commission of audit so that government is only as big as it needs to be to do what people can't do for themselves.

We will set up a root and branch review of competition policy to ensure that small business gets a fair go and small business will be a cabinet portfolio within the Treasury department.

There'll be an affordable and responsible Paid Parental Leave scheme because women should get their full wage while on maternity leave just as men should get theirs while on annual leave.

We will revitalise work for the dole because people who can work, should work, preferably for a wage but, if not, for the dole.

Within three years, the Coalition's NBN will deliver broadband speeds at least five times faster than the current average for $60 billion less than Labor's version.

We will start work within 12 months on Melbourne's East-West Link, Sydney's WestConnex, Brisbane's Gateway Motorway upgrade, Adelaide's South Road, and Tasmania's Midland Highway, as well as key roads in Perth and parts of the Bruce Highway, because when you're stuck in traffic jams, you aren't at work or at home with your family.

We will duplicate the Pacific Highway, finally, well within this decade.

We will establish a one-stop-shop for faster environmental approvals so that new projects can get up and going more quickly.

We will re-establish a tough cop on the beat, the Australian Building and Construction Commission, to deliver (as it previously did) $6 billion a year of productivity improvements in a troubled industry.

We will return the workplace relations pendulum to the sensible centre, under the existing Fair Work Act, with fairer rules for right of entry and for new projects.

And we will establish a new, two-way street version of the Colombo Plan taking our best and brightest to the region as well as bringing their best and brightest here.

It will be part of a foreign policy that's focussed on Jakarta, not Geneva.

All these commitments are affordable and deliverable.

We will deliver them in our first term of government, if we win, and will provide all the funding details after the pre-election fiscal statement is released.

But tonight, I set out specific savings to cover keeping tax thresholds and pension rates without a carbon tax to fund them.

The Coalition has already announced that we will rescind the increase to the humanitarian migration intake because – until the boats are stopped, and we will stop them – it's the people smugglers who are choosing who comes to Australia.

We've announced that we'll reduce by at least 12,000, through natural attrition, the size of the Commonwealth public sector that's now 20,000 bureaucrats bigger than in 2007.

We've also announced that we'd scrap Labor's green loans scheme for projects that the banks won't touch.

Tonight, I confirm that we won't continue the twice a year supplementary allowance to people on benefits because it's supposed to be funded from the mining tax and the mining tax isn't raising any revenue.

As well, we won't continue the low income superannuation contribution because that's also funded from the tax that isn't raising any revenue.

I announce that we will delay by two years the ramp up in compulsory superannuation because this money comes largely from business – not from government – and our economy needs encouragement as mining investment starts to wane and new sources of growth are needed.

These measures alone will produce nearly $5 billion a year in savings which is more than enough for tax cuts without a carbon tax.

The Coalition won't shirk the hard decisions needed to get the budget back into surplus.

Living within your means is not mindless austerity – it's simple prudence.

It's recognition of the reality that you can't spend what you don't have.

Households know this and it's time governments did too.

At least for a first term, until we're on an honest path not just to surplus but to re-paying debt, an incoming Coalition government will resist new spending commitments that aren't fully funded, nearly always by offsetting expenditure reductions.

As far as the Coalition is concerned, the next election won't be an auction.

Talking to people all around the country, the last thing you want is more "historic" announcements or so-called "revolutions" that never justify the hype.

Let me be clear.

Many of the measures in this budget are objectionable, the attacks on Medicare; the abolition of the baby bonus which the government had promised never to touch; robbing Peter to pay Paul on education; and forcing more businesses to do the tax paperwork monthly, not just quarterly.

But thanks to Labor's poor management over five years, there is now a budget emergency.

Hence the Coalition may decide not to oppose any of them; doesn't commit to reverse any of them; and reserves the option to implement all of them, in government, as short-term emergency measures to deal with the budget crisis Labor has created.

Far from cutting to the bone, we reserve the right to implement all of Labor's cuts, if needed, because it will take time to un-do all the damage this government has done

By keeping, if needed, all Labor's budget cuts – and – by not implementing any of their budget spending measures unless specified, we will achieve the first duty of every government: namely, to preserve the nation's finances.

We will keep the announced spending on the National Disability Insurance Scheme and we'll ensure that the scheme reflects the Productivity Commission's recommendations rather than becoming just another big government bureaucracy.

I would not have ridden 1000 kilometres, the week before last, to raise money for Carers Australia if I was half-hearted about the NDIS and would never claim for just one side of politics this reform that should be an achievement for our whole nation.

On the other hand, the key to better schools, at least as much as more money, is better teachers, better teaching, higher academic standards, more community engagement, and more principal autonomy.

So that's what we'll work with the states to deliver.

We won't back a so-called national education system that some states don't support especially as this government has a history of spending more while schools' performance actually goes backwards.

Regardless of normal political allegiance, Australians are sick of leaders who play politics ahead of governing the country and who blame everyone but themselves when things go wrong and the numbers don't add up.

You want a grown up government like the ones that John Howard and – yes – Bob Hawke too used to run.

As soon as people know there's a government with an economic strategy to build the country rather than just a political strategy to save its own skin, confidence will start to return to our economy.

Tax reform starts with immediately repealing the carbon tax and the mining tax and giving a modest company tax cut as soon as it's affordable – but it doesn't end there.

Within two years, an incoming Coalition government will consult with the community to produce a comprehensive white paper on tax reform.

We'll finish the job that the Henry review started and this government squibbed.

We want taxes that are lower, simpler and fairer and will take proposals for further tax reform to the following election.

Right now, the blame game between the Commonwealth and the states that Kevin Rudd promised to end has become worse than ever.

Typically, over the past three years, the Prime Minister has announced massive new programmes in areas that are the states' responsibility so she can claim the credit but the states have to pay.

It's no way to run the country and it's no way for adult leaders to behave.

Within two years of a change of government, working with the states, the Coalition will produce a white paper on COAG reform, and the responsibilities of different governments, to ensure that, as far as possible, the states are sovereign in their own sphere.

The objective will be to reduce and end, as far as possible, the waste, duplication and second guessing between different levels of government that has resulted, for instance, in the Commonwealth employing 6000 health bureaucrats even though it doesn't run a single hospital.

Again, a Coalition government will seek a mandate at the subsequent election for any proposed changes.

One of the best ways to ensure that governments don't make mistakes is to have a proper cabinet process.

That's how Bob Hawke and John Howard ran their governments but that's not how government is run now, as the four former ministers now sitting on the backbench have testified.

My ministers won't need to learn how to be a good government because they've been one before.

Sixteen members of the Coalition shadow cabinet were ministers in the last government that actually delivered surpluses, as opposed to just promising them.

Those surpluses weren't just John Howard's and Peter Costello's.

They were my surpluses and Joe Hockey's surpluses and Julie Bishop's and Warren Truss's and Malcolm Turnbull's because we were all part of the last government that Australians knew was competent and trustworthy.

Unlike the current government which never makes an announcement that isn't supposed to be the most important thing ever, what I'm proposing is not unprecedented and shouldn't even be remarkable.

I'm offering what should be normal: careful, collegial, consultative, straightforward government that says what it means and does what it says.

That would be change for the better.

The next election, to which this budget is a mere prelude, should not be about who becomes prime minister.

It should be about who can do more for our country – because our country is more important than any of us in this parliament.

My colleagues and I have a Plan to build a strong and prosperous economy for a safe and secure Australia.

It's not about us.

It's about you, the Australian people.

We pledge ourselves to your service.

Christine Milne (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The budget is the most value-laden of any document tabled in the parliament. It reflects the priorities for the nation and the future. The Treasurer said as much at the beginning of his budget speech on Tuesday. If you want to know what people and governments value, then follow how they raise and spend their money. The test of this budget is not the size of the deficit or how quickly Treasury forecasts a path back to surplus, but rather whether the decisions underpinning and outlined in the budget make Australia a greater nation at home and abroad. Whether it make us a more caring, happy and prosperous community; whether it looks after the precious places and plants and animals that we all love and the natural and built environment in which we grow food and in which we live; and whether it delivers all this in a fiscally-responsible way.

What is so disappointing about the budget is that it does not present a coherent vision of where the country needs to be in 10 years time or of how we face the challenges posed by an increasing global population in a rapidly warming world, the interdependence of economies and our own narrow economic base, as well as our overdependence on resource based industries and the fossil fuel intensive energy sector that drives them. We have hollowed out the manufacturing sector, we have failed to invest in education and we have stuck our heads and future in a hole in the ground. We have done so for decades and we are planning to keep on doing it.

What Australians needed was relief from the pressure they are feeling day to day in keeping a roof over their heads and food on the table; and they needed hope in relation to the anxiety they feel about the future when they hear of job losses, fees rising, farmers walking off the land and traffic congestion. They wanted to know that those pressures can be relieved. People wanted a vision, a glimpse even, of a future in which everyone can be healthy and flourish, with a great education and with job prospects in a dynamic, diversified economy. They wanted a visions of a future where they can live in a safe climate, in communities that are safe, sustainable and friendly; and can look forward to an old age supported by appropriate health and aged-care services.

The fact that this budget is a finance plan without a broad vision, and beset by confusion and contradictions, is what makes it fail as a budget. And Mr Abbott's alternative is worse: full of rhetoric but devoid of detail—the very 'magic pudding' against which Mr Hockey railed. While championing important and necessary reforms, such as DisabilityCare and Gonski education funding, the government cannot at the same time aspire to be a low-taxing government. We have a lower tax-to-GDP ratio than even under the Howard government. You cannot claim to be choosing a smarter Australia while cutting funding to research and development, universities and students, in order to fund schools. You cannot claim to be addressing climate change while stripping millions from renewable energy and continuing to shuffle billions of dollars into fossil fuel subsidies. And you cannot claim to be choosing a fairer Australia while condemning those who are unemployed to poverty. I noticed that is precisely what Mr Abbott said he would do, but even worse.

In contrast, the Australian Greens have a consistent vision shared by many Australians: we want the gap between rich and poor to be closing, not widening; we want a sustainable environment to future-proof our economy and quality of life; we want infrastructure spending that gives us clean, liveable cities; we want farmers to stay on the land; and we want investment in research and development, and education and innovation to give us the low-carbon economy we need to meet the challenge of global warming. We recognise revenue must be raised and we want it to come from those who can afford it—mining corporations making billions of dollars from resources the people own, and major banks already making record profits. We want Australians to keep their generosity of spirit in the community both here and abroad, and for Australia to be a respected global citizen. Yet, despite continuing growth, low unemployment and inflation under control, millions of Australians feel uncertain about the future, uncomfortable and under pressure.

The question is: what is the government doing in this budget to relieve that pressure? Labor is not doing enough, and we know from Mr Abbott's speech tonight that a coalition government will make it even worse. The opposition leader gave us no confidence that he will place people over short-term economic outcomes. He says we need a competent, trustworthy, adult government, but, as one wag said today, 'He's right, but where will we find one?' Certainly not with Whyalla-wiped-off-the-map, Gladstone-ghost-town Mr Abbott—an alternative prime minister who said in his book, Battlelines, that the role of other ministers is to pick holes in your argument wherever possible so he tried to avoid taking things to cabinet. It sounds very much like Direct Action.

He says he will be 'honest' and 'competent', but he is facing at least a $70 billion black hole now gaping even further from his scrapping the carbon price but keeping the compensation and tax cuts. How on earth is he going to keep an $18,200 tax-free threshold plus all other compensation and pay the polluters as well? This is going back to the Costello handout era of corporate welfare on steroids. We are going to see, according to Mr Abbott, a company tax cut as well. What happened to Mr Hockey's end to the age of entitlement? This is dishonest and incompetent, and it will be no surprise when it is not funded. Without raising more revenue from more taxes, we will see bigger and more extreme cuts to services, thousands of public servants out of jobs, polluters being paid and even less support for those in need from Mr Abbott and the coalition.

Let us test the claim of a stronger economy that was made by the government in the budget. Not so. Instead, we have the absolute failure of the minerals resource rent tax to raise any significant revenue—only $200 million in its first year. This is an embarrassment for Labor, who championed the tax to 'spread the benefits of the boom'. Well, $200 million does not go very far. If Labor had the backbone to stand up to the big mining corporations, it would not need to slash funding to universities or push single parents into poverty. As John Falzon from St Vincent de Paul has said:

… this Budget is less Robin Hood and more Sheriff of Nottingham.

No wonder Tony Abbott intends to support the government's cuts. Let me address the attempts by the Treasurer to explain away the failure of his mining tax. He points to the drop in commodity prices, and it is true: commodity prices have come off their record highs, but they are still at historically high levels. It is true that the resource rent taxes are on profits, but can the Treasurer explain how Rio Tinto, which made a $9 billion profit from iron ore last year, paid no mining tax? Is the Labor Party really suggesting that a $9 billion profit is not enough to be taxed?

The reality is that the mining tax has fundamental design flaws as a result of BHP, Rio and Xstrata running rings around the Treasurer and the willingness of the Prime Minister to cut a political deal at the expense of the community. Labor has shown in this budget its lack of courage, as has Mr Abbott in his budget reply.

Unlike Labor and the Coalition, the Greens are not afraid to stand up to the big mining corporations in the interests of the Australian people. If the government had the courage to close the loopholes in the mining tax, like they are looking do to for other multinational business arrangements, this could be a nation that invests in education as a whole—rather than cutting from universities and child care to fund schools.

What about a smarter nation? Education is central to our vision for Australia. The Greens will give children better education from early childhood through school and onto university and TAFE. The government is right to highlight the need for a smarter Australia but a nation does not become smarter by cutting funding to universities and research. Indeed, this is a dumb choice. We are risking competitiveness in the global economy as well as our capacity to respond to global challenges by raising money from the poorest students and our universities. Our universities have been vocal about the effects of these cuts on the quality of the education they can provide, and according to a poll by Universities Australia over 50 per cent of Australians oppose cutting university funding to pay for schools.

Australian students are already under pressure, with more than 80 per cent of full-time undergraduates working as well as studying. The changes to the Start-up scholarships will place even greater debt burdens on Australia's poorest students. It is a measure that is contrary to the ideal of opportunity for all in education and it is likely to see a reduction of enrolments from those who are most disadvantaged. That is dumb and mean and the Australian Greens will move to block the cuts to universities and students.

The challenge for the coalition is whether they will work with the Greens to protect our universities—in particular our regional universities, who will be hit very hard by these cuts—and ensure greater opportunities for students, or whether they will continue this harsh agenda. According to the Leader of the Opposition tonight, they will continue the harsh agenda. As he said, he will back all of Labor's cuts if he happens to get into government.

For all the talk of creating a smarter Australia, this budget, on top of cuts to research and development last year, turns its back on some of the most exciting, innovative projects that are happening in this country and that are in dire need of support before their funding runs out within a year. The Bionics Institute, whose teams have played a key role in the successful development of Australia's world leading bionic ear over the past 25 years, has a plan to develop six new devices in the next five years to treat chronic pain and movement and psychiatric disorders. The potential health benefits and market size are bigger than for Cochlear's bionic ear. They need only $24 million over five years to keep going, yet despite requests there is nothing for them in the budget.

Meanwhile Bionic Vision Australia, a world leading national consortium of researchers working together to develop a bionic eye, is currently using advanced manufacturing techniques to make in Australia prototypes that right now are being tested in patients. They need a mere $8 million a year for the next three years to keep going—but the budget turns its back on them. Without secure funding past this year, researchers will pack up and look to other countries that can offer greater support and we may lose this work forever—just as we have with so many climate scientists and technologies.

News today that CSIRO scientists have developed flexible solar panels that can be printed at home is great, but cutting 165 jobs from that very institution, the CSIRO, is dumb. These are the industries of the future, where Australia's advanced manufacturing techniques and our incredible intellectual capacity work together. If we can sell the world a bionic eye or an implant that relieves pain, it will be far better than shipping off coal or woodchips.

The Australian economy is in transition. We must move away from dig it up, cut it down, ship it away. We can prepare for the new economy or be caught out. The old parties seem more than content to leave us to be caught out by the changing global situation and the carbon bubble that will see huge coal projects and ports stranded as black elephants. Cutting more than $1 billion from renewable energy, energy efficiency and the environment is not smart or strong and it is further evidence that Labor cannot be trusted on the environment.

Let us be clear: we are in a climate change emergency. Last week climate scientists reported that, for the first time, atmospheric CO2 concentration figures exceeded 400 parts per million, moving us perilously close to runaway climate change. In that context the government have to answer two fundamental questions in the budget.

First, why do they believe that the measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions should be revenue neutral? The government asserts that receipts from the sale of emission permits should equal expenditure on assistance measures and programs to promote energy efficiency and renewable energy. But why? Given that we are in a climate emergency and deep and sustained emission cuts are a scientific imperative, why should expenditure on climate related programs be revenue neutral? It is like saying that defence should be revenue neutral in a war.

Second, the government said the funding to climate related programs needed to be cut because of the lower carbon pricing when trading starts. But the trading period does not start until 2015-16, so why is the government cutting almost $400 million from the essential Australian Renewable Energy Agency, the effective Low Carbon Communities program and the critical Biodiversity Fund during this two-year period? Not only is this a breach of the Multi-Party Climate Change Committee agreement; it is denying Australians cheaper electricity prices through investments in renewable energy.

The opposition is not serious about climate change either and, contrary to his promises about a secure and safe Australia, Mr Abbott is mortgaging our children's future. His Direct Action plan still has not won support from a single Australian economist or industry group. Perhaps Mr Abbott, who wants to be seen as honest, trustworthy and competent, can give a straight answer to the question of the dollars that are going to go into the carbon fund and a yes or no answer as to whether he will maintain the 41,000 gigawatt hour target for the large-scale RET.

The budget is further evidence that the Labor government is internally conflicted about climate change and cannot be trusted to protect the environment. The rush for coal seam gas and the exporting of more and more coal is killing the Great Barrier Reef and destroying valuable farmland and groundwater systems, and Labor and the coalition are standing by and letting this destruction happen. Not one coal seam gas project has been rejected by Minister Burke—not smart or strong; that is dumb, weak and dangerous.

So is Mr Abbott's proposed one-stop shop for environmental approvals. Mr Abbott will stand by and let the Queensland government turn cattle into national parks and allow them to graze those national parks at the same time as he stands by and allows the Queensland government to overturn national parks for logging. Today we had an Abbott opposition talking about agreeing to logging in World Heritage areas.

Despite taking the chair of the G20 next year, Australia is failing to live up to the commitment given at the G20 to end fossil fuel subsidies. While we welcome the cuts to carbon capture and storage programs—which was always a nonsense and a waste of money—the government will continue to provide billions in tax breaks for big mining corporations, while pushing single parents onto Newstart. While shaving the subsidy for mining exploration, the government's ongoing financial support to the big miners is bad for the climate and a diversion of taxpayer funds which could go into creating a more caring society. These are the choices and priorities of Labor and they are backed by the opposition.

And what about fairer? The Greens have a vision not of closing the gap not only on ecological sustainability but also between rich and poor—and that gap has been widening. We support a universal health system that includes caring for our teeth and growing more secure jobs throughout our economy. DisabiltyCare is a significant reform towards a better and more equal society. We Greens are proud to have backed it from the beginning and to have supported it through the parliament. We congratulate the Gillard government for delivering.

Achieving a more equitable schools funding model is another important step for a fairer society. The Australian Greens are right behind the Gonski school funding reforms. We have been advocating a fairer funding model for schools for over a decade and we want it legislated before we rise for the election. The test will be whether the government's proposals live up to the expectations of the Gonksi review for an equitable funding system. Australians have reason to be sceptical, given the very modest funding available in the next four years. For a Prime Minister who proclaims education to be the reason she entered parliament, she is selling the school children of Australia short with only $473 million next year. More money should be flowing to our public schools—the schools that educate our most disadvantage kids—and it should be flowing faster. The longer we wait the more kids we are selling short.

The coalition is all at sea on this issue, but to be perfectly clear—and from his speech tonight—Mr Abbott has said he will not proceed without additional funding unless all the states sign up. At this point many have not done so. The Greens will protect a fairer and more equitable funding model against a coalition government intent on letting our public schools down. We will stand in the Senate and in the House of Representatives against any repeal.

In contrast to schools, the budget actually cuts funding to child care. It keeps in place the freeze on indexation on the childcare benefit rebate, leading to increased pressure on families struggling with the cost of living. When we know fees are increasing and the childcare sector desperately needs help to provide quality and flexible care for busy families, this is neither smart nor fair. The biggest disappointment for many Australians who are really struggling is the failure of the government to increase the rate of Newstart and youth allowance, and its continued punishment of single parents. The paltry increase of $19 a week to the allowable income of Newstart recipients, including single parents, puts a lie to Labor's claims of 'a fairer society'. It is an insult to those who are struggling to make ends meet.

More than that, the decision to abolish the baby bonus by incorporating some of it into family tax benefit A will further hurt low-income families. While the Greens support, in principle, reform of the baby bonus, we want to ensure the poorest in our community are not hit harder by these changes. It is disappointing that once again the opposition have joined with Labor to remove benefits from those most in need. Mr Abbott went even further in his speech tonight. Not only is he going to cut Newstart even further but also he is going to delay the superannuation guarantee and take away the low-income tax rebate, at the same time letting the big miners off.

The failure of the Gillard government to increase Newstart payments by $50 a week, an increase supported by both business and the community sector, will lead to more people falling deeper into poverty. It is even more disappointing that the government has decided not to act, despite the other place today voting to support a Greens motion noting that Newstart is too low. This was the choice the government made—uncaring and mean, like its race with the coalition to the bottom on who can be crueller to asylum seekers fleeing horrors in their own lands.

Lord Stern commented this week that with global warming the challenge of food security will see displacement of millions. In such a global context, Australia cannot continue its appalling treatment of refugees. It was disgraceful to hear the Leader of the Opposition say that he is going to rescind the increased humanitarian intake.

The cruel government and coalition policies are costing billions—nearly $10 billion from 2012 to the end of the forward estimates—and are undermining our international reputation; but more than that, it is just deliberately cruel policy. They are spending almost twice as much on cruel detention polices than on DisabiltyCare and Gonski combined over the forward estimates. What does that say about a fairer society? We also learned in the budget that the government is looking to revise Australia's refugee assessment processes to find new ways to punish refugees and shut people out from safety. This is the government now wanting to wind back humanitarian protections, to deport more refugees back to the countries they have fled from. It is not the policy of a nation that cares for people or seeks to play a leadership role in the Asian Century.

Adding insult to injury, we are now allocating overseas aid money to our cruel and inhumane refugee detention policies, in contradiction to the government's own scope of legitimate aid document, making us the third biggest recipient of our own overseas aid—not fair, not smart; plain dumb and mean. As well as demonstrating its lack of compassion here in Australia in the last two years the government has cut $4.8 billion to overseas aid over the forward estimates. Australia is in the right place at the right time for the very first time in our history. Not only are we hosting the G20 next year but also we have been elected to the United Nations Security Council. But we are in danger of being perceived as uncaring by the rest of the world and on the international stage of making promises, only then to break them. It should concern all Australians that, while campaigning for a seat on the Security Council, Australia promised to meet our aid target of 0.5 in the time frame agreed, and now we have reneged twice. What sort of country are we looking like?

Population pressures exist not only overseas but also here at home. Some of the real pressures Australians are feeling come from living in cities with inadequate infrastructure. We welcome the commitment to rail projects, in particular the Metro rail and Perth rail projects, but are disappointed no funds were there for Hobart's light rail. And we are concerned about the apparent embrace by Labor of the failed public-private partnership model.

It is also disappointing that much of the good planning work on boosting public transport and active travel to create more sustainable and liveable cities has not been converted into action—70 per cent of funding is still flowing to road projects. Investing in public transport and rail will relieve pressure on people in our cities, but the old parties retain their obsession with roads. The coalition's speech tonight was a classic in this regard—more highways everywhere.

The government also failed to acknowledge the national housing crisis. The Labor Party and the Liberals have turned their back on millions of Australians struggling with unaffordable housing. Housing pressure is enormous here, yet the budget essentially ignored it, with no new programs for housing affordability, no new money to tackle homelessness, no boost in public housing, no plans for more affordable rentals or more affordable ownership and no mention of the word 'housing' at all in the budget speech. So much for 'fairer'.

Quality of life is further enhanced by the arts and we welcome the fact that the national cultural policy is now to be enacted and we welcome the restructuring of the Australia Council. The Greens have been campaigning for a long time for increased resources to the ABC and SBS and are happy to have delivered a $129 million boost to the ABC and an increase of $30 million for SBS. However, the failure to find a measly $1.4 million for community radio is a disgrace. The Greens will continue to do what we can to ensure additional support for community radio.

Furthermore, regional arts have been ignored. In fact, the whole of regional Australia does not seem to exist for the Labor Party. Rural and regional Australia, which is facing very significant challenges, has been let down by the slashing of Caring for our Country and the Biodiversity Fund—and taking $2 billion away from the Regional Infrastructure Fund will not make for a stronger economy or a fairer Australia.

A stronger society is not just about money but also about how we relate to each other. The Greens are going to continue to boost that dividend of decency in Australia by pursuing marriage equality and banning sports gambling advertising before nine o'clock.

The Treasurer is reported to have yesterday placed Labor between the austerity freaks on the one hand and the Green types on the other. The Green types, according to him, want the bottom to fall out of the budget. Last year it was the Treasurer who was the austerity freak, insistent on a budget surplus this year, and it was the Greens showing economic maturity and responsibility in calling for a delay in the surplus. And it is now we, the Green types, who—far from wanting the bottom to fall out of the budget—have been identifying revenue measures, including fixing the mining tax, ending fossil fuel subsidies and introducing a levy on the big banks. It is the Treasurer who would rather engage in stereotyping than standing up to Rio Tinto, BHP, Xstrata or the big banks.

The Labor government had the opportunity with this budget to manage the economy in a way which would care for people and protect our environment. That would have been smart and fair. Instead, we got $2.3 billion of university cuts, a billion taken from clean energy and the environment, and continued punishment for single parents and the unemployed. I do not think they will take much comfort from a 10-year road map with a shelf life, if the polls are right, of only a few months.

And Tony Abbott will be worse, if his speech tonight is anything to go by. That is why you need the Greens. It is governments working with the Greens that deliver major reforms. It is the Greens who have delivered the clean energy package, it is the Greens who have delivered Denticare and it will be the Greens who deliver marriage equality. What is more, we will stand up strongly in the Senate and the House of Representatives. We will not allow the repeal of important initiatives we have fought hard for, particularly those in the areas of schools and clean energy. We will stand against the excesses of any future government, including an Abbott government, which tries to turn such achievements back.

The Australian Greens will deliver a caring Australia, a path to a safe climate and a proud global reputation. We are the competent, adult, honest party which will stand up to those who protect their own interests to the detriment of the environment and who deny everyone else a fair go. It is the Greens who will stand up with a strong voice for what is right and what is genuinely strong, smart and fair in caring for people and protecting our environment.

John Madigan (Victoria, Democratic Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise tonight to give my opinion, and the opinion of the Democratic Labor Party, on the federal budget handed down only two days ago.I donot deny that the state of the global economy at this point in time makes it difficult for any government to deliver a budget which will satisfy everyone and keep the books in the black. But you would have hoped that, because of the huge number of promises given by the government to keep the budget in surplus, a better budget could have been delivered.

As a small business owner and a family man, I have always tried to live within my means. If you do n o t have the money for something you need, you cut down on other expenses. You trim the fat, tighten your belt and redirect funds from luxuries to life's necessities. That i s what Australians have had to do already as a result of the intro duction of the c arbon tax , which increased power costs around the country. Sadly, f amilies around the country are , given the measures delivered in this budget, going to have to get better and better at cutting their own spending. The T reasurer and this government have removed incentives, funding and bonuses from the Australian people in this budget. What they have not done is curb their spending elsewhere . I n fact , spending has increased in areas I believe should be cut.

While I am forced to admit that the likelihood of a DLP government being elected in September is remote , I do believe the Democratic Labor Party will have much to contribute in coming years. T he purpose of a budget reply is not only to point out where the current budget succeeds or fails but also to say where we in the DLP believe it could have been improved. There a re a number of things I will talk about very briefly. They are subjects I hope to bring up in more detail over the coming months and with whichever party forms the next government .

Families are among the worst hit by this budget , with the abolition of the baby bonus and the reduction of eligibility for this payment for stay-at-home mums. But it is worse , much worse. Add to this the cuts imposed on single mothers and it is worse still. This budget removes any remote recognition by government that children are an investment in the nation's future. Children have been reduced to a commodity for which the user pays. ' If you can ' t afford them , don't have them. We don't care. ' That is the message this budget gives to families.

Once upon a time , in the bad old days of Menzies and Whitlam , there existed something called 'horizontal equity' in taxation for families. Figures show that back then the average family did not pay tax until they earned 150 per cent of average weekly earnings. The tax system took into account the numbe r of dependa nts that the wage earner provided for before taxing them. The government recognised that supporting families was an investment in the future —n ot anymore.

John Howard, as Treasurer in the Fraser g overnment , changed the system. The introduction of the family allowance paved the way for families to be seen not as custodians of future citizens but as welfare recipients and drains on the public purse. We saw campaigns suggesting family tax benefits were ways of funding 'middle-class' welfare. Yuppies were the only ones entitled to a decent standard of living. It was just tough luck if you were supporting children . Now each wage earner is treated as an independent individual with no dependants —a triumph of rampant individualism. Having children makes you an economic basket case. It is your choice. User pays. Suffer little children. Scrooge controls the purse strings.

The D LP believes our economy is best served by looking after the families and communities first. They are the top of our totem pole , not corporations. In the coming months the DLP will release a number of policies we hope can be taken up by the government in the hope of assisting the families and communities of Australia .

For workers , the DLP will seek support for a national portable leave scheme that will ensure all workers, especially those in unskilled or less secure employment, can accumulate sick leave that can be carried from job to job, ensuring they are secure in periods of illness and employers are able to employ temporary staff during their absence.

We hope to provide legislative assistance for small business in a number of areas. For example, small business suffers greatly from a diminished cash flow when larger corporations hold up or withhold payments for goods or services provided. The DLP will introduce legislation aimed at giving small business greater confidence in their ability to receive monthly payments promptly.

Every year we find it harder and harder for f irst home buyers to achieve that dream of homeownership. The F irst Home Owners Grant, recently altered, was usually seen as an incentive for developers to increase the price of the home by the amount of the grant. This budget offer ed little assistance for the first home buyer. The DLP will seek to introduce legislation to allow a modest percentage of superannuation to be made available as a deposit for first home buyers.

T he incoming NDIS is welcomed and will enjoy the full support of the DLP. It is an initiative whose time is well ove rdue and I am pleased to see bi partisan support, for the most part. During the last year I have brought up with the government and the opposition an issue that I believe is of overwhelming importance to the health of all Australians as well as the health of our economy. I am disappointed that nothing has been done to address this issue in this budget and nothing appears likely to happen in the near future. This health issue has a direct cost to our economy of some $5 billion a year and an indirect cost of over $31 billion. It affects every Australian to varying degrees , and I can guarantee that it affects many of my fellow s enators and the members of the other place. The issue is s leep disorders and s leep deprivation.

The Australian Sleep Health Foundation has commissioned an extremely detailed report showing just how much this problem affects this nation. The c hairman of the f oundation, Professor David Hillman , of the Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital in Perth, has devoted an enormous amount of his time and resources to this problem. The work of the Department of Pulmonary Physiology and Sleep Medicine, in Perth, of which he is the head, is something of which the people of Western Australia should be justly proud. It is the hope of the Australian Sleep Health Foundation, and of Prof essor Hillman, that s leep disorders and sleep deprivation can become the fourth arm of the National Preventative Health Strategy alongside obesity, alcohol and tobacco. This is a hope I and the D LP will try hard to fulfil , and I welcome any interest from the major parties

Every day, countless thousands of Australians give all of their time to care for relatives on a full- time basis. Because of their selfless service , our h ealth system saves billions of dollars. However, when their caring is completed, either at the loss of the loved one being cared for or simply because they also have become too frail to provide constant care, there is no reward for their years of devotion. The D LP believes the government should implement a c arer s ' superannuation scheme to provide for a basic level of comfort for the people who have given so much and who have saved the Australian taxpayer countless billions of dollars. We will work with the next government to achieve this result.

Lastly , I would like to discuss an aspect of this budget that has me deeply concerned. I find it interesting that there has been little analysis of the foreign aid section of the budget, apart from the outcry that Australia has once again delayed its commitment to meeting the Millennium Development Goal s . I believe that Australia is in a good position to help the world's poor. But I also believe that we have a duty to the world's poor and to the tax payers funding this aid to ensure that every single dollar is going to the most worthy causes. The foreign minister's statement contained in the budget booklet , Australia's International Development Assistance Program , subtitled Effective aid: helping the world's poor , contains the line ' It is important that aid funds are spent wisely and well . ' I could n o t agree more with this sentiment. Australians are a generous people. We will always come to the aid of those less fortunate than us , especially a neighbour in need. However, it is clear that the foreign minister and I would disagree strongly on the definition of the words 'wisely' and 'well'. This particular line from the book caught my eye :

The Australia-Indonesia Partnership Country Strategy 2008-14 aligns Australian development assistance with Indonesia’s priorities and reflects the determination of the two countries to tackle poverty and promote a prosperous, democratic and secure Indonesia.

Australia gives more money to Indonesia than it does to any other single country. What I take from this statement is that this money is given to assist the priorities of the Indonesian government, not the priorities that most Australians would place at the top of their list for aid.

I have said on a number of occasions that it beggars belief that we can justify tripling our economic aid to Indonesia over a six-year period while they can afford to triple their military spending over the same period. Now we have given them an additional $105 million, increasing aid to $646 million a year. This year Indonesia has the third fastest moving stock market in the entire region, beaten only by Japan and the Philippines, and has enjoyed economic growth of over six per cent a year for four of the past five years. This is hardly a country in economic distress. I am not suggesting that the majority of people in Indonesia enjoy a comfortable lifestyle, but how much of that is a result of the incredible economic inequality and wealth disparity between the rich and the poor or because of the culture of corruption that is still endemic in its government, departments and institutions?

Government priorities come and go, but the problems facing the world's poor will remain. In the past fortnight we have heard the Indonesian President proclaim proudly that the aim of his government is to have a military that is bigger and better than that of Australia, Singapore and Malaysia. I have no problem with that. A sovereign nation has a right and a duty to establish and maintain an adequate defence force. However laudable the Indonesian President's statement is, he forgot to add, ' and we thank the Australian foreign aid budget for helping us attain that goal'.

If you can afford to build a military to rival Australia's then you can afford to build schools, extend health care and improve the levels of equality within your own country. You would think that, based on the statement by the Indonesian President and these figures alone, a review of Australia's large foreign aid each year to Indonesia would be prudent. However, it appears we have not taken the figures into consideration. In fact, as I said earlier, we have increased our aid to Indonesia by $105.2 million a year to a staggering $646.8 million.

I have brought to the attention of senators in this place the atrocities that are occurring in West Papua at the hands of the Indonesians. In doing so, according to the foreign minister, I have shown myself to be a reckless, unthinking Australian. At least he lets me keep my citizenship. The foreign minister cited a number of projects being conducted in Indonesia with the help of Australian aid money, and I agree these are great achievements. But I question why we have brought about increasing Australian aid by $500 million in six years when they can afford to increase their military spending by $6 billion in the same period. Pardon my cynicism, but to put it plainly, this just does not add up.

I am not asking for the foreign aid budget to be cut but that it be used, in the minister's own words, 'wisely and well'. I can think of a number of projects that are sorely needed in Timor-Leste, mainly because of the rampant destruction caused by the Indonesian military as it reluctantly left. These could be easily completed with a portion of the aid currently being given to Indonesia. Maybe it is the methods used to determine how we spend our aid that need to be looked at. Surely helping Indonesia extend its military is slightly less important than helping the East Timorese establish a proper sewerage system, or an education system that allows for fewer than 60 children to a classroom, or a road system that includes actual roads.

I think the thing that bothers most Australians about this is that, however much the government says it has not seen any evidence of the recent atrocities and human rights abuses in West Papua, the international outcry is growing and, after East Timor, they simply will not accept a government's word for it. If the government wants to deny years of mounting evidence they can do so, but they should not be surprised when the average Australian, reckless and unthinking though they may be, is outraged that their tax dollars are assisting these atrocities. I do not believe that our foreign aid budget is being spent wisely and well. Either we spend it wisely or we should spend it at home.

A country is what a country makes. I remind the government and the opposition that you cannot continue to import more than you export. We as a nation need to manufacture more world-class products for domestic and foreign consumption, and we need to produce more world-class food for home and abroad. Ultimately, if we do not support and encourage our manufacturers and our farmers Australia's standard of living will continue to fall.

Many aspects of this budget are positive—a feat not easy to achieve with the size of the deficit we now face. However, I believe many opportunities have been missed to improve the lives of ordinary Australians. I can only hope that the next government, whether ALP or coalition, can look to the workers, the families and the communities of Australia and recognise that it is in them that the basis of all solid economic policy begins.