Jan McLucas (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Mental Health) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of questions asked by opposition senators today.

I asked Senator Nash some questions today about the impact of the interrelationship between the proposals to change the way we fund our universities in this country, and the impact that will have on the future health workforce in Australia.

Frankly, I was rather disappointed at Senator Nash's somewhat flippant responses. I would have thought, given the commentary—in the health media, and around health generally—about the concern that we have about how many doctors and nurses we are going to need in the future, that Minister Nash would have had a far more fulsome answer to the question that I raised.

The Australian Nursing and Midwife Federation yesterday called on all of us to reject the deregulation in university fees. I will quote them again. They said:

It’s nonsensical that as a significant Australian nursing shortage looms over the next decade, the Abbott Government is intent on systematically destroying nursing education in this country …

The coalition government has form on this. When they were in government last time I believe it was health minister Abbott who cut the training places for our doctors, and as a direct result of that action his government had to deal with the doctor shortages that arose. They had to make large increases to the number of undergraduate doctor places, and then we had again the problem we now have with training. You have to plan for a workforce. I was terribly disappointed that Minister Nash had not been asking her department to get busy, to do the work, and analyse the impact of fee deregulation on our health system and on our health system's ability to attract, to train and to retrain Australian nurses. I was shocked that Senator Nash said there would be no impact on the way we train nurses. We know that most of our young people going into nurse training are women, and if we say to them that they will graduate with a bill of $63,000 if they go into nurse training then surely that will raise a question in the minds of those young women. The current cost of getting a nursing degree is $23,000. Basically, we are going to triple that cost. Of course it is going to be a disincentive for young women—particularly young women from rural areas who are from low-income families—to undertake a nursing degree. How are we going to staff our hospitals into the future, how are we going to staff our aged care facilities into the future, if we put such a barrier in front of young people getting a nursing education?

Minister Nash also referred to an answer she gave yesterday to Senator Ketter. She said yesterday:

If those opposite paid a little more attention—

be assured we do pay attention—

they would realise that that is National Party policy. We then go on to form coalition policy for the election campaign and that immediately addresses the issue.

That made me go and find their health policy. It states:

Only The Nationals’ Regional Health Rescue Plan can ensure that the one third of Australians living in the regions get a fair go from the health system and a fair share of health funding.

So what do they do? They go around Australia with this document that says that only the Nationals can do this and then they go into their little meeting with the coalition and say, 'This is what we've put together'—and what happens then? The Liberal Party says, 'That's no good; we won't have that.' But they have had their campaigning opportunity, running around Australia telling everybody that only the Nationals can do this. The first thing in the Nationals' plan is that they will have a minister for regional health. But we do not have a minister for regional health. Everyone who has read this document, who voted National because they believed that this was what the National Party would deliver for them, believed that we would have a minister for regional health—but we do not. We do not have a minister for regional health and country people are the big losers in this budget. (Time expired)

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for the Environment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This Sunday will mark the first anniversary of the 2013 election that saw the end of a hapless period of Labor government—a period marked by division and disunity; a period marked by dysfunctional policy, as we have seen this week, writ large and highlighted by the release of the report of the Royal Commission into the Home Insulation Program, and a period marked by mounting government spending, record deficits and record debt. Twelve months on, this Sunday, this government stands here proudly delivering on our promises—promises to get the budget back under control, to build the roads of the 21st century, to stop the boats and control Australia's borders, to axe the carbon tax and to axe the mining tax. We have seen this week further progress on the last of those key promises—axing the mining tax has been delivered for all Australians.

We heard in question time today questions from those opposite who continue to go on about the impact of the mining tax package. The impact for all Australians of the mining tax package just passed is that we will greatly reduce this country's future level of debt. We will reduce that debt enormously because over the forward estimates the package the Senate passed this week will save some $10 billion. Over the next decade that package will save some $50 billion. The legacy the Labor Party left this country of $25,000 debt for every man, woman and child is being tackled and is being tackled through reforms just like that one. We are continuing with further reforms—not just those to get the budget under control but reforms to make Australia more competitive. Those reforms apply right across the economy, but they apply, importantly, in education as well—another sector those opposite asked questions about today and an area that Senator McLucas was trying to talk about before. I note that Senator McLucas's contribution seemed to focus on whether we have a minister for regional health. She seems worried about titles on business cards, and there seems to be constant carping from those opposite about that. We on this side are worried about policies and reforms and things that make a difference to all Australians.

In the higher education reform space, we are implementing a suite of packages that will make Australia's higher education system more resilient to increasing global competition for higher education dollars and will ensure Australians have the best possible access to the broadest possible range of education opportunities. Contrary to the lies coming from those opposite, funding for higher education, including the total of Commonwealth Grant Scheme funding for student places and regional loadings, is going up under the coalition government. We are spending more on higher education because we will be supporting more students having more opportunities.

For many disadvantaged students, the most important of the reforms that are proposed perhaps will be the support we will put in place for an uncapped number of diplomas, advanced diplomas and associate degrees, creating enormous opportunities for students to access taxpayer support for places that they have never before had support for. It will create opportunities for an estimated 80,000 additional students, many of whom will likely come from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, many of whom may come from regional Australia, and all of whom will benefit from this important reform.

It sits alongside the deregulation opportunities in these reforms that exist for universities that will allow them to focus on specialising and doing what they can do best. It will ensure that we have universities operating among the best in the world for years to come, as well as ensuring we have universities choosing to specialise in delivering key courses like nursing to the best of their abilities by creating those places for students into the future.

Importantly, every Australian needs to understand that as a result of these reforms no-one will have to pay a dollar up-front. There is no change to the way the HECS scheme works in that regard, and no-one will have to repay their loans until they are earning over $50,000 a year. This is the type of reform that will set Australia up for the future. (Time expired)

Doug Cameron (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The problem with Senator Birmingham's contribution is that no-one in Australia believes you. No-one trusts you. No-one trusts this government, because this is a government that came to power based on lies. This is a government that came to power based on misrepresentations, and it is a government that came to power based on fear campaigns.

It is clear now that 12 months into this rabble of a government the Australian public are shaking their heads, wondering what happened to all the promises that were made. Why are pensioners being hammered by this government? Why is the health system being stripped of resources by this government? Why is this government not the government they said they were going to be, prior to the election? This is a government that has demonstrated in the last 12 months that it is incompetent. It is absolutely incompetent.

The Treasurer has delivered a budget that is universally condemned around this country. He has delivered a budget that has rank-and-file National Party members standing up at their conferences condemning the issues and the aspects of the budget that the Liberals are forcing on the National Party. If the National Party were not such doormats to the coalition, they would actually be standing up for rural and regional Australia. They would actually be saying, 'Why are you ripping away at the residents of rural and regional Australia?' They would be demanding a fair go for rural and regional Australia. Yet, what do we have from the National Party? We have absolute silence.

Removing the superannuation contribution for workers earning less than $37,000 affects rural and regional Australia more than most other areas. In the National Party seat of Cowper, 46.5 per cent of workers are earning less than $37,000, and they are the ones who are being affected by this cruel attack on superannuation. In Page, the seat of Mr Kevin Hogan, 46 per cent of the electors are affected by this. So you are getting superannuation entitlements ripped away from ordinary Australians. It is no use if Senator Cormann stands up here and tries to ignore what business is saying. Business is saying that this money will not come back to ordinary Australians. Business is saying, 'Because your superannuation increases are being stopped, you will not be getting pay rises.' That is what business is saying.

Yet this rabble of a government, this incompetent government, stands up here and continues its misrepresentation. It continues to live in a parliamentary bubble and just does not understand what is happening in the real world out there in Australia. They just do not get it. To save for your future is something the Liberal Party used to say was a good thing. Now we have the Liberal Party standing up and saying, 'No, just get the money now and spend.' Where is the argument that thrift, that saving for your future, is a good thing? Where has that gone? It has simply gone because this government has absolutely no compunction about lying to the Australian public. And when it has lied to the Australian public, when it finds itself in a difficult position, it just lies and lies again.

That is why the public do not trust this government. They see the government as one based on lies and misrepresentations. They see this government as one based on ideology, an ideology which says, 'If you have brown paper bags full of money and you can hand it over to the Liberal Party, we will look after you. But if you are a pensioner, we are going to cut the pension.' That is what this government is—incompetent and untrustworthy. (Time expired)

Christopher Back (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Forty-three years as a veterinary surgeon enables me to give Senator Cameron a bit of advice, which is that if you flog a dead horse often enough, it still remains dead. What Senator Cameron seems to have overlooked is that 12 months ago this weekend the people of Australia, in 150 electorates around this country, actually voted for a coalition government with the very polices that poor old Senator Cameron stands up here and so badly maligns. The people of Page and the people of Cowper had as much brains last year as they will have in two years time, Senator Cameron. The Labor Party risks dealing itself into the world of irrelevancy in higher education and health, as indeed it was rendered irrelevant on the mining resource rent tax earlier this week. Senator O'Neil was going on about the mining industry and small business and I gave her the challenge that Senator Sterle might want to take her to Hannan Street, Kalgoorlie, where he could walk her up and down Hannan Street to look at all the empty businesses that were occasioned as a result of the shocking, rotten mining and carbon taxes that befell that very, very proud mining community. I do not know where the Labor Party is when it talks about protecting Australian jobs.

We have just heard the usual rant from the dead-horse flogger Senator Cameron, when he was talking about the Australian people believing that what the coalition has been saying are lies. He has now brought the entire Universities Australia sector into that. Let me quote from a 28 August release—only a couple of days ago—from Belinda Robinson, the Chief Executive of Universities Australia, in which she said:

The peak body representing Australia’s universities has called on the parliament to support the deregulation of Australian universities with changes to the government’s proposals that will assure affordability for students and taxpayers.

No dead horses there. That is what Universities Australia is talking about.

… a once in a generation opportunity to shape an Australian higher education system—

and these are Belinda Robinson's words, not ours—

that is sustainable, affordable and equitable in serving the best interests of students and the nation.

It was Senator Carr, the shadow Minister for Education, who made the allegation about regional universities. I had the pride and privilege of being on the faculty of a regional university for 13 years in our state of Western Australia so I do speak with some authority on that. It is very, very deeply disappointing—and I would urge the leadership of the Australian Labor Party to think carefully about this—that Senator Carr has been out there saying in the education space, 'We do not care what the coalition's policies are in higher education. We are going to oppose them and oppose them and oppose them because we want to force the coalition to a double dissolution election.' That man over there in that seat is the alternative Minister for Education. If he is so politically driven and so policy starved that he is not prepared to examine, to accept and to listen to the views of the very universities charged with responsibility in this field, then the man ought to submit his resignation.

But let me tell you about the opportunities for regional universities as one who was in them. He made the comment 'let it rip.' Well, if I was still at the Muresk Institute—then part of Curtin University—I would be saying the same thing. I would be saying, 'Deputy President, look at these new policies'—through you to Senator Brown—with funding for diplomas and funding for sub-university degrees and that whole vertical integration from skills development right through to degree courses and higher education. They are all funded through the HECS scheme. What cost to a student starting their course—zero. No dollars. All paid for by the Australian taxpayers—people like yourselves up there. Absolutely not one dollar being paid at the time and nothing paid until that person is earning $55,000 or probably $60,000. And even then—to pick up the points about nursing—

Senator Carol Brown interjecting—

please, Senator Brown, some courtesy—to have that figure capped for someone earning $55,000 to $99,000 a year. And the maximum? Four per cent—not a bad deal. Not a bad deal if you are going to earn a million dollars over your career with a degree initially funded by the Australian taxpayer. Only when you are at $100,000, would you be paying a maximum cap of eight per cent. This is the best opportunity that young Australians have ever had. It leaves us internationally competitive. I am proud to support it. (Time expired)

Chris Ketter (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to take note of answers given by the Minister for Finance and the minister representing the Minister for Health on questions without notice asked by opposition senators today in relation to superannuation and certain health matters.

As we come to the 12-month anniversary this weekend of the 2013 federal election, it is worth reflecting on the promises that this government made to the people of Australia a year ago and how they have systematically and underhandedly gone back on those promises over the last year. We can recount the various areas in which this government has regrettably gone back on pre-election commitments in the areas of health, education, no new taxes and superannuation.

This week alone in the Senate we have seen the future superannuation savings of millions of Australians snatched away by this government with no consultation, no prior notice and no explanation. We have also seen government senators justifying cuts to rural and regional health care on the basis that what they said before the election were merely National Party commitments and not coalition commitments. Regrettably, that appears to be what the National Party has been reduced to under this Abbott-led government: a party that suggests policies for rural Australia but has no power to enforce them when in government.

I refer back to my question to Senator Nash today. I asked about the 2013 coalition health policy to fund 50 per cent growth funding of the efficient price of hospital services. If one goes back to the coalition's policy document, it says:

A coalition government will support the transition to the Commonwealth providing 50 per cent growth funding of the efficient price of hospital services as proposed, but only the coalition has the economic record to be able to deliver.

I emphasise that last sentence, because when we are talking about delivering on promises it is quite ironic that the actual policy emphasises that the coalition is going to deliver on this promise, but we are seeing that is not going to happen.

On the issue of rural health, I would like to take honourable senators back to some information from the National Rural Health Alliance going back to May and in particular in respect of the GP co-payment and the effect that this has on the rural communities. There was an opinion piece on 16 May by Catherine Nielson which was measuring the fairness of the federal budget for rural people. Ms Nielson prepared an overview and concluded that it was likely to have a damaging impact on the people of rural and remote Australia. The article goes on to talk about various areas of policy, including welfare payments, age pensions, disability support, pensions, fuel excise, Indigenous programs, environmental initiatives, education. It goes on to conclude:

Overall, evaluation of the changes in such program areas as briefly described here leads to a gloomy prognosis for the income and wellbeing of families in rural and remote areas. And therefore it leads to a gloomy outlook for their health.

I turn to the area of superannuation. Senators might remember that in my first speech, I made specific reference to the world-class superannuation system that we have in this country. Superannuation savings in Australia are approximately fourth-largest in the world. The deal to cut future superannuation contributions, which we have seen this week, was done with such disregard for due process and was rushed with such speed through the House that the government hardly gave time for even cursory consideration of it. These changes to superannuation are so blatantly opportunist, it is no wonder that the government is loath to talk about them. It will pretend that the events of this week never happened, but I will tell you who will not forget—the millions of Australians who will find a comfortable retirement that little bit further out of reach.

Before the election, the Prime Minister said that he expected people to be very harsh on a new government that does not keep its commitments. So what was his commitment on super? He had said:

Our clear, categoric commitment to the Australian people is that we are not going to make unexpected, adverse changes to superannuation.

The only thing that is clear and categoric— (Time expired)

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the motion moved by Senator McLucas be agreed to.

Question agreed to.