Sue Lines (WA, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I inform the Senate that, at 8.30 am today, two proposals were received in accordance with standing order 75. The question of which proposal would be submitted to the Senate was determined by lot. As a result, I inform the Senate that the following letter has been received from Senator Collins:

Pursuant to standing order 75, I propose that the following matter of public importance be submitted to the Senate for discussion:

The need for the Prime Minister, in his government's budget tonight, to stop his cuts to Medicare and reverse his $700 million of cuts to local hospitals; reverse his $17 billion of cuts to local schools; give up on the zombie cuts in his budget that hurt families and pensioners—like axing the energy supplement; and reverse his $80 billion tax handout to the top end of town.

Is the proposal supported?

More than the number of senators required by the standing orders having risen in their places—

I understand that informal arrangements have been made to allocate specific times to each of the speakers in today's debate. With the concurrence of the Senate, I shall ask the clerks to set the clock accordingly.

Catryna Bilyk (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The big four banks aren't very popular amongst the Australian people at the moment. At the banking royal commission—the one that Mr Turnbull spent years opposing because he knew of the damage it would cause his mates in the banking sector—we have heard damning evidence of dodgy and downright illegal behaviour. What's the reward from the government for such a gross breach of Australia's trust? Mr Turnbull and Mr Morrison will give them $17 billion in tax breaks—$17 billion to banks that have been ripping off customers, falsifying documents and acting in a fraudulent or dishonest way. On current calculations, one dollar in four from a company tax cut will go into the pockets of big banks. Could there be a stranger public policy than rewarding the banking sector with a multibillion dollar tax cut at the same time the sector is going through its biggest shake-out in a generation?

We know that $17 billion is also the amount of money that the government has ripped away from schools. Bank profits are being paid for with classroom supplies and teachers' resources. Australia's parents should remember, every time their child's school cannot afford something, that money was ripped from their schools to inflate bank profits. The government should be utterly ashamed of itself. The Treasurer wants us all to think he's a great guy because he's giving a small tax cut to individuals. Regular Australian families will receive a so-called sandwich-and-milkshake tax cut, while Mr Turnbull's banker mates will get billions of dollars extra each year. In fact, it's probably not a sandwich-and-milkshake tax cut; it's probably a sandwich-or-milkshake tax cut.

All this is coming at a time when workers have being facing the lowest wage growth in decades, while bank profits are again at record highs. While the banks are the main beneficiaries, big business as a whole, including multinationals, will benefit to the tune of $80 billion, because the government has to reward its big business mates for their donations and their public support of the government. This tax break for multinationals is funded from money that will be ripped out of Australian schools and Australian hospitals and taken away from infrastructure and other important projects. The services that everyday Australians rely on are being gutted to pay for these corporate tax cuts.

The Liberal Party spin would have you believe that this tax cut will create more jobs and fatter pay packets, but managers have said that tax cuts will be more likely to go to share buybacks and paying down corporate debt. Only seven per cent of firms said they would grow employment, and just four per cent said they would increase wages. If you don't pay Australian tax in the first place, lowering the statutory rate won't make you invest more anyway. Mr Turnbull's failure to properly crack down on multinational tax avoidance has allowed billions of dollars to slip out of the revenue system, and the end result of this largesse to the government's business mates is fewer resources for schools and fewer resources for our hospitals.

Rather than racing to the bottom on company taxes, wouldn't the nation be better off investing in better schools and hospitals, building the infrastructure that our congested cities require and keeping taxes lower for middle Australians? When it comes to boosting corporate investment, a far more efficient approach is Labor's Australian investment guarantee. According to experts at Victoria University, the investment subsidy is between two and three times more effective as a stimulus to investment than the company tax rate cut. The government has already cut $715 million from Australian hospitals. Mr Turnbull and Mr Hunt face four key tests in this health portfolio in tonight's budget. First of all they must reverse their $715 million in cuts to public hospitals. Then they should drop their entire Medicare rebate freeze immediately, fix the private health insurance affordability crisis and scrap the tampon tax once and for all.

Mr Turnbull can find $80 billion to give big business a tax handout but he can't properly fund Australia's health system. The Liberals' hospital cuts are doing real damage across Australia, surgeries are being delayed, emergency department waiting times are blowing out and doctors, nurses and hospital staff are under ever-increasing pressure. Mr Turnbull's cuts will see $11 million less going to public hospitals in my home state of Tasmania from 2017 to 2020. Surgeries will be delayed, nurses and doctors numbers will decline and emergency department wait times will increase as a result of Mr Turnbull's cuts. These cuts to Tasmania's public hospitals are equivalent to 16,000 emergency department visits, 3,055 cataract operations and 1,825 deliveries. It says it all about Mr Turnbull's priorities that he's happy to give big business a tax handout but won't properly fund our public hospitals and give Australians the health care they need and that they deserve.

In 2016-17, Tasmania's emergency departments saw a record number of people, with 156,000 presentations. This is an increasing problem, as there are 8,045 more presentations a year to Tasmania's emergency departments than before the federal Liberals were elected. When you or your loved one gets sick or is unwell, the last thing you want or need is to be turned away because your local hospital doesn't have enough staff or beds to give you the care you need. Every dollar cut from our public hospitals is a dollar cut from our sickest and most vulnerable patients. Access to health care, as we've said many times on this side, should be determined by your Medicare card, not by your credit card. But while Mr Turnbull's priorities defend big business and while he keeps siding with private health insurers, our public hospitals continue to be put last. Australians know that Labor will always invest more money in public hospitals and in the system than the Liberals, who want nothing more than to privatise and Americanise our world-class healthcare system.

We've got to talk about the education cuts in the short time I've got left. They're happening right now and we're seeing our kids being disadvantaged because of the wrong choices of this government. Mr Turnbull talks a big game in education but he doesn't play well at all. He's long on rhetoric and he's short on action. Mr Turnbull has the opportunity to reverse $17 billion worth of cuts to school funding over the next 10 years, but this budget will have a direct effect on the cost of education and the resources that are going to go to students in the next couple of years. We want to see this government not only be more constructive but reverse some of the positively unhelpful decisions they have made in education.

Once again, tonight's budget is a chance for Mr Turnbull to wake up to himself and choose our schools and our kids' education over giving corporate tax cuts to the big banks. The budget is also a great opportunity for the government to get rid of its plans to cut the energy supplements for seniors. It's time for Mr Turnbull to stand up for pensioners instead of the dodgy bankers by dropping his cuts to the energy supplement and by abandoning his plan to increase the pension age to 70.

Axing the energy supplement to two million Australians, including 400,000 aged pensioners, will mean a cut to new pensioners of $365 a year for singles and $550 a year for couples. This cut was first proposed by Mr Turnbull and Mr Morrison in the 2016 budget but they still haven't been able to get it through the Senate because it's just not credible. Then there's the government's plan to increase the pension age to 70. As we heard earlier today, that means Australia would have an older pensioner age than the US, UK, Canada and New Zealand. In the first four years alone, around 375,000 Australians will have to work longer before they can access the pension. It has been almost four years since Joe Hockey first announced the plan to increase the pension age to 70 and, in a flight of fiscal fantasy, Mr Turnbull and Mr Morrison are still booking a $3.6 billion save to the budget bottom line, despite the measure not even being introduced in this term of the parliament.

But the Prime Minister still has time. There are still a few hours before the Treasurer's budget speech. He can reverse his cuts to schools, reverse his cuts to hospitals, reverse his tax cuts to the big banks and his big business mates, and start governing in the interests of all Australians.

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I follow Senator Bilyk in this debate with some disappointment because I know and like Senator Bilyk but, regrettably, she just follows the Labor lies about health and education. I see some school students up in the gallery and they would have heard Senator Bilyk say that the government has cut funding to schools and to health. These are the facts of the matter: under the new national health agreement, where the Commonwealth funds most of the states to provide hospital and health services, the coalition is on track to double funding from $13.3 billion in 2012-13—when the Labor Party was in charge of the government—to a record $28.3 billion under the coalition.

I repeat that: the coalition is doubling the billions of dollars that come under the national health agreement for the states' hospitals. It is doubling what Labor paid, yet Labor speakers continue the mantra that became quite famous at the last federal election and actually has become part of the lexicon of our nation when you want to demonstrate something that is an outright and absolute lie: the 'Mediscare' campaign by the Labor Party at the last federal election. Around the country, they got on the telephones and started telephoning people at random, saying the coalition was going to cut Medicare, which was a complete and absolute untruth. It was an unmitigated lie, and yet the Labor Party perpetrated that lie—the 'Mediscare' campaign—all the way through the election, and it did result in changes of votes. But, as I've just indicated, the fact is that, under the coalition's plan, funding for the national health agreement will double to $28 billion.

Madam Deputy President, the coalition's increase in hospital funding is up to 6.5 per cent per annum, and that is more than four times population growth, which is only 1.6 per cent, and more than three times the consumer price index, which is at 1.9 per cent. So popular is the coalition's offering on health that New South Wales, Western Australia, South Australia, Tasmania, the ACT and the Northern Territory have signed up to the Commonwealth national health agreement, and half of the governments that have signed up with glee and relish are, indeed, Labor state or territory governments.

Madam Deputy President, we continue to fund hospitals and health very, very appropriately. The 'abolition of Medicare' as Labor called it, in one of the greatest lies of our generation, has been proven to be false. This government has established the Medicare Guarantee Fund, which guarantees by legislation—the Medicare Guarantee Act—the Medicare Benefits Schedule and the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. Indeed, Madam Deputy President, under the coalition government, more Australian patients are seeing doctors without having to reach for their wallets. At 85.8 per cent in the period July 2017 to March this year, we have seen the highest bulk-billing rate at any time since the inception of Medicare—and that's under a coalition government. The GP bulk-billing rate is up by 3.8 per cent since Labor was last in government and more than 97.7 million bulk-billed GP visits were provided to patients between July 2017 and March 2018. That's an extra 3.7 million services bulk-billed under Medicare during the coalition's term of office. I might say, Madam Deputy President—

Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Macdonald, I might raise a point of order on you. I've been called a lot of things around here lately, but never 'Madam'! I let you get away with four.

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I do apologise, Mr Acting Deputy President. When I started my speech the Deputy President was sitting in the chair and, I must say, I was so intense in exposing Labor's lies that I hadn't glanced back at the chair and seen the changeover. So I do, indeed, apologise for that. I would call you many things, Senator, but I certainly would not call you 'Madam'!

I just spent a week in hospital getting my knee replaced. I had one of the best knee surgeons going. He did a wonderful job with me, and there was an assistant surgeon and an anaesthetist. Curiously, I paid the assistant surgeon very little; I paid the anaesthetist nothing; I paid my surgeon a little bit. I would have paid him triple what I paid him, because he did such a wonderful job. But with most of those specialists, including the cardiac specialist—one of the best cardiac physicians in Queensland, who looked after me because of the valve in my heart—there was no bill at all from them. That's all paid by Medicare. That is typical of the growth of bulk-billing under the coalition government and the guarantees that the coalition have given. This is the Medicare scheme that the Labor Party told all and sundry at the last election that the coalition was going to abolish.

Time won't permit me to go through everything, but I will quickly turn to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. Since coming to government, the coalition has, on average, listed one new medicine a day on the PBS, which is the scheme for the hugely subsidised pharmaceutical provisions given out to Australians. Those new medicines are worth around $8.3 billion to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. This includes new cancer treatments, some of which cost hundreds of thousands of dollars, that are now available for a $6.40 payment on concession, or $39.50 for general patients, per script. I remember I was involved with Senator Smith in the campaign to get the cure for hepatitis C onto the PBS. That's been a wonderful boon for people who suffer from that disease. The coalition continues to increase the funding for the PBS, and bulk-billing is increasing under the coalition.

I would like to respond to some of the lies on school funding that have been propagated by the Labor Party—not just with comments but with actual facts. Under the coalition all schools will reach 20 per cent of the SRS by 2023. Investment in public schools will rise from $6.8 billion last year to $7.4 billion this year and yet the Labor Party say we've cut funding to schools. The facts simply show the truth—$8 billion next year and $13.3 billion in 2027. I have to mention the record levels of recurrent funding for Catholic schools, totalling some $6.6 billion this year and nearly $9.8 billion in 2027. On average, funding will grow by around 3.7 per cent per student per year.

These are the facts of the health and education debate. Forget Labor's lies, forget Labor's 'Mediscare' campaign and look at the facts—they show government funding increasing. (Time expired)

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

I rise to speak on the MPI and join with Senator Bilyk in calling on the coalition to see sense and restore some fairness to Australia in tonight's federal budget. Before I go into those comments, the problem for Senator Macdonald, in his comments, is that it's not just the Labor opposition which is condemning the government's cuts to health and education. When you look at the issue of health, you see that the Australian Medical Association, which represents the nation's doctors, has joined with Labor in decrying the cuts to health and the impact that this is having on the public hospital system.

A couple of months ago, the AMA issued their public hospital report card, again revealing the impact of the Prime Minister's cuts and showing that:

The current funding formula will doom our public hospitals to fail, and patients will suffer as a result.

Even worse, the AMA says that the Prime Minister wants to lock in these cuts for another five years. The AMA goes on to say that the latest Commonwealth funding offer at February's COAG meeting, which is effectively a continuation of the current agreement:

… would lead to a continuation of the prevailing underperformance of hospitals due to significant underfunding and insufficient capacity.

So it's not just the Labor opposition talking about this issue; there are other independent bodies which support our proposition.

We see business profits at record levels, the highest since the GFC hit, which is good news, but wage growth is still at historically low levels—and we touched on that yesterday when I was at the Labour Day march in Brisbane. The Premier came out very strongly and talked about launching a parliamentary inquiry into allegations of wage theft. I welcome that move. That is the action of a government which does care about the real issues that are impacting on families. People are hurting because of rising health costs, rising insurance premiums and high energy bills. Despite this, we see the coalition government cutting hundreds of millions of dollars out of hospitals across the country. In Queensland patients are copping a $160 million cut to hospitals, which is the equivalent of taking 1,435 nurses out of our wards. This is on top of the over $1 billion owed to Queensland that the coalition had failed to pay until recently. We note that, in a win for Queensland, there was an agreement from the Treasurer last month to pay around a third of what is owed to Queensland hospitals going back to 2014-15 and 2015-16. That's $300 million in back pay to the Queensland public hospital system, but there's more to come. We're yet to see how that's going to play out. We know that the Prime Minister successfully implemented his GP tax, which means that there are more out-of-pocket expenses for Australians when they go to see the doctor—in going to see a specialist there is $12 more in out-of-pocket expenses.

Turning to education, I've been in my duty electorates of Maranoa and Flynn recently. It is important to note the impact of these education cuts on local schools. Warwick State High School is going to lose $770,000 over a two-year period; Warwick West State School, $440,000; and Warwick Central State School, $240,000. In Roma, the state college will miss out on $780,000 over a two-year period. In Stanthorpe, the high school will lose $580,000, while the state school will lose $270,000. In Flynn, another regional electorate, Gladstone State High School will lose $1.35 million over two years; Toolooa State High School, $870,000; Gladstone Central State School will lose $300,000; Gladstone West State School, $570,000; and Gladstone South State School, $220,000 over two years. In the northern suburbs of Brisbane, Pine Rivers State High School will have $1,060,000 ripped out of its budget and North Lakes State College will lose $2½ million. I could go on. The Catholic sector makes up 12 per cent of the $17 billion in cuts. That means that Catholic schools stand to lose over $2 billion in funding over the next two years. We stand with the Catholic sector, and I know that the Catholic sector welcomes Labor's approach.

This is the time for balance to be restored. It's only a Labor government that will restore balance and fairness to Australia to start bridging the gap between the rich and the poor.

John Williams (NSW, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to contribute to this matter of public importance, which, frankly, is a waste of taxpayers' money. For about an hour we'll sit here and throw political hand grenades at each other and talk about who is best fit to run the place. I know you wouldn't, Mr Acting Deputy President Sterle—you're fair dinkum. I've done a lot of work with you over many years. When I leave this place next year I'll look back and say, 'Senator Sterle? He was one of the genuine blokes on the other side.'

But here we are talking about an issue that is all about politics, instead of working together to make things better. It infuriates me. I'll tell you a secret, Mr Acting Deputy President, at the time of the 2013 election, I think most of those in the Labor Party knew they were going to lose. The polls were terrible. It was pretty clear that the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd era was coming to an end. Believe it or not, and I would never try to mislead you, Mr Acting Deputy President, there were promises made by the other side that they were going to spend $80 billion—this huge amount of money—on education and on health. Of course, they were never funded. The money was never there. It was a political promise, a piece of propaganda—that's what it was. Those promises were never funded, because the Labor Party knew full well they were going to be thrown out of government, but Labor used those figures today. Those figures are dream figures. They were never true figures, never funded. They were figures plucked out of the sky and would never have been produced, even if they had won the election, believe me. Now we play this political game on this matter of public importance put forward by Senator Collins.

The words 'like axing the energy supplement' really caught my eye. Why was the energy supplement brought in? I will tell you why. It was to compensate pensioners and low-income earners and those on social security for the extra cost of electricity. Because of what? Because of a carbon tax. Remember the 2010 election? I'm sure Senator Ketter would. I know you would, Mr Acting Deputy President Sterle, remember the 2010 election when former Prime Minister Gillard was the Prime Minister. She said those famous words, the big statement: 'There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead'. Senator McGrath would remember it well, would you not? However, it was a cliffhanger of an election. I remember it well. The coalition won 73 seats; Labor won 72. Enter Mr Tony Windsor from New England. Whose side was he on? He was on Labor's side. Of course, Mr Oakeshott, the then former National Party member from Lyne, which includes Port Macquarie, sided with Labor. One of the deals they agreed to was that they would set up the multiparty political gathering of whatever it was to look at climate change and what we are going to do about a carbon tax. What was it called? It was called the multiparty climate change forum or some stupid thing. It was going to change the planet.

In came the carbon tax and so here we have this supplement to those pensioners. And it was a fair thing to say we're going to supplement your social security, your pensions, because the electricity price will go up because Prime Minister Gillard broke her promise, simple as that. Mr Tony Abbott said if he won the election in 2013, the carbon tax would go and it did, but that supplement has stayed on. We're supplementing people, especially pensioners and low-income earners and those on social security, for electricity prices boosted by a carbon tax that doesn't exist. In this debate today, which is about wasting taxpayers' money, we are playing politics—probably doing little for the Australian people—and getting prepared for the budget tonight.

I have learned a lot in politics since I've been here. Do you remember the last election on 2 July 2016? Opposition leader Bill Shorten said, 'They will privatise Medicare.' Mr Acting Deputy President Sterle, you've been in business, you have been a truckie, you have carted furniture and you know a fair bit about business, probably quite different to many of those opposite over there. Mr Acting Deputy President, would you buy a business that earns $10,000 a week but costs $23,000 a week to run? I wouldn't. It's a clear loss. Medicare collects around $10 billion of Medicare levies and spends about $23 billion on Medicare pay-outs. Who will buy a business or a coffee shop earning $10,000 a week through the till and costing $23,000 a week to run? That's a terrible business. Who would ever buy that? There might be some gullible people out there who want to invest but I don't think you would find too many who will put to that sort of money in to buy a business like Medicare when those opposite said it would be privatised—just crazy politics.

Let's look at Medicare. We're guaranteeing Medicare and putting in record levels of funding with an additional $2.4 billion over the next four years. That's a fact. We're listing life-changing medications on the PBS. As Senator Macdonald said, we've listed over 1,600 new and amended medicines worth $8.2 billion We're debating the hospitals. My memory might not be very good but I remember a bloke; his name was Prime Minister Kevin Rudd. He said to the Australian people, 'I will fix the hospital system and the buck will stop with me.' Does everyone remember that quote? You should do. You could probably google it up. Well, surely, Mr Rudd fixed the hospital system. What are we doing arguing about hospitals? Mr Rudd fixed them. Surely he honoured his word, or did he? Perhaps he didn't fix them. Perhaps the buck didn't stop with him either. These are the politics we play come budget night.

Altogether our government will invest more than $103.3 billion over the next four years in hospitals. I will give you some figures. Commonwealth funding for public hospital services has increased from $13.3 billion in 2012-13, when we were in opposition, to a record $22.7 billion in 2021, or 70 per cent over this period. On school funding, in 2017 we spent $17.5 billion on schools and by 2027 we will be spending more than $31.1 billion. That spending will almost double between now and 2027, so the next 10 years. We're growing funding each year by more than $1 billion.

And so the politics goes on with Labor's retiree tax. The Labor Party's proposed $56 billion retirement tax will hit 875,000 Australians, including low-income earners, retirees and pensioners. I'm getting plenty of emails on the franking credits issue! People who are self-funded retirees, husbands and wives on $40,000 a year, are going to lose between $10,000 and $12,000 a year. If you're taking home $40,000 a year and you haven't even got your hand out to taxpayers, why are you going to be hit? This is a big issue. I reckon this is why the polls have turned against Labor, because they're going to dig into the people who've worked hard and saved their money. Of course if their money's in the bank they'd be lucky to get 2½ or three per cent as interest rates are so low; the official cash rate is 1.5 per cent. So Labor are going to take money off them, the self-funded retirees. They backflipped on pensioners. They say, 'We won't touch the pensioners,' but the original plan was that the $55 billion would include them. I have no doubt there will be a lot more said about that as we run towards the election.

The Liberal-Nationals government is delivering a record $75 billion in investment in infrastructure and transport projects, focused on building local communities, connecting the regions and our cities, busting congestion and boosting productivity while creating local jobs. The government has committed to a 10-year infrastructure investment plan. I'm glad to see this, and I hope we hear more about it tonight when Treasurer Morrison delivers his budget—especially roads in regional areas, where many of us still drive on dirt roads. Many of those in the city wouldn't know what a dirt road is.

Jordon Steele-John (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Here we are on budget night, and the place is alive as, over in other parts of this building, commentators and journalists sort through the entrails of the federal budget and ask themselves questions. Who got the pound of flesh? Who has been heard? Who has been brought in and who has been shut out? I would like to ask some questions that occur to me as a young person and on behalf of a generation that is so rarely heard in this place.

I do wonder whether there will be anything in this budget to address the intergenerational theft that is inaction on climate change, or whether we will continue to see this criminal destruction of an entire generation's future by this government. I also wonder whether there will be any action to address the disgraceful poverty gap that has become the youth allowance in this country. Some in the government have proposed in recent weeks that they could live on Newstart's $40 a day. Well, I would ask them to give youth allowance's $32 a week for a single person a go, and I would refer them to the recent Anglicare research that suggests that if you are a single person living on youth allowance there are a grand total of three rental properties in the entirety of Australia that are affordable and appropriate for you. I would also wonder whether this government will reverse the decision that it made in the 2014 budget to cut the funding for the national youth advocacy body, leaving the young people of Australia without a federally funded youth voice for the first time in 30 years.

We will find out in a few hours the answers to these questions, and I hold in my heart a small grain of hope that we might get some positive ones. But, given this government's track record in this area, I very much doubt that it will take the opportunity to right the wrongs it has perpetrated against this generation in the last six years. I hope that I am wrong, but I and the young people of Australia are not holding our breath. I thank the chamber for its time.

Malarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The only consistent thing that we have seen from the federal government is that they have no real interest in investing in the Northern Territory. Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull and Scott Morrison are more interested in giving an $80 billion tax cut to big business and the banks than they are in improving the lives of the people of the Northern Territory.

In the Territory, we remember this history of poor treatment at the hands of the Turnbull government. We remember the disastrous budget last year, with the savage GST cuts of $2 billion over four years. Now this year we have a drop of $1.4 billion compared with those projections over the next four years. This is on top of the cuts from 2017. So the people of the Territory remember this government's flip-flops on a commitment to remote housing. The 'Will they or won't they?' game on matching the NT government's $1.1 billion commitment to remote housing went on for months until only a fortnight ago, when the Treasurer committed to $550 million over five years—with the national partnership agreement expiring on 30 June. The government now needs to follow through with a commitment to sit down with the NT government, Aboriginal organisations and community representatives to enter good-faith negotiations around issues like leasing and funding for town camps.

There is also the disaster that is known as the CDP, the Community Development Program, where 15,000 participants were slapped with so-called serious failures in just two years to 30 June 2017. There are currently around 33,000 CDP participants, most of whom are Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Serious failures were applied five or more times to 3,702 individuals, and for those whose fines were partially waived the average time off welfare was 2.4 weeks.

Since it began operating in July 2015, 406,626 financial penalties have been applied under CDP. About 80 per cent of participants are Indigenous people living in remote regions. The message that is being sent consistently under this government is the entrenchment of poverty and the entrenchment of disadvantage for the most vulnerable in our society. A report by The Australia Institute found that the scheme had helped fewer than one in five people into an ongoing job and that fewer than one in 10 remained in that job for six months or more. This is a $1.3 billion policy failure.

Under the federal government's school funding model, every single school in the Northern Territory will lose funding. Over the next two years, the Northern Territory will lose $70 million of the Turnbull federal government's funding for its schools. But Labor is going to restore every dollar of the $17 billion the Liberals have cut from our schools across the country.

The people of the Northern Territory were blindsided when MYEFO was released late last year. There was a $15 million cut to the Territory's premier tertiary institution, Charles Darwin University. This was in addition to $70 million in cuts to the Territory's education sector more broadly. And to make matters worse, the Liberals are attempting to silence educators by banning all student media organisations from the budget lock-up this evening. They can't face them. In the Northern Territory, we are at a serious disadvantage. According to the 2016 census, only 17.1 per cent of Territorians have completed a bachelor's degree or higher. This is in contrast to the national average of 22 per cent, a difference of five per cent overall.

We've already seen orchestrated leaks to some local Territory media around big promises on road funding. Let's unpack some of those big promises on road funding. Let's see beyond the smoke and mirrors in the rear view mirror to those roads. There are media reports that tonight's budget will have a $180 million to upgrade the Central Arnhem Road to a two-lane sealed road. The Central Arnhem Road is a dirt road. If this is accurate, that's absolutely wonderful. But let's unpack that $180 million—if this is the case. It costs a lot of money to upgrade a road. Roughly speaking, it costs around a million dollars for every kilometre. The Central Arnhem Road is a 663-kilometre dirt road. Maybe the first 50 to 80 kilometres are sealed, where it takes you from the Stuart Highway to Barunga and Beswick. But, beyond that—to Bulman to Weemol and then off to Ramingining and Gapuwiyak and up to Nhulunbuy—it's all dirt road. So we're talking around 600 kilometres of dirt road. If we look at about a million dollars a kilometre to seal, that's way over $180 million—way over. So there really are smoke and mirrors going on here about the kind of planning and investment that is being touted for the remote regions of the Northern Territory. I want to see the details this evening when the budget is released.

The media is also reporting that the federal government has committed $1.4 million to land transport infrastructure projects. Again, let's see what the reality is here. We know the federal government does not have a good record at all on investment and infrastructure in northern Australia. Let's have a look at the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility—oh, a $5 billion fund! It's nearly four years later, and not a dollar has been spent. Here we have the chairperson of that fund resign. Still the people of northern Australia see nothing from that $5 billion fund.

This government is so seriously out of touch with Territorians, they expect us to cop $16 million in cuts to public hospitals in the Northern Territory, cuts which are equivalent to 24,000 emergency department visits, 4,443 cataract extractions or 2,655 births. Under this government, elective surgery waiting times are the worst they've been since records began. Every dollar cut from our public hospitals in the Northern Territory is a dollar cut from our sickest and most vulnerable patients. Access to health care should be determined by your Medicare card, not your credit card.

Territorians will be looking at tonight's budget to see if this government is going to fund recommendations out of the Royal Commission into the Protection and Detention of Children in the Northern Territory. This royal commission was announced by this Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbull, in 2016. Now this government won't commit the funds to see recommendations implemented. The people of the Northern Territory deserve more than spin and smoke and mirrors out of this budget. It's a fact of life we do not have the revenue base and capacity to raise funds the same as the other states. We do have a high degree of entrenched disadvantage. This disadvantage continues to remain entrenched under the policies and the smoke and mirror financial bucket that you say is going to help us. Territorians, like all Australians, deserve a fair go. But are they going to get it in tonight's budget?

James Paterson (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In my two short years in this place, never have I seen a matter of public importance more in need of a fact check than this one. It is an MPI full of untruths and misstatements, and it is clearly an attempt to mislead and deceive. Let me go through, one by one, the false claims and errors made in the MPI alone, let alone the contributions by Labor senators during this debate.

First the MPI claims that there have been cuts to Medicare. Fact check: it's wrong. In fact, Medicare funding will increase by $2.8 billion over the next four years. That is increased funding from this year to next year to the year after to the year after. This year is record funding, next year is record funding and the year after that and the year after that will also be record funding. That doesn't sound like a cut to me.

Next the MPI claims that there've been hospital cuts. Fact check: it's wrong. Funding for hospitals, in fact, has increased from just $13 billion in 2012-13, when Labor was last in government, to a forecast of $22 billion in 2020-21. That's an increase this year, next year, the year after and so on and so forth to record levels of funding.

There are school cuts, the MPI claims. Again, that is wrong. Over the next 10 years, $25.3 billion of extra funding on top of the already legislated funding that was in place will flow to schools. That represents a 77 per cent increase on current levels in the next decade.

The MPI goes on to claim that there is an $80 billion tax handout to the top end of town. In that one claim alone there are multiple errors. Firstly, it's not an $80 billion tax handout; it's a $65 billion cost to revenue over a decade. Secondly, it's not to the top end of town. As Labor senators know, $24 billion of those cuts, which have already been legislated, in fact go to businesses with less than $50 million in revenue. I don't think, under any Australian's understanding, that that would be the top end of town. Thirdly, the MPI claims that it's a handout. It's not a handout at all. A handout would be giving a company money that it didn't earn but that someone else earned and has had taken from them, but this tax cut just returns to companies the money they have earned themselves and allows them to reinvest it in their business and in their workforce. Also, this $80 billion figure doesn't include the $30 billion of increased revenue that the Treasury estimates will take place as a result of the tax cuts, which halves the estimated cost to government revenue.

I think this draws out an interesting point about the Labor Party's position on tax cuts for companies. Where exactly do they stand? We know they support tax cuts for small businesses with up to $2 million in revenue, and we know that they don't support extending tax cuts to businesses with over $50 million in revenue, but what about the businesses in between $2 million of revenue per year and $50 million of revenue per year? There are thousands and thousands of businesses in this range. They have hundreds of thousands of employees and hundreds of thousands of shareholders. Today, standing here, we still do not know what the Labor Party's plans are for them. If the Labor Party win the next election, will the tax cuts, which have already been legislated for that group of businesses, stay in place, or will those businesses face an increase in taxes? It's up to the Labor Party to clarify.

What's the real issue here? What's the real division between the Labor Party and the coalition here? It's certainly true to say—and I'm happy to acknowledge it—that the Labor Party propose to spend more money than the coalition proposes to spend. They do propose to spend more on health. They do propose to spend more on education. But just because they've promised to spend more doesn't mean that the real increases that this government is delivering today, now, in reality, amounts to a cut. And, although they may be happy to claim that they can make the figures add up and that they can deliver all this increased spending, I have my doubts. I'm waiting to see how it adds up. I doubt, even with the $200 billion of tax increases that they have already promised that they will legislate, that that will even cover the increased spending. Even off the back of low-income retirees and people of modest means who've decided to invest in a second home and are negatively gearing that home in an attempt to grow their family wealth, even off the back of those tax increases alone, I suspect the Labor Party have promised to spend even more money than they will raise in extra revenue.

But let's talk about some of the features that are actually going to be in this budget. One which has been confirmed by the Treasurer and Minister for Finance is a new cap of 23.9 per cent on tax as a percentage of GDP. I think that is a really worthwhile initiative and a really worthy initiative that deserves all of our support, because there should be a limit beyond which government will not grow. There should be an amount of tax that the government says it will not take any more than, and 23.9 per cent is a long-term historical average of federal governments' tax take. The Labor Party have thus far refused to commit to any limit on the amount of tax they'll take from individuals, any limit on the amount of tax they'll take from businesses or any limit on the amount of tax they'll take from retirees. If Labor were left to their own devices, tax as a percentage of GDP would rise far beyond 23.9 per cent. Who knows where it will end? They refuse to nominate any ceiling on the amount of tax they're willing to take.

I want to respond to one other issue that I heard raised in this debate, in Senator Steele-John's short contribution on behalf of young people in this country. While Senator Steele-John is younger than me, I am also a young person and I too have an interest in the future of this country and the future of young people. It amazes me that Senator Steele-John thinks one of the priorities for the budget tonight should be to create taxpayer-funded advocacy services for young people. As a young person now, and as an even younger person in the past, there's nothing I find more patronising than the idea that young people aren't capable of advocating for themselves, that they somehow need a helping hand from the government in the form of taxpayer-funded advocacy and that we should measure the worth of a federal government, with all the things it will do in the budget and all the things it will do, on whether or not there are going to be taxpayer-funded youth advocacy services. But that is a measure of the narrow priorities and the narrow focus of the Greens.

Lee Rhiannon (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We've heard from Senator Paterson, speaking in grandiose terms, about the need for a fact check on what we have here. If he was sincere, he would apply a fact check to his own government. This is where we see the lies, and there will be more lies tonight. We'll be hearing from the Treasurer and the Prime Minister, and it will be quite sickening. They'll be out there talking about redistribution and making Australia a fairer country. That's the last thing that will happen out of this budget. Why can we say that emphatically? Because of the state of the country now.

When you look at the distribution of wealth, the level of inequality is being driven harder and harder because of the policies of the Liberals and the Nationals and how they run this country. The figures are deeply shocking. The top one per cent now own more wealth than the bottom 74 per cent of Australians. This income inequality is so extreme; it's the worst it's been in 76 years. Why is that? It's because of the policies of the Turnbull government. We also know that wage growth is the lowest it's been and, at the same time, company profits are up at a record rate. Last year, in 2017, there was a 40 per cent increase in company profits. What did we hear from the government? How many times have we heard Senator Paterson and his Liberal and Nationals colleagues tell us we need to have a company tax cut? Really, is there no end to the lengths that they will go to look after their mates so that their profits can be even greater? The government has let business off the hook time and time again so they can increase their profits. Look at the situation with regard to the cuts that they brought in on weekend wages for some of the lowest paid workers—vulnerable people doing it tough already. What does this government do? Open it up so that they can cut more wages.

There are so many people unemployed and underemployed in this country. Today I was with Grant Courtney from the meatworkers union. We've been working together on the issue of live exports. Some of the information he shared, when we had meetings today, is that there are 8,000 unemployed and underemployed meatworkers in this country looking for work. But what do we get from the Liberals and the Nationals? They want to keep the live sheep trade going, because it serves the interests of just a few rich farmers. The majority of farmers by far are not happy with the current situation. We could have a win-win here: a win for ending the cruelty and a win for regional Australia in ensuring that there is jobs growth and a boost to the economy. Again, we hear all the rhetoric from the Nationals about their commitment to country folk, but we don't get any real significant change.

We'll be hearing the budget speech shortly. It should be a budget that is about reducing the inequality in this country. How should we be doing that? Obviously homes for all is something that's critical. We need to have decent well-paid jobs where there are safe working conditions. The issue of Newstart really does need to be addressed. The urgency of bringing in an increase to Newstart should not be overlooked in this budget. The number of people in this country living in poverty is simply unacceptable. We need a very broad renationalisation program, starting, clearly, with energy and transport. So much of our public transport is now in public hands.

There are many other exciting proposals around that people are getting behind. They are understanding how rotten this government is and how unfair it is. When it comes to Labor, Labor need to watch themselves. So often, when they're in opposition, they're a different beast. When they get into government, the tentacles of neo-Liberalism can capture them to often a similar extent to the Liberal-Nationals rollover. We've seen the shadow Treasurer, Chris Bowen say that when the budget has returned to surplus then you can look at a further tax reform of both personal and company tax. There is Labor talking about cuts to company tax. That would be a disaster. They need to sign off and just say that is not where they're going to go. They need to be emphatic and, when they get into government, actually stick with policies that address inequality, ensure that there are homes for all and particularly work with the union movement to change the rules. We need to bring back that ILO recognised right—the right to strike, the right for political strikes and the right to strike for wages and conditions. That is essential if we're going to drive these changes.

Sue Lines (WA, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That concludes the discussion of a matter of public importance.