James McGrath (Queensland, Liberal National Party, Shadow Assistant Minister to the Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the answers given by Minister Farrell to the questions without notice asked by Senator Cadell today on the cost of living.

Senator Cadell is my good friend from New South Wales. What is interesting is the gap in reality between the government benches and what is happening out in the real world. There is a massive gap in reality when you have a prime minister who says, 'It has been a good 10-month period because what we have been doing is going through and fulfilling the commitments that we made in the election.' Well, first of all, they've been busy breaking their promises, and, second of all, they do not understand the cost-of-living crisis that is impacting upon all Australians.

In particular, my colleague Senator Cadell asked about the price of electricity and what is happening to the government's commitment to cut people's power bills not by a dollar, not by a thousand dollars but by $275. Before the last election Prime Minister Albanese and the Labor Party promised 97 times that they would cut your power bills. So, to the good people listening at home, the Labor Party promised you they would cut your power bills by $275. They didn't do it once. It wasn't just a brain burp, like when sometimes politicians misspeak. It happened 97 times. When they get into power it's a bit like Homer Simpson wandering through the staffroom at Mr Burns's nuclear reactor going, 'It wasn't me, boss.' They have no idea of how to use the levers of the economy to help the Australian people. What is happening under this government is that power prices are actually going up. They're not going to go down by $275; they're actually going to go up by more than that, thanks to Labor, who are very good at talking. There are some fine words that come from the Labor side. But, when you look at the words and you study them, you realise they're very good at making promises, but they're particularly poor at delivering on those promises. But they are brilliant—they are gold medallists—at breaking promises. I'm going to go through some of the promises that the Labor government said they would deliver.

Now, this is going to hurt people, because I know most Australians think politicians don't break promises. They think politicians are honest, altruistic people. Guess what? On this side of the chamber, we are. We are honest and altruistic. We believe in what is good for Australia. But, sadly, Deputy President—and I know you've warned me before about saying rude things, so I won't; I'm on my best behaviour at the moment, and I disappoint my fans who are listening, those who send the nice emails in the capital letters—the Labor Party are very, very good at breaking promises. First of all they said they would cut your power bills by $275. Well, broken. They promised that 97 times. Guess what? They've broken it 97 times. They said there'd be cheaper mortgages. Guess what? Since Labor have been in power, mortgages keep going up and up and up. So thanks, Labor, for making my mortgage payments go higher. They said there'd be no changes to super. Well, come in spinner—we've got another broken promise from Labor. They are now going after your money in your super accounts. So, first of all they're putting up your power bills, then they're putting up your mortgages, and heaven help you if you're renting somewhere. Firstly, it's so hard to find a place to rent, and, secondly, rent is going through the roof because of Labor's policies. But then they're going after your retirement savings. And they promised lower inflation.

It is so dispiriting that a modern political party would make such false promises before an election then get into power and skip around this building like fat kids in a lolly shop, stealing all the lollies and then not delivering on their promises, because they've forgotten who sent them here. They think the trade union sent them here. In this place, if you look over at the good people there—well, most of them—it's like a retirement home for union barons. This is what it is. The UK have got the House of Lords. Here we've got the 'house of union barons'. They serve two terms as the secretary of the 'paperclip union of South Australia' and suddenly they get elevated to the Senate. It's almost like their super or their pension policy: 'You've done 10 years working for this union, and now for your retirement package. Here we go—go and be a senator for 12 years.'

Another promise was that they wouldn't touch your franking credits. Guess what? They're coming after those, because you can never trust a fat kid in a lolly shop, like you can never trust the Labor Party when it comes to keeping their promises.

Tony Sheldon (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Besides some offensive comments from the senator who spoke before me, I just want to say it's a very interesting approach to say 'honest and altruistic'. Those opposite voted against a $230 average saving to household power bills. That's what they did—that's their honesty. Do you know what? They are altruistic, because they did not support a wage increase of a dollar an hour—that's 'altruistic' when you're a conservative on that side of the chamber! They made sure they voted against multi-employer bargaining, which delivered productivity and better wages and which produced an opportunity for fair competition amongst companies. They voted against that. They voted against a secure jobs plan because they're 'altruistic'. If that's what altruism is then that's what is wrong in this country and why they were voted out. They don't understand the importance of making a difference in this country on so many fronts, the importance of building a better country that involves everybody.

When we go back to the energy program from those opposite, we see they didn't have one, and they didn't have one on 22 occasions. They had no policy. We were landed with no energy policy from those opposite, but we have had them vote against an energy policy that decreases and holds back average prices for power bills. They are the ones who hid the fact that there was a 20 per cent increase in the default market offer before the election. They are 'altruistic and honest'—what a load of rubbish!

It is disappointing to hear those sorts of false allegations made in this Senate, when the reality is that they didn't vote to hold back prices at $230, on average, per year and they lied about and misrepresented a 20 per cent increase in the default market offer. I can go on. In nine years there were 22 energy policies that didn't float, that didn't fly, that didn't progress, yet those opposite have the hide to come in here and talk about honesty and altruism. Being altruistic is actually about making a difference with the plans that you put forward.

Those opposite ignored 12 formal warnings from the ACCC about domestic gas supply—they ignored them! And these are the people who have the hide to come in here and say to the Australian people that not only do they not have an answer—that they haven't progressed an answer—but they vote against answers because that's the program that they have. Under those opposite we also saw a four-gigawatt infrastructural power leak, with only one gigawatt coming back in. Snowy 2.0 is running months late.

Of course, we've announced, quite rightly, our Energy Price Relief Plan. We've also announced our intent, in this May budget, to make some incredibly important changes to make sure there's relief and support for those in the Australian community who are doing it tough. They're doing it tough because the people opposite, who are not altruistic and not honest, have left this country in a hole of over a trillion dollars of debt. Whilst they were running off and giving billions of dollars to Qantas, without any obligations to the Australian public, and giving tens of millions of dollars to Harvey Norman, without any obligations and whilst its profits went up during COVID, leaving us with a trillion dollars of debt because of their mismanagement, we've been looking at areas like the Housing Australia Future Fund. They don't want to have 30,000 new social and affordable houses in this country in the next five years. They're voting against it. They've said they're opposed to it.

How could you be less altruistic and less honest while saying you are honest? Their approach to honesty in what they are delivering, in their views and their policies and their suggestions—their 'no-alition'—is to make sure that every Australian pays the price for their lack of thought, lack of preparation over the last decade and lack of capacity to support good policies that make a difference to the Australian public.

Of course, those good policies go to cheaper medicine under Medicare, a very important initiative—30 per cent less for prescription medicines under the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. They go to 180,000 free TAFE and vocational education and training places. That's about building up productivity and capacity within our community. They go to the $50 million TAFE Technology Fund. Again, it's all about improving capacity and productivity within the economy. That's smart spending not wasted spending. It's about making sure we make a difference.

We see those opposite consistently oppose policies to ease cost-of-living pressures through opportunities for better wages, or, alternatively, through policies that make a difference to energy prices.

Claire Chandler (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I also rise to speak on the motion to take note of the answer provided by the minister to the question asked by my good friend and colleague Senator Cadell. That was a question about the cost of living, which is an issue that I'm hearing a lot about. In my home state of Tasmania, families are struggling, prices are going up and up, and they feel like they don't have the means to address those price increases.

It seems like every single day, at the moment, we are coming into this chamber as the opposition and we are asking questions on behalf of those families in our own states about the skyrocketing cost-of-living. Every time we ask these questions—and they are important questions that the Australian people want answers to—we find ourselves in a situation where the government brushes those questions off and will try to talk about anything else. If this government was something you bought in a store, I think you would be taking it back to the store and asking for a refund. Then you would take that refund and put it towards paying for your power bill, which we know has gone through the roof since this government came to power. Or it might be your grocery bill, which we also know has gone through the roof, or your mortgage payment, which, again, is going through the roof.

The marketing material for this government was very clear. What was written on the box is not the product that Australians have actually got now. If only I could call the ACCC! The government said that if you voted for them your cost of living would go down.. They said that if you voted for them your power bill—each individual's power bill—would go down by $275. They made that commitment 97 times in the lead up to the election. They made it over and over and over again.

Fast forward 10 months, and not only have they broken that promise but they are actually asking for credit for bills going up by more than 10 per cent. They want credit for breaking an election promise, yet they don't want to accept any of the blame for the skyrocketing cost of living that Australians are now facing. Indeed, every time we come into this chamber and we have conversations about the rising cost of living, and we ask questions about that $275 commitment that was made 97 times during the election campaign, all we get from the government is avoiding the question—at best—and—at worst—talking about the previous government, because they don't have anything else that they know how to talk about.

They also promised that they wouldn't increase taxes on Australians. Yet, they've broken that promise as well. In the lead up to the next budget in May, it certainly seems, as my colleague Senator McGrath says, that they are laying the groundwork to break that particular promise—not to increase taxes on Australians—again and again. This is a Labor government which said whatever it thought people wanted to hear to get their vote back in May 2022. But, in fact, this government does the opposite. Under Labor, the cost of living has gone way up, when they said it would go way down.

We know that the Treasurer and the finance minister have looking around to see whose pockets they can dip into to plug the holes in the budget coming up in May. Sure, they promised before the election that they wouldn't do any of that. But, of course, that promise is out the window, like the majority of the promises they made. We saw this when the Treasurer got up on national TV and refused to even rule out capital gains taxes on the family home. Admittedly, the Prime Minister did come and clean up that little slip of the tongue by Treasurer Chalmers, but, like I say, you can't trust this government when they've broken so many promises already. Who's to say that we won't be having another conversation about capital gains tax come the budget in May? It was pretty obvious, when the Treasurer would not even rule out something so obvious as capital gains tax on the family home, that the Labor government are cooking up a long list of possible tax hits on Australians, and the Treasurer, at that point, did not want to rule anything in or out.

But there will be something else. There is always something else when it comes to this Labor government. They promise the world to everyone and quickly run out of money to pay for all of those promises. And when they have run out of money, they will come after yours. The Labor promise to cut your power bill by $275 is broken. Their promise to reduce the cost of living is broken. Their promise not to increase taxes on Australians is broken already, and they are looking for even more ways to break it.

Linda White (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government understands that the rising cost of living is hurting Australians. The Prime Minister and the Treasurer know that it is hitting a lot of Australians hard. The government knows this too, and I know that. I think the Australian people understand that we didn't create these challenges, but they elected us to take responsibility for addressing them.

The Albanese government has a three-point plan for addressing the inflation and cost-of-living challenge in the economy; it's about relief, repair and restraint. I'll break it down. It's about responsible cost-of-living relief and policies, like our cheaper childcare policy, cheaper medicines and direct energy bill relief. We're also repairing the supply-side constraints by introducing fee-free TAFE; cleaner and cheaper energy; the National Reconstruction Fund, which, hopefully, will go through the parliament; and a plan for more affordable housing. We've also got a responsible budget with spending restraint, as I said. We want to return almost all the revenue upgrades to the bottom line and keep spending essentially flat over the next four years, not to add to inflation.

There's absolutely a plan, but let's think about how those opposite have tried to thwart it. Let's talk about electricity prices. The question to the minister was about electricity prices, but let's take a closer look. It seems to me that those opposite have a bit of amnesia about what they actually did last year. Maybe they can't remember what they did during the Morrison years.

Raff Ciccone (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They don't want to remember it!

Linda White (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They don't want to remember it—absolutely! Luckily for us the Australian people saw it and remembered it at the ballot box almost a year ago. They remembered it. It seems like there's a bit of amnesia and re-creation of history. Let's remember that last year the Albanese government legislated to cap wholesale energy prices on coal and gas. We did that in large part because we had to deal with a wasted decade of failed energy policies from the coalition. We did that in part to respond to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, which had put enormous pressure on global energy markets. We recalled the parliament—do you remember that?—before Christmas to deal with the situation because we prioritised energy prices and we prioritised what we thought was a difficult situation. This government took it very, very seriously, so we legislated the Energy Price Relief Plan. Do we remember that?

Now, just three months later, we're already hearing from the Australian Energy Regulator that, had we not acted when we did, energy prices would be 40 to 50 per cent more expensive than they are now. Without that government intervention, Australian families would be paying more for electricity. Without the government intervention, Australian businesses would have paid extra. Because we acted, hundreds of dollars in additional increases for households have been avoided, and people have saved thousands of dollars.

But wait a minute; let's remember—where was the coalition when this emergency was going on? When given the chance to support cheaper power prices, what did the coalition say? They didn't say yes, they said no. When asked if they would support Australian households and business by stabilising the energy market, the Liberal and National Party said no. The 'no-alition' over there voted against cheaper energy prices and voted against support for Australians feeling the sting of inflation. If the coalition had been in charge last year, Australians would be paying hundreds and hundreds of dollars more for electricity than they currently are. Why? Because the Albanese government had a plan and we implemented that plan, but with no help from the 'no-alition'—no help whatsoever. Are we surprised about that? No, because during their nine years in office they had 20 failed energy policies. There was inaction—

Raff Ciccone (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

How many?

Linda White (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It was 20—yes! It was a decade of inaction that put us in this mess. They were in charge. They could have had an energy policy, but, no, 20 of them bit the dust. I'm here to remind those opposite of what they did—which was nothing—and what the Albanese government have done, which is have a plan and put it into action. The plan is delivering for Australians every day of the week, and of that I am incredibly proud.

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

The reason that we're having this debate today is that when you are the government for vested interests you don't have any time to deal with the major challenges that are facing the Australian people; you only have time to work through the narrow vested interests that are being set out for you by your great supporters, benefactors and donors. We have seen since the election an effort to work through the laundry list of grievances from unions, super funds and class action law firms. We have seen the effort to put in place multi-employer, or pattern, bargaining. We have seen the efforts to line the coffers of super funds. We have seen the efforts to remove transparency from workers so they can't see how much money the super funds are sending off to the unions. And we have seen just in recent weeks this hilarious idea of a housing fund, where we want the super funds to give more money so they can buy more houses, but, of course, the people themselves are banned from buying houses with their own money. This is the bizarre world of the government's vested interests, where if you are a union or a superfund you get the rolled gold treatment but if you are a punter you can forget about it.

The consequence of the narrow focus here is that the government hasn't been able to deal with inflation. We have seen 10 interest rate rises since the election. A mortgage holder with a $750,000 mortgage will now be paying at least $1,500 additionally each month. That has been massively fuelled by Canberra. The government is fuelling inflation. The IMF, the International Monetary Fund, has warned that the use of off-balance-sheet items has fuelled inflation and is a risk to our budget and our economy. Inflation is at a 33-year high. Canberra and the Labor Party are massively fuelling inflation because Canberra and the Labor Party are addicted to massive spending projects off the balance sheet but also through the budget itself.

So we have seen $45 billion in off-balance-sheet items, the reconstruction slush fund for unions, the housing fund and the rewiring fund, but there are also tens of billions of dollars in new expenditure locked into the budget with the bills that have passed the parliament since the election. So you have a government that is heavily invested in enriching its favourite vested interests through policy proposals, but you have also got a government that is committed to fuelling inflation perhaps not deliberately but because it can't seem to restrain expenditure. It is prepared to ignore the IMF and the independent observers here. It continues to bring bills before the parliament. There are now bills before the parliament to establish the union slush fund, the reconstruction fund and the housing fund. We just considered the housing fund at the economics committee this week, and we will be reporting later today or tomorrow. This is another $10 billion. Again, going against the warnings of the IMF, the government has decided that it will fuel inflation.

Then we hear the Labor Party people come into the Senate and read out their pieces of papers with their talking points about how bad the Morrison government and other governments were. Sure, there were many bad things in the past, but the reality is that the pandemic was managed as well as it could have been from an economic viewpoint. The Labor opposition wanted to pay people to get vaccinations. The Labor opposition wanted to pay JobKeeper to foreigners and universities. We won't forget that because, effectively, the idea of extending JobKeeper and then paying it to foreigners was a ridiculous proposition at the time and it was ruled out of order. Then Labor will say, 'You switched off too quickly.' But Dr Leigh—or Minister Leigh, as he now is—has gone through and done a forensic examination of all this sort of stuff. We will come back to this in the next episode.

Question agreed to.