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

A letter has been received from Senator McGrath:

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

The Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) told the Senate Select Committee on the Cost of Living that government spending means that interest rates must be higher for longer, but instead of heeding this warning and reducing spending to allow the RBA to cut rates, Labor has spent an additional $315 billion since coming to office, and told Australians they should be grateful the Government is being 'so helpful'.

Is the proposal supported?

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

With the concurrence of the Senate, the clerks will set the clock in line with the informal arrangements made by the whips.

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

I think it is very handy to read out this matter of public importance for those who are playing along at home. I will read out what this debate is about today and why it is a matter of public importance—that is, the Reserve Bank of Australia told the Senate cost of living committee that government spending means that interest rates must be higher for longer. But, instead of heeding this warning and reducing spending to allow the Reserve Bank of Australia to cut rates, Labor has spent an additional $315 billion since coming to office and told Australians they should be grateful the government is being so helpful. It is very much a Marie Antoinette approach to fiscal policy—that is, the mob are doing it tough, but you should be grateful you have the Labor Party in power because we are being so nice to you.

The thing is it is actually the policies of the Labor Party that are causing Australians, in particular Queenslanders, my constituents, a lot of pain and a lot of suffering. When it comes to inflation, that means the cost of living. Australia is in a cost-of-living crisis that has been caused by the policy decisions of this Labor-Green government. If you have a mortgage—and the average mortgage in Australia at the moment is about $750,000—since Labor have come to power, you are now $35,000 a year worse off because of the Labor Party, because of the 12 interest rate rises that have happened under the watch of the Labor Party. So you are in middle Australia, you have a mortgage, you're doing it tough, but it's even tougher because of the Labor Party.

The Labor Party profess to be the friends of working Australians, but working Australians have found out since Labor have come to power that the price of food has gone up 11 per cent, health has gone up 11 per cent, education has gone up 11 per cent, housing has gone up 15 per cent, rent has gone up 15 per cent, financial and insurance issues have gone up 17 per cent, electricity has gone up 22 per cent—I will come back to electricity in a moment—and gas is up 25 per cent. It is a cost-of-living crisis. And what do we get from the Labor Party? Well, it is the political equivalent of crickets or the political equivalent of a fruit salad in terms of the words that they throw at this particular issue, but they are failing to take any real action apart from making it worse.

I mentioned that electricity had gone up 22 per cent since Labor have come to power. Who can forget that before the last election Anthony Albanese promised at least 97 times that he would cut your power bills by $275? That was a core promise, a core commitment. He so believed it he said it 97 times. Well, hands up in this chamber if you think your power bills have gone down by $275? Just so those people following along who have the misfortune of reading this Hansard later know, no-one put their hand up. In fact, across Australia no-one is putting their hand up to show that their power bills have gone down by $275.

Labor will promise anything before an election to try and get in, but, ultimately, the Australia people always find out that Labor will always cost you more. Before the last election, the coalition said that life would not be easy under Mr Albanese. How right we were, because life under Mr Albanese and the Labor Party government is actually really tough at the moment. But what we do have is a prime minister who likes to spend time on the red carpet, who likes to go to celebrity weddings, a prime minister who is actually not across his brief, a prime minister who is frankly not just a disappointment but a disaster for Australia, and the sooner he calls an election, the better so that we can throw out this Labor government and bring in Peter Dutton as Prime Minister.

Helen Polley (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What a stark contrast from those opposite, who had 10 years in government and left mess after mess. We've just had that contribution without giving any credit to our government, because, let's not forget that, when they were in government, they were opposed to Australian workers getting any pay rise. It was actually their policy—which they admitted—to keep wages low, but, under our government, wages are going up for Australian workers. That is helping with the cost-of-living crisis that we already acknowledge, and it's why we have taken measures to ensure that we do everything we can to tackle inflation. We know that inflation has, in fact, started to moderate.

There is no doubt that Australians are better off since the election of the Albanese Labor government. But we know that it hasn't just been the tax cuts that Australian workers have received from their first pay packet after 1 July this year. Not only have they got that tax cut but they got a tax cut twice the size, on average, of what those opposite committed to when they were in government. Since we made the announcement that we were going to increase it and, in fact, give a tax cut to low-paid Australian workers, those opposite have had so many different positions to stop it, cut it or take it back to what it was. It's a bit like their energy policy. They're now up to 23 energy policies during the time they were in government and now in opposition, and we know the disastrous energy policy that Mr Dutton has been putting forward.

But this government is taking real action to address the cost of living, unlike those opposite when they were in government. Their attitude now is just to let the pain continue on and let it rip through the Australian economy. We just had a contribution where they talked about whether or not your energy bills have gone down by $275. Obviously, they were not paying attention to the budget, because this government is delivering $300 energy payments for residential homes and $350 for small businesses. What did they do with that legislation? They voted against it. That's what they did because this is an opposition led by Mr Dutton, who's better known now as 'No-no-no'. What did they do when the energy legislation came through to support residences and small businesses? What did they do with that legislation? That's right—they voted against it.

They voted against the tax cuts, and they voted against the energy levy that we were giving to Australian residents. What did they do when we introduced cheaper medicines? That's right—they voted against that as well. When we increased scripts to 60 days to help people with their medicines, which means fewer visits to the GP, which saves them money and allows more people to see GPs, what did they do with that measure? They voted against it. They voted against better wages for people who care for our most vulnerable and people who live in residential aged care. They voted against that. They have not supported any of our measures to actually help with a strategy to reduce the cost-of-living pressure on Australian families.

We've introduced cheaper child care. We've also just committed to a 15 per cent pay increase for early childhood educators. That is good for the early childhood educators. It will mean that more people will be attracted to work in that very important area of responsibility. It is good for families. We want centres not to increase their prices, obviously, just because that money is rolling out.

The real benefits, as well, for tax cuts, for energy, for all the measures that we put in place— (Time expired)

Nick McKim (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Millions of Australians are getting smashed by high inflation and the high interest rates that follow from that. Do you know who's not getting smashed? The big corporations who are making obscene profits, which are actually driving inflation up. What is Labor doing about this? Absolutely nothing. Labor is refusing to go after the big corporates who donate so generously to Labor Party coffers, refusing to take on their greed and their profiteering, and refusing to take action that would help reduce inflation. A corporate super profits tax would remove the incentive for corporations to profiteer. Make price gouging illegal to stop the big corporations price gouging. Break up the supermarket duopoly and put more competition into the supermarket sector. The result will be cheaper food and grocery prices. Freeze rent increases. Provide some relief to renters.

If Labor did these things, it would allow the RBA to bring down interest rates, providing relief to mortgage holders. The Australian Greens stand ready to take on the big corporations, in this place. It's just a crying shame that the Labor Party is not ready to join us.

Andrew Bragg (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Home Ownership) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government have done everything they can to make housing in Australia so much worse than it was when they came to office over two years ago. All you need to do is look at what the RBA said in their announcement last week, where they said that they were looking to now only hit target inflation in 2027 because, 'In part, this owes to a stronger outlook for domestic demand'.

The government is spending too much money, which is driving increased demand from the public sector, and that is keeping the pressure on the Reserve Bank. The Reserve Bank is considering its position on whether it needs to increase rates, rather than cut rates, as we've seen in comparable economies. What does this all mean? It means that we have a persistent inflation problem, which not only makes things much harder for prospective homeowners but also for renters. It comes on top of a series of disasters in the housing portfolio, which has recently been flipped by the Prime Minister in his reshuffle, where he sacked the old housing minister and appointed a new one.

The problem with the new housing minister is that the new housing minister is committed to the same policies as the last housing minister. We've seen, frankly, a disaster in relation to this Housing Australia Future Fund slush fund, we've seen a failure on the housing targets and then we've seen this build-to-rent idea. The idea here is for foreign corporations, foreign fund managers, to become the landlords to Australians. This is a massive perversion of the Australian dream—a twisting of the Australian dream, from a dream where people own their own houses to an idea where your house is owned by BlackRock, Vanguard or Cbus. That is a disgusting perversion of the Australian dream, which has been perpetrated by this Labor government. We've seen today that the new minister, Minister O'Neil, has said on radio, 'And what I can tell you is the Treasury modelling for this bill tells us that we'll have an additional 160,000 houses'. That is the end of the quote, and it's also false in the sense that Treasury never did that modelling—and that has been exposed as a huge mistake. The point here is not so much that the minister has made a gaffe—I understand that people get things wrong from time to time—it is that the policy itself is a sick idea because it gives up on the idea of individual ownership and agency and hands the keys to the city, so to speak, to the foreign fund managers. Foreign fund managers are the only people that are going to get a tax cut to build a house. Go figure! We've now seen the disaster of the shared equity schemes, which the government hasn't even brought on for a vote.

When you think about this broader position on housing, which is a massive problem the Australian people face, we've always been a country where people could afford to buy a house of their own. Now we have a position where that is getting away from the average worker. So what are the things that the Commonwealth government could do to help here? There are limited options because we don't run the planning system, so the interventions from the Commonwealth government need to be very carefully calibrated.

We hear nothing from the new minister or the old minister on banking and lending policy. We hear very little on super, which is a Commonwealth issue, other than trying to help the big super funds buy the houses and lease them out to Australians like they are serfs. We have seen this with the Housing Australia Future Fund, which will go down in history, I'm sure, as one of Labor's greatest boondoggle slush funds. These slush funds are never good ideas, because you end up running them for the unions and other vested interests. In this case, I think this Housing Australia Future Fund wanting to partner with the super funds will be a disaster, because Australians don't want to lease their home or rent their house from a super fund; they want to own it themselves. So you see nothing on banking, nothing on super. The only things on tax are proposals that are bandied around in Labor's caucus to increase taxes on houses like negative gearing or capital gains tax, or of course the idea that you cut taxes for the build-to-rent class—the Vanguards, BlackRocks and the other foreign fund managers.

So far this has been Labor's worst policy ever, you would have to say. There are a few to compete with, but housing has been a disaster. The people who are paying the price here are the renters and the prospective homebuyers, who have seen the Australian dream slip away.

Jess Walsh (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We are proud of the work that we are doing to push inflation down, to get the economy moving and to help Australians in what we know are tough times. Those opposite should remember that we inherited from them inflation with a six in front of it. It now has a three in front of it. We also inherited from them the slowest wage growth on record. We are getting wages moving in this country again, particularly for our lowest-paid Australian workers.

On the one hand, we inherited from those opposite budget deficits as far as the eye could see, from a coalition government that, despite those deficits, still failed to invest in the services that Australians actually want and need. On the other hand, our government has delivered two surpluses and we have delivered those surpluses while continuing to provide the support that Australians need and that Australians rely on, including tax cuts for every single Australian taxpayer and energy bill relief for households and businesses too.

Despite the words in the motion, this is a fact that is actually acknowledged by the Reserve Bank governor, who is invoked by those opposite. The RBA governor said:

My job and the Reserve Bank's job is to get inflation down. The governments have a different job. Their job is also to get inflation down, and they acknowledge that, but it's also to provide services and infrastructure for the Australian people.

She further said, 'My personal view is that they are doing what they can do.'

So if those opposite are coming in here today to tell the Australian people that they are concerned about government spending then they need to also tell the Australian people exactly what it is that they are going to slash if they have the chance at government again. They need to tell the Australian people what it is that they want to cut. Is it the energy bill relief? Is that what it is? Would it be Medicare again, like they slashed on their last watch? What will it be? Will they go after the wages of the Australian people again? Because we know that under those opposite low wages were a deliberate design feature of the economy. We don't do things that way. We know that Australia's lowest-paid workers right now are receiving their third wage increase backed by and supported by our government, wage increases that those opposite just don't want to see. They want to see low wages as a deliberate design feature of the economy. Early childhood educators will receive a 15 per cent pay rise under our government, off the back of the 15 per cent already delivered to aged-care workers. Wages are moving again in this country. Our responsible budget management is paying dividends. We are returning revenue to the bottom line. We've delivered back-to-back surpluses for the first time in almost two decades, surpluses that we know have been acknowledged by the RBA governor herself, again invoked in your motion, as putting downward pressure on inflation. Those opposite couldn't even deliver one surplus. We've delivered those surpluses all while delivering at the same time cost-of-living measures that actually help Australians, like those tax cuts for 13.6 million taxpaying Australians—every single taxpayer, not just a few—or like those $300 energy rebates for every Australian household and those $325 rebates for small businesses.

This government, our government, knows that you can tackle inflation and you can deliver the services and the relief that Australians need at the same time. But those opposite just continue with motions like this, with comments that they make, to threaten the measures that actually are there to help all Australians. So, if the opposition want to target government spending, they need to come clean and tell the Australian people what they are proposing to cut should they get the chance. Is it those energy rebates? Is that what it is? Would they cut wages for our essential and undervalued early childhood educators? Is it the wage increases that they can't decide their position on today? Would they close the door of our Medicare urgent care clinics? We know they loved cutting Medicare when they had the chance. So, when it comes to inflation, those opposite have no plan. They have no answers and no problems with cutting the services Australians need. (Time expired)

Penny Allman-Payne (Queensland, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Every day, millions of Australians feel the crushing stress of living on Centrelink. They're not turning on the heating to save on bills, they're foregoing necessary medication and they're choosing between paying rent and eating. Families are being evicted into homelessness. Pensioners are sleeping in their cars. Parents are skipping meals to keep a roof over their kids' heads. In a wealthy country like ours, no-one should have to live like this. Labor promised when they came to power that no-one would be left behind. Yet people on income support are starving while Labor turns a blind eye. Expert after expert, report after report, inquiry after inquiry, the evidence is clear, and it has been for years. The government must raise the rate of JobSeeker. Poverty is a policy choice. I'm sick of hearing this do-nothing-government list of excuses for why it can't help people. This government has spent hundreds of billions of dollars on stage 3 tax cuts for the rich and big corporations, on AUKUS submarines and on tax breaks for fossil fuel companies, all while leaving the most vulnerable Australians to suffer. It's time to get real about the cost of living and make a difference to people's lives. Raise the rate, freeze and cut rents, build public housing, and tax wealthy corporations.

Malcolm Roberts (Queensland, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If you feel like you're going backwards, you are. Inflation is running out of control and is way too high. Wages haven't caught up to cost-of-living increases. When adjusted for inflation, Australia's real wages have collapsed to a level not seen since before 2010. That means that government caused inflation has wiped out 15 years of hard-earned pay rises. The government has its foot on the accelerator now, making it worse, while the Reserve Bank is stomping on the brake for mortgage holders. This coalition motion claims $315 billion of Labor government spending is unhelpful in the inflation fight. The coalition's $508 billion spend on its mismanaged COVID response was just as unhelpful. That created the inflation that Labor is now prolonging. The Liberal-Labor uniparty cannot fix the cost-of-living crisis when both are committed to net zero insanity, making inflation worse. While government subsidises foreign-owned, Chinese-dominated companies to put up environment-destroying wind and solar complexes, inflation will continue. While farmers are restricted from using their land to grow fresh food, inflation will continue. While government crushes small business and lets multinational companies get away with economic murder, inflation will continue. While 40 per cent of the cost of building a new house continues to be taxed, inflation will continue.

The solutions are simple: cut the subsidies to the foreign-owned, net zero parasites, and use Australia's abundant oil, coal and gas reserves right here for the benefit of the people in this country. Let farmers be free to use their land to cheaply grow the world's best food so Australians can afford to eat. Finally, adopt One Nation's housing policies that will get Australians into affordable houses. Only One Nation policies will put Australia first and bring inflation under control. To the Labor-Liberal uniparty, stop looking after your mates and start putting the country first. Adopt One Nation's policies on housing and immigration.

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

I was reflecting on a comment that Senator Walsh made about how this government knows how to tackle inflation and deliver services at the same time, and I'm trying to work out why they're not doing it, if they know how to do it. It would be much simpler for all the Australians who are struggling under this cost-of-living crisis if that were the case. It would be a lot simpler for young Australians who can't even fathom renting a property because it's so expensive so much as having the dream or the aspiration of owning their own home, and it would be very helpful to Australians who have seen their mortgages double over the last 15 months or so. So I would suggest that if they do know how to do it, Australians who are struggling under this cost-of-living crisis should be put out of their misery and the government should do its job.

On Wednesday last week, the RBA told the Senate Select Committee on the Cost of Living that government spending means that interest rates must be higher for longer. That's not the opposition saying that; that's the RBA saying that in a Senate select committee. Instead of heeding this warning and reducing spending to allow the RBA to cut rates to ease cost-of-living pressures for everyday Australians, this government has instead spent an additional $315 billion since coming to office, and then it's told Australians that they should be grateful that the government has been so helpful to them in offering all of this cost-of-living relief.

The RBA conceded last week that government spending is not helping the inflation problem. The Australian also reported AMP Chief Economist Shane Oliver telling that same committee that he thought the RBA 'should be cutting interest rates now' but argued that increased government spending had cruelled that chance. Again, you have a specific link between interest rates and the doubling of those interest rates for Australians and the economic mismanagement of this government. He went on to say:

The Reserve Bank would probably be a lot closer to that if they didn't revise up their growth forecast. Why did they revise up their growth forecast? Partly because they got stronger public spending numbers in there. The RBA's job would be a lot easier if they did haven't the surge in government spending that's been occurring over the last few years.

It is very clear that this inflation and cost-of-living crisis is homegrown. There have been comments about things that were inherited. I'm really sorry, but, when you have been government for almost three years, it's time to stop talking about what you think you may have inherited and actually start talking about what you're going to do, particularly when you stated earlier that you know how to do it.

Shane Oliver wasn't the only economist making those kinds of comments. It wasn't a one-off. Professor Steven Hamilton made a number of different statements to the inquiry and one really struck me. It was one that the Australian also reported as did other media agencies. He said, 'The RBA has got its foot on the brake, but this government has its foot on the accelerator'. How on earth are the RBA meant to deliver the outcomes that they're trying to achieve when the government is hampering them at every step?

The only lever that the RBA has is to lift interest rates, and who does that hurt? It hurts Australian mortgage holders, and it hurts Australian renters. That's about 66 per cent of the economy. The other third of the economy is not impacted in the same way. So what we're effectively doing is we're bashing that same group of people who can't cut their spending. You can't cut back your mortgage repayment. It doesn't work like that. You can't cut back the rent you pay. It doesn't work like that, unless of course you attempt to move, downsize or uproot your family and find something cheaper, which a lot of families, unfortunately, are now having to face the reality of because this government hasn't been able to do their job. I thank my colleague Senator McGrath for putting up this matter, because it is absolutely urgent and important, without question.

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

The time for the debate has expired.