Dean Smith (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities and Treasury) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the answers given by ministers to questions without notice asked by Opposition senators today.

Day by day, month by month, Australian families and businesses are feeling the real pain of Labor's poor economic management, but there are 25 people who do not believe that Australians are feeling the pain and that businesses are having to close their doors. Those 25 people are the 25 Labor Party senators that sit in this Senate chamber—because today we heard from the government that their economic plan is working. Well, Australian families and Australian businesses don't think the economic plan is working. In fact, we heard Senator Gallagher, the Minister for Finance, say that the cost-of-living crisis in our country is manufactured, meaning that it's not real, meaning that it's made up.

The data does not lie, and today we've had it confirmed by the Commonwealth Bank of Australia that Australians are now spending 20 per cent or more of their pretax income to pay their mortgages—a figure that we have not seen since the GFC and double what Australians were forced to pay in the 1990s. The CEO of the CBA, the Commonwealth Bank, went on to say: 'We expect to see further increases in arrears in the months ahead, given continued pressure on real household disposable incomes.' The CEO of the Commonwealth Bank is saying to Australian mortgage holders that it's going to get worse. The government, on the other hand, are saying that their economic plan is working, and the finance minister is saying that the cost-of-living crisis is manufactured. But there's more bad news in the figures. The value of past-due home loans has increased from $14.8 billion to $17.6 billion, an increase of $2.8 billion—money that people can no longer afford to find to meet their mortgage repayments.

The data gets worse. Personal loan arrears of more than 90 days have climbed to 1.5 per cent, which is higher than the 1.25 per cent that has been the average for the past 15 years. Australian businesses, including in my home state of Western Australia, are being forced to close their doors. Insolvency rates are rising. ASIC tells us there have been 11,000 insolvencies in the last months. In the June quarter alone in Western Australia there were 379 insolvencies—one every seven hours. And the government says the cost-of-living crisis is manufactured and that their economic plan is working.

Australians want to know why it is that, in just two years, they are feeling significantly poorer as a result of the economic management of Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Treasurer Jim Chalmers. Prior to the election in May 2022, the Prime Minister made the big, bold claim in my home town of Perth, Western Australia, that Labor would make life better and Labor would make life easier for people with mortgages. That's not true. Australians have gotten poorer, living standards are falling and people are finding it harder and harder to call this country the lucky country. I suspect that many Australians feel that their luck has now run out. And this government says they've got nothing to worry about because the economic plan is working—apparently—and the cost-of-living crisis is manufactured and make-believe. That's not what people are feeling. I challenge Anthony Albanese, when he comes to Western Australia, to walk the streets of Perth and see it for himself. People are hurting and are poorer thanks to him and his Labor government.

Louise Pratt (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Of course it's right that, in taking note of answers given after question time every day, we should debate the pressures of the cost of living on so many Australians right now. Our No. 1 priority as a government is delivering cost-of-living relief. But it is completely disingenuous the way the opposition seeks to debate this issue day after day after question time. Why? Because Australians, had a coalition government continued, would have been demonstrably worse off.

So let's take a look at the facts. Under the coalition government, we had a set of income tax thresholds that would have kicked off a month ago with just the very highest of Australian income earners getting a tax cut. They backflipped on that. They never really said that our change was a good idea; they essentially said, 'Look, we can't stand in the way of a big tax cut for Australians just to give it to the very highest income earners.' At that point in time, they didn't oppose the desperate need to change that very malapportioned tax cut legislated by the previous government; they just kind of waved it through. But make no mistake: had the coalition been in government, would they have sought to reset our tax thresholds to make them more fair and equitable for the cost-of-living crisis faced by so many Australians? There is no sign or evidence that they would have.

Every Australian household is getting $300 in energy bill relief. In states like WA, that adds up to about $700 in energy bill relief. But do you know what? Not only did those opposite oppose that but the very fundamentals of power increases in Australia over a long time now have been very much driven by the lack of an energy policy and energy framework under the last government. For a long time now it has been self-evident through economic modelling and through pricing in the market right now and over the last decade or so that renewable energy is cheaper than coal and that renewable energy will continue to be cheaper than nuclear. But, of course, those opposite, who are so motivated by denying climate change that they also want to deny the most efficient forms of energy provision in our country, went on to continue to completely destabilise Australia's electricity market year after year. It was the kind of instability that absolutely deprived it of investment in new generation—that being generation which would have, with more supply, pulled down electricity prices.

Under our government we see 2.6 million low-paid workers getting their third consecutive pay rise. These are pay rises they were deprived of under the last government. We've also delivered stronger Medicare and cheaper medicines in every community around Australia.

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

The thing I like about this government is it's consistent. It is consistently focused on being the best government for vested interests it can be. What it has done over the last two years is shovel policy and money to its favoured vested interests—the people that run the organisation of the Labor Party, the union movement, which runs preselections and supports the Labor Party at polling places and is the campaign force behind the labour movement. This government has spent two years of public office working for these narrow vested interests, and it appears the nation's economic problems will never be solved under it—which is hugely regrettable for the Australian people, who are stuck with this government in the immediate term. It means people have to pay more for things like rent and mortgages.

The questions I asked Senator Farrell today about the probity and governance standards that I thought the government would be interested in applying to the Housing Australia Future Fund, which the minister didn't appear to be across the detail on, are just another example of the government being totally relaxed about rent seekers being part of public policy formulation. What is most surprising is that the government seems entirely relaxed about this shocking conflict which threatens the integrity of the Housing Australia Future Fund; we have the president of the Labor Party also being the chairman of the Cbus fund, which has three CFMEU trustees on its board, and the government seems totally disinterested in these issues. I would have thought that the government, if it wanted to protect the public interest, taxpayer funds and its own reputation, would be interested in these issues because it would see the obvious conflict.

It is a howling conflict of interest for the government to be running a housing slush fund where it wants to co-invest and give taxpayer funds to the Cbus fund, which has three CFMEU trustees on its board and has the president of the Labor Party as the chairman of the fund. I would have thought that it would be in the interests of the Labor Party, let alone the interests of the public and the taxpayer, that these things be taken seriously. But what do we hear from the good minister Farrell today? Crickets. Absolute crickets—very disappointing answers. Frankly, I expected better.

The minister says the Prudential Regulation Authority needs to do its job. Now, the Prudential Regulation Authority is not in charge of the Housing Australia Future Fund, its probity and its governance. Nor is the Prudential Regulation Authority in charge of superannuation laws and board composition rules. Those are matters for this government, for this parliament, to turn its mind to. So that is hugely regrettable.

The government has huffed and puffed about how bad the CFMEU is. A couple of years ago the CFMEU were at polling places, helping the Labor Party win office, funding its campaigns. The first thing the government does when it wins office is abolish the Building and Construction Commission. But today apparently the government says the CFMEU are our mates; that is not the case.

The government talks tough on the CFMEU in relation to its status as a registered organisation and its status as a union, but what does the government do when it comes to protecting compulsory savings in a superannuation scheme? Nothing. And Minister Farrell's answer today is revealing. The government plans to do nothing to protect taxpayer funds invested in the HAFF which could be threatened by corruption in the CFMEU, through the Cbus fund seeking to invest in the Housing Australia Future Fund.

Then, more broadly, Minister Watt today commits the government to making no changes to superannuation boards. Minister Watt is committing to the 1970s model of equal representation, where employee groups and unions run the superannuation funds in the interests of the IR club, not in the interests of workers and certainly not in the interests of employers.

This is a corruption at the heart of this government. It is hugely regrettable that the government has taken no steps to clean the Housing Australia Future Fund and clear away the CFMEU and all its corrupt constituents.

Marielle Smith (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I also rise to contribute to this debate relating to questions asked by coalition senators in question time. In my home state of South Australia, my community are absolutely telling me that they are doing it tough. That is absolutely what we're hearing from people in South Australia. We have had a problem with inflation in this country, and, whilst I'm pleased that inflation is moderating, rising cost-of-living pressures are hurting families in South Australia. As a government we have heard that message loudly and clearly, and that's why our No. 1 focus in government has been to do everything we can to take action to put downward pressure on inflation, because that has an impact ultimately on the cost-of-living pressures that South Australians are feeling every day.

There is no more significant plank to that work than the two surpluses we've delivered—back-to-back surpluses—which have the impact of applying downward pressure on inflation. We're combining that with targeted cost-of-living relief because it's that targeted relief which can provide support for families in my home state of South Australia without adding further to those inflationary pressures, many of which are external to the Australian economy. But, in terms of the things that we can control, the things that we can influence, getting on top of inflation, applying that downward pressure on inflation, is at the top of our priority list.

Those cost-of-living measures have been very targeted. The measures include tax relief for every single worker in Australia, not just some—not just those at the top end of the tax bracket. It's tax relief applied to those in our community who feel inflationary pressures the hardest—who feel cost-of-living pressures the hardest. We've frozen the cost of common medicines because we know that is a significant pressure for Australians in our community. Particularly for those Australians who rely on repeat medicines and repeat prescriptions, that measure will make a real difference.

Of course the cost of housing is a significant pressure, and we are working overtime to get reforms through this place, which are opposed time after time, to influence supply. That's because we know that if we increase supply in the housing market we will have an impact on house prices. We're also doing our darnedest to increase rental supply in this country, not to mention supporting Commonwealth rent assistance recipients with significant and substantial increases to rent assistance, which will benefit one million households.

We've waived $3 billion in student debt for more than three million Australians, and for those students in our community who are undertaking courses which require them to do prac placements we're providing payment for those placements. That's so that cost-of-living pressures, the cost of rent and the cost of bills doesn't stop students in our community from undertaking qualifications in the skills which we know we need, particularly in the caring economy—in nursing, midwifery and other professions—which our economy desperately needs.

We're providing more funding for emergency and food relief and financial support services, and we're extending the freeze on deeming rates for 876,000 income support recipients. On top of this we have $300 in energy bill relief for Australian households and $325 for one million small businesses. All of these measures are specifically targeted to provide relief but not add further inflationary pressure within our economy.

We are doing this because we are hearing South Australians. I hear them. Families are telling me every day that they are struggling with the cost of living and that they are concerned about the price of housing and housing supply in our economy. I think they can see—I hope they can see—that as a government this is our No. 1 priority: applying downward pressure on inflation so we can provide relief for the cost-of-living pressures that we know they are feeling.

Time after time when we've put up these measures that will make a difference in the lives of Australians doing it tough right now, those opposite have walked into this chamber and voted against them. I think that tells you that their claims on this are not sincere. If you were sincerely concerned about what I know your communities are telling you—just like they're telling me, they're feeling pressure at the moment—then you would be doing everything in your power to provide that targeted relief, to support budgets which deliver surplus after surplus. You too would be doing that in support of your community.

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

I rise to take note of answers to all questions asked by coalition senators. It's very sobering to keep talking about the cost-of-living crisis and the inflation crisis. It is fundamentally real to all Australians, particularly young Australians and particularly young women. There were a couple of things in the answers to questions today which really bothered me. In one of the answers, Senator Wong said she took issue with the assertion that inflation was persisting due to the actions of this government. That's a reality. This is homegrown inflation. The days of talking about what has happened globally are over. What we are dealing with today is without doubt and without question a direct result of the actions and inaction of this government.

Australians are struggling and Australians are juggling, and they can't keep doing it. Australians are making decisions every day about how much to put in the trolley, whether to put in half a tank of petrol or three-quarters of a tank of petrol, and which of their children's activities to cut. But what they can't do is cut back on their mortgage or cut back on their rent. I was really disturbed by that answer to the question around why other central banks have been able to reduce their interest rates and ours hasn't. Rather than taking issue with that assertion, why not answer the question and explain what it is you're actually doing? I think that that would be a better result.

Then, in relation to the question that Senator McDonald asked of Senator Gallagher, there were comments around inflation moderating. No, it's not. I note that there were quotes from the RBA governor, RBA statements and references to the release on 8 August, but I'd like to read one thing from the RBA post their meeting. It says:

Headline inflation is expected to moderate temporarily in the near term—

Temporarily. This is the RBA; this isn't the opposition—

owing primarily to one-off measures including those providing cost-of-living support to households. However, headline inflation is then expected to increase as energy rebates end (as currently legislated), before moving in line with underlying inflation once these temporary effects have passed.

What does that mean? That means, in the midst of all this hoopla, this energy bill relief is going to have a temporary impact on inflation, and then the inflation will go back up. It's an absolutely false hope. It's absolutely not a proper fix to the inflationary pressures that Australians are feeling.

Let's be real about this: if your energy costs have gone up $1,000 a year, which is pretty much what it is, getting back $75 a quarter is really a bit insulting and a bit of a kick in the guts. It doesn't even begin to address all of the other challenges that we have spoken about, where, with the average Australian mortgage being $750,000, you're $35,000 worse off—'But's that's okay. We'll give you 75 bucks a quarter off your energy bill, and that means we actually still kind of delivered on our promise to make your energy cost $275 a year less.' I don't quite get that math, but we don't have time for that now.

The point I am making is that, in the answers to the questions that were asked, there was no proper or meaningful response. They were going around in circles, around the edges, rather than acknowledging and admitting to the Australian people that this is a homegrown inflationary crisis, and actually getting to work to fix it. Instead, we had Senator Gallagher make the comment, 'Those opposite choose to talk about and manufacture this crisis.' This is not manufactured; this is real. If you go out there, out of this building, and talk to everyday Australians anywhere in this country, they will tell you this is not manufactured.

Question agreed to.