David Fawcett (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to take note of answers to questions asked by coalition senators. What has become increasingly apparent is a marked difference between the rhetoric and the ideology of those opposite and the reality faced by the Australian people. We saw today answers from ministers saying they take the advice of experts. And yet we see in a subsequent answer by the same minister a defence of decisions by this government where the advice of experts was actually ignored. We see the rhetoric about what this government is seeking to achieve in terms of cost-of-living relief, investment in the economy and things made in Australia, but the lived reality for people in Australia is different. It's fascinating to highlight that, despite the rhetoric of those [inaudible], the reality is that the national accounts figures have revealed the slowest GDP growth since the 1990s outside the period of the pandemic, the sixth quarter of negative GDP per person growth and the longest per-capita recession in 50 years. That's 18 months of a household recession under this government.

I do seem to recall a slogan during the last election saying, 'It won't be easy under Mr Albanese,' and that has certainly proven to be the case with living standards—that being the real disposable income per capita—falling by 8.7 per cent. I notice an article in the Australian Financial Review that highlights that Australia stands in stark contrast to most other comparable nations around the world. Productivity has collapsed by 6.3 per cent, household savings are down by 10.2 percentage points, personal income taxes are 25.3 per cent higher and interest paid on mortgages has almost tripled. Gas is up by 33 per cent. Electricity, nationally, is up by 14 per cent and by even more in my home state of South Australia, where—I'll just remind the Senate—despite all the rhetoric about the transition to variable renewables being the pathway for the future, South Australians are paying 45 cents per kilowatt hour, which is by a long stretch the most expensive power in Australia and amongst the most expensive electricity in the world. Rents are up 16 per cent, health is up 11 per cent, education costs are up 11 per cent, food is up by 12 per cent and financial and insurance products are up by 17 per cent. These have impacts on people in the real world. Despite the ideology and the rhetoric from those opposite, when I've visit the operator of a small caravan park in South Australia, she tells me about the fact that those rising insurance and electricity costs are making her business marginal in terms of the ability to continue trading and providing a service for people who choose to travel through or holiday in that part of regional South Australia.

The rhetoric we heard here today was from a government that says it listens to the experts. But we also had evidence here today that that is clearly not the case. If we are concerned about growth and economic opportunities and work and income for families, then you would think that we would be listening to the experts when approving investments in things like mines here in Australia. We heard today and we've seen in the press the fact that the experts in the case of McPhillamys mine in New South Wales—the state EPA—highlighted that the waters from the tailing dam would not affect the rivers and normal processes would look after that. We saw the fact that the local Indigenous body highlighted there were no issues from a cultural perspective to stop this project. Yet the minister concerned blocked the development of this mine by one action. It was a decision around the tailing dams which didn't come from the experts but came from a group of people who didn't even reveal their last names, in terms of the registration of the organisation, over facts which they said they couldn't disclose publicly because, essentially, they are secret business. This is not a government where the reality that affects Australia matches their reality.

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

I still find it—I would use the word 'gob-smacking' I suppose, because I can't think of anything else at the moment, that the opposition would come into this place without any hint of irony and complain about the cost of living. Let me remind people when the current wave of inflation started. In recent years, the peak of quarterly inflation was reached in March 2022 when those opposite were still in government. They created this crisis through almost a decade of wasted opportunities and inaction in government, and now they've got the gall to come in here and demand that we fix everything—before we were even in government, probably. They would be happy if we had done it then.

Our responsible economic management has helped to fight inflation, and it has kept Australia out of recession. Without our government spending on essential health services and our cost-of-living relief, Australia's economy would not have grown at all in the last quarter. Our economic plan is all about fighting inflation without smashing the economy. That is the responsible way. And we're helping people who are feeling under pressure. We understand that people are feeling under pressure.

The national accounts confirm that the economy barely grew last quarter, reflecting global uncertainty, higher interest rates and persistent inflation. Those opposite are in denial about that. They're in denial about the fact that there's global uncertainty. There are significant global challenges, and Australia is not immune to these. Many OECD countries have seen at least a negative quarter of growth.

The Albanese Labor government has a responsible economic plan focused on ensuring that inflation continues to moderate. But those opposite oppose things that we try to put in place to improve life for everybody. They opposed our energy bill rebates. They oppose our housing agenda. The one that really galls me is that they oppose wage increases. In particular, they opposed the early education and care 15 per cent wage increase. Can you believe that?

As Minister Watt mentioned earlier, I was an early childhood educator. I did that job for close on 12 years. I know the work that early childhood educators put in. But I also know they're treated like rubbish, and not necessarily by their bosses but by the community, who often think they're just there child minding. Well, let me tell you, if you'd ever worked in the area you would realise the effort that goes into minding your child. Every child is treated as an individual. Every early childhood education centre has to have program planning for every individual child. They have to make sure any special needs of that child are met. They have to make sure they meet all these criteria.

I worked in a centre that was responsible not only to the local government area but also to the state government and to the federal government. I had to fulfil the responsibilities of three layers of government—hours spent on paperwork—to receive a pittance in return. It's not good enough. People used to say to me, 'My child's the most precious thing in my life.' Well, make sure the people who are looking after this precious person in your life are paid responsibly. Where else would you get people doing the job that early childhood educators do? There's a reason it's a predominantly female workforce. It's because they're the people who will actually do that work, whereas men will often demand higher wages. I'm not saying there are no men in the early childhood education area; don't get me wrong. And the ones who are there are brilliant.

But it's so hard for early childhood educators to get a mortgage, to get a loan to buy a car. It shouldn't be. These people are looking after people's kids. As I said, everyone says how much they love their kids. The parents demand a really high standard of care. Of course these people should get a wage increase. But what happens? Those on the other side don't want it to happen. Nearly 40 years ago I was one of the people who started the call for— (Time expired)

Matthew Canavan (Queensland, Liberal National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Bilyk has just highlighted something I wanted to touch on, and that is the problem of wishful thinking. I completely recognise the hard work our childcare workers and those in the industry do. It's a very tough job and a very important job, as Senator Bilyk said. The problem is, we'd all like to give people a pay rise, we'd all like to see people's wages go up, but if we just increase wages without combining it with increased productivity and better outcomes for our economy we get one thing. We get a certain thing when we push wage rises without corresponding productivity improvements, and that one thing is called inflation, and that's what everybody is afflicted with right now. So, you give these wage increases, but not very long after that it's all eaten up in the fact that that childcare worker with the higher wage suddenly faces a 30 per cent increase in their grocery bills, suddenly faces thousands of dollars more on his or her mortgage repayments. So it's great to have wishful thinking, but it would be better for everybody if we could focus on what really can improve the lives of Australians, and it takes hard work. It cannot just be handouts. That's not a sustainable way of building a strong economy.

That goes to the heart of my question today to Minister Gallagher. I mentioned that the government's economic agenda, as Senator Bilyk just outlined, seems to be based just on handouts and on more and more government spending and subsidies, and not on actually improving the underlying performance of our economy, which is the only sustainable way to deliver real increases in the standard of living of Australians over time. The finance minister could not answer my very simple question about how much productivity has fallen under her government. She didn't have the answer to that. I hope that was more because she was embarrassed about the answer than that she didn't know it, but I have the answer here.

The figures came out just last week. The national accounts showed that, on the basis of GDP per hour worked—basically, all the economic output we make divided by how many hours people work; it's a measure of productivity—that figure has fallen 6.3 per cent in just two years. As I say, the finance minister didn't know, apparently, the productivity performance of her own government. She seemed to know a lot about the productivity performance of the previous coalition government. She was saying that that was poor and that it wasn't very high. That's all she wanted to focus on. She didn't have the exact numbers.

I've actually compared them and, yes, our productivity performance has been somewhat slow for a decade or so, but, in the 8½ years that the coalition government were in power, on an annual basis, that GDP per hour figure grew at an annual rate of 1.3 per cent. That is relatively low compared to other periods in our history, but it still grew, and it grew at a reasonable rate—1.3 per cent—helping to support wage increases without a breakout of inflation in that 8½ years. As I mentioned, during the two years we've been under this government, productivity has actually declined. It has gone backwards. On an annualised basis, productivity has gone backwards by 2.9 per cent. Under the coalition, it went up by 1.3 per cent. Under this government, productivity has fallen by 2.9 per cent on an annual basis. That is why we're getting this inflation.

When you look at it on an industry basis, you start to see the picture emerging of what is going on in our economy. I admit that these industry figures are only available for one year of this government. They will be out later this year for the first two years of this government. In the first year of this government, mining productivity fell by four per cent, and electricity, gas and water productivity fell by 7.2 per cent. So, when you get your energy bills, that's one of the reasons they're going up. We're spending more money—there are more subsidies going into wind and solar factories—and we're getting less or the same output, so productivity is reduced by seven per cent. That's why your bills have to go up. That's why you're paying more. Wholesale trade productivity, which would be dominated by our food and groceries trade, has fallen by 11 per cent. That's why you're paying more when you go to the check-out. I should have used the other figures. Under the coalition, that grew by 2.2 per cent on an annual basis. Going back to the energy situation, it was flatlining under the coalition but has fallen by seven per cent under the Labor Party. Real estate productivity has fallen by five per cent. Finance has fallen by 2½ per cent. Again, there were positive or neutral figures under the coalition but massive falls in the first year of this government, making housing and rent more expensive, making interest rates higher and making banks having to charge you more as well.

This is why we're getting poorer at a record rate. During the first two years of this government, our standard of living and our real wages have gone back to levels that we haven't seen since 2011. They're not taking this seriously enough. They've got to get serious about it. They've got to stop blaming the RBA and start doing the hard work of lifting our nation's productivity and making our standard of living higher again.

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

Coming back into the Senate chamber after two weeks, I would have expected there would be a lot more optimism from those opposite. I was thinking that they would come into this place with some policy ideas, yet all we have is the same negativity that we have heard since the last election.

The government has been very, very upfront and clear—as Senator Gallagher has been today—about the state of our economy. But we're also quite clear about what the government has been doing to help people, whilst we go through a very turbulent time in the economy, in particular in terms of cost-of-living relief that the parliament has passed—no thanks to those opposite, but with the support of the government and the crossbench—to support the many millions of Australians who do rely on, and need the support of, the government of the day. We understand it has been and it continues to be a very difficult time for many Australians. But let's not forget that the government has, from day one, as part of its economic agenda, made sure that we have supported the most vulnerable people in our society.

We also inherited an inflation figure that had a six in front of it. Since coming into office, we have lowered that. In fact, we've halved that; it now has a 3 in front of it. But we know there's a lot more work to be done, and that is why we are continuing to work, as a government, with many organisations, with many entities, including the RBA—although those opposite will have you believe that somehow we're 'against' and 'at war' with the RBA. What the government, and the Treasurer particularly, is trying to do is also reform government processes that, in some ways, need to be looked at every so often. We're trying to modernise the RBA for the 21st century.

It's also important to put things into context. Senator Canavan and others made some remarks here in the Senate today and provided some figures, but it's also worth mentioning on the record that those opposite, when they were in government for 10 years, had the deliberate design feature of their economic policy, their economic plan, to keep the wages of Australians low. Not once did they ever put in a submission to the Fair Work Commission to support an increase to the minimum wage—not once. But we backed those increases, and guess what? The commission has now accepted the government's arguments and we've started to get wages moving again.

We've also introduced a tax cut for 13.6 million Australians. Remember stage 3? Stage 3 meant that only a certain number of people were going to get a tax cut whereas now every single Australian is getting a tax cut, particularly those on low and middle incomes. This also complements the other measures the Albanese government has also managed to put in place through this parliament: cheaper child care; an increase in the Commonwealth rent assistance; electricity bill relief of $300 for every single household, and $325 for over one million small businesses. We've also managed to introduce fee-free TAFE, HECS bill relief and a freeze on many medicines on the PBS scheme. We're helping Australians every single day, and these are just some of the measures I wanted to highlight during this take note debate.

It's no surprise that the current Treasurer and former treasurer Wayne Swan would say that mortgage increases are difficult for families because the simple fact is they are. No-one wants to see mortgages go up—no-one does. But what's also important to note is the national accounts have shown that it's the government spending that is keeping the economy growing. Without the government, we would be in recession right now. I don't know if that's something that those opposite actually understand or want. Do you want to be in recession? Is that the ultimate endgame for the coalition?

The Treasurer only last week made this point very clear, and I quote:

… without growth in government spending, there'd be no growth in our economy at all.

… this justifies the way that we've managed the economy responsibly—fighting inflation as our primary concern but doing that without slashing and burning in a budget in an economy which is already weak …

The government is committed to ensuring inflation continues to moderate, and we'll continue to help families where it matters most.

Just touching on the RBA, with the 30 seconds I have left, I would make these points. The government cherish the independence of the RBA. It's why we are reforming the bank, to make sure it is as strong and as effective as it can be. Our reforms are all about making the bank stronger and more independent. The review recommended that overriding power will be removed to strengthen the independence of the bank. The power has never been used. In the interest of bipartisanship, I call on those opposite to back the government on our reforms.

Ross Cadell (NSW, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Coming into this chamber for question time, it's like waking up in the year 2000, turning on Rage and listening to Shaggy and RikRok saying, 'It wasn't me.' Every excuse, every reason—that's what we get from this government in here. 'We're smashed by the RBA on the economy.' 'Home owners are being hammered with interest rates.' 'It was Putin's original invasion of Ukraine that put up energy prices.' 'We have world commodity prices coming down, causing these problems. Woe is us', says this government. All we hear is, 'It wasn't me. Look here! Look there! The last government left us in this position.' This is what we've all heard raked out today in the talking points. I'll tell you what: when you want someone at the wheel, managing the economy, you want someone that takes responsibility.

When we hear the government say, 'We've got a choice between recession or inflation,' it's because those two are the only levers they've got. They don't have any imagination. They don't have any skills. They come in and talk about things they didn't vote for. Nothing's been blocked. They get together with their buddies in that corner, the Greens, and they've got everything through one way or another. Why didn't we vote for them? It's because they haven't worked, they didn't work or they wouldn't work, and the scoreboard shows it.

If you're getting your policies through after 2½ years of government and your only two choices are recession and inflation, something is wrong. But we sit here, and we've had excuse after excuse. Everyone is to blame except the people with their hands on the controls, and that's not good enough.

Individually they go, 'Here the child care is cheaper and this is cheaper and that's cheaper.' You'd think that you'd never had it better in Australia. But when you're a government that supports the whingers over the workers and thinks feelings are more important than facts and when you think words can do what actions need to do, this is where you end up: being a one-term government, potentially. They came in with such promise. It's like my school reports: 'Ross would do better if …' This government would do better if they actually took things seriously and stopped the hubris around how great they are, how wonderful the world is and how, if we had voted for something—even though it got through—the world would be better.

I'll tell you something about helping people out, which we all want to do: it is easier to help out people when you are growing the pot that helps everyone, and the pot that helps everyone is the builders, the miners, the growers, the farmers, the helpers and the healers, not those that sit around and pontificate around getting more public employment, more and bigger unions and more and bigger service funds. We have to get to what's really going to help and get real workers on the ground doing the things they do.

Question agreed to.