David Bradbury (Lindsay, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Treasurer ) Share this | Hansard source

Members might want to reflect upon the last time that they saw the Leader of the Opposition walk into this place and talk about the good news that exists about this economy, about one of the strongest economies in the developed world. As a member of this government, I am very proud of the record that we have. I am very proud, as a member of this country, as an Australian citizen, that we can stand tall and proud in having one of the strongest economies in the developed world.

Let us have a look at the strength of the economy, because you will not hear it from those opposite. They do not want to talk about it. Their approach is to talk the economy down. At every opportunity they want to talk it down because, to them, more important than economic success is political success, and they have equated political success with talking the Australian economy down. That is why at every opportunity they come into this place and they talk the economy down. Let us have a look at the fundamentals of this economy. Let us have a look at what every major institution has said about the Australian economy, whether it be the IMF, the OECD. They all say the same thing, and that is that we are standout performer on the world stage, that this is a strong economy. Not only is it a strong economy, but we as a government are determined to spread the benefits of that strength. That is the difference between us and them.

The Leader of the Opposition came in and he started talking about class warfare. He said, 'The problem is that the government want to conduct a class war; they are just not very good at it.' The truth of the matter is that the Leader of the Opposition wants to conduct a class war. In his budget reply speech he came forward and said that $150,000 is not a huge household income. Well, nobody is proposing to take an axe to any of the benefits or entitlements that people above that have. Nobody is proposing to do that. But the Leader of the Opposition is proposing to rip money away from people on incomes of less than $150,000. This is the class warfare that the Leader of the Opposition wants to wage—on anyone on low and middle incomes. And in fact we all know that, at the end of the day, he will sing to the tune that the piper plays. The piper, we all know, is Clive Palmer and Gina Rinehart—Clive Palmer because of his considerable contributions to the Liberal National Party. We know about those considerable contributions, and the donations that he makes are so important that they could not do without them and they have to put up with his crazy comments every now and again.

Let us look at the strength of the Australian economy. There is low unemployment, at 4.9 per cent.

Mr Frydenberg interjecting—

The member for Kooyong would not know an unemployed person if he tripped over them; that is his problem. He might have met one once. Well, I tell you what, we stand for those hardworking individuals out there that deserve the right to employment. That is why we fought hard to deliver support for the economy during the global financial crisis. Hundreds of thousands of Australian workers are only in a job or only stayed in a job because we took some decisions to invest in and support those jobs. That is what we did. Those opposite voted against it. The Leader of the Opposition actually did not vote against it because he did not come into the chamber. Just to remind members, this was not one of those occasions where he came in and then tried to scurry out of the chamber; this was one of those occasions where he just fell asleep. The biggest global event since the Great Depression, and the man who wants to come and sit on this side of the chamber, who wants to get his hands on the Treasury benches—he fell asleep through it. He slept through the whole thing. He slept through the global financial crisis and certainly was not here to stand up for the people across this country that needed our support.

We stood up and we acted. It is not only about low unemployment. Have a look at contained inflation—it is well and truly within the band that the Reserve Bank looks at. We know that is so important to families and businesses all around this country. We do not want to put pressure on interest rates. They put lots of pressure on interest rates. Remember they were the party that were always going to keep interest rates at record lows. What about the 20 warnings that they got from the Reserve Bank to cut their expenditure, to address infrastructure bottlenecks, to address capacity constraints? They never did any of those things. They did not listen to the 20 warnings they got from the Reserve Bank, and interest rates went up and up and up—10 consecutive increases in interest rates.

Working families around this country and small businesses around this country will know that interest rates are lower today than when we came to office. A family that has a mortgage of $300,000 is paying about 3½ thousand dollars a year less. They come in and they talk about the carbon price impact. Let's wait and see. If you can find me a family that ends up getting slugged by that amount, then that will be really interesting to see. We have low unemployment, contained inflation, net government debt amongst the lowest in the world—

Mr Frydenberg interjecting—

Not growing, as the member for Kooyong protests, peaking this year amongst the lowest of all of our competitor economies—9.6 per cent net debt—and we are returning that figure lower and lower as time goes by. In addition to that, we have a record pipeline of investment coming into the resources sector. Members could be forgiven for thinking that most of that money was flowing in from the pockets of Liberal members, because they have all decided to invest in the resources sector. We have seen how confident they are in the success of the resources sector. Don't listen to what they say, but when they stick their hand in their pocket—the member for Kooyong knows; he is laughing. He is laughing because he is watching his stock prices go up, he is watching the strength of the resources sector and he is going out and investing more.

There is considerable investment in the resources sector that extends beyond the pockets of the Liberal Party members. Half a trillion dollars worth of investment is coming into the resources sector. So you have to ask a question. They said the mining tax was going to kill the resources sector. They say the carbon price it is going to kill the resources sector. If all of these things are going to kill the resources sector, firstly, why would they be investing in it? But, secondly, why would half a trillion dollars worth of global capital be flowing into this sector? It is because people have confidence in the strength of the resources sector and they know that the mining tax was always what we said it was about, and that is just making sure that we get a reasonable return for the Australian people on the resources that we all own. Those opposite think that they are the preserve of the rich and the privileged, that because these people are investing the capital to extract it they should take all of the profit. They only get the opportunity to do that because the Australian people give them permission to extract the resources. In giving that permission, we think it is only fair that we secure a fair return for the Australian people. That is what we are doing.

If those people ever get the opportunity to come into this place as a government at some point in the future and they want to repeal the mining tax, that will be one of the most shameful public policy decisions this country has ever seen. To hand back a tax cut to some of the wealthiest entities in the world at a time when our economy is doing so well, but those particular sectors are doing particularly well, would be an absolute disgrace—and they know it. When they go around and talk to people in their communities, they hear the same message. There are plenty of people out there that are not experiencing the benefits of the mining boom. We want to make sure they get their fair share. That is why we are increasing family payments. That is why we have delivered a schoolkids bonus.

Mr Frydenberg interjecting—

The member for Kooyong walks right into it. He says, 'And cutting company tax.' He would be the first member for Kooyong in that seat's history to come into this place and oppose a tax cut for business. In fact, he should be disendorsed. How could any respectable member for Kooyong come into this place and oppose a business tax cut? You are a disgrace to your predecessors. Menzies would roll in his grave. Even the more dissenting members for Kooyong, those who on occasion took a more aberrant view, would have supported a tax cut for business. You are one out, and you did it because of the relentless and destructive negativity of the Leader of the Opposition. It does not matter what we propose, he will say no. This government could propose the canonisation of Mother Theresa and he would oppose it, because at the end of the day he says no to everything—except for a big fat tax cut to some of the wealthiest miners in this country.

On the question of consistency of economic policy message, we have heard from the others—they do not even know if they would deliver a surplus if they were in government. You listen to the member for North Sydney, you listen to the Leader of the Opposition, then you go and listen to the member for Goldstein or Senator Abetz, who said, 'We're not in the business of making any outlandish promises.' We are not making outlandish promises. We are delivering a surplus, and we are going to deliver increasing surpluses over the forward estimates. That is what we are going to do. The member for Kooyong points to the carbon price. If you are interested, we are delivering an emissions trading scheme with a three-year fixed price. They went to an election saying they wanted an emissions trading scheme. The member for North Sydney has come into this place and has said, 'Pricing carbon is inevitable.' Okay, so it is inevitable. So when are you going to do it? 'Not just now.' So when is the member for North Sydney proposing that we price carbon? When does he think is the best time to do that. John Howard, whose mantle they seek to try to cling to, already got there. He got over the line on this one. He decided that a carbon price, an emissions trading scheme, is what this country needed. He said very proudly at the time that if we want to maintain our competitiveness as an economy in the future, these are the hard decisions that governments have to take. I do not know anyone out there that seriously thinks that in 50 years time this country will be able to rely on fossil fuels in the way it does today or has in the past. If you believe that, then you realise that the process of beginning the transformation towards less dependence on fossil fuels and greater reliance upon a clean energy future are the hard decisions that governments have to take. We are taking them. We are taking them in difficult circumstances through a minority government. The member for Cook might be lucky enough to come back into this place at some point in the future and actually have to make a concession—to confess that he got it wrong. In fact, he got it right when he went to the election in 2007 promising an emissions trading scheme. He got it right then. But he got it wrong this time. They have got it wrong.

This government is taking some hard decisions that will make the structural changes that our economy will need for the future. That is what we have done. They all know it. Governments in the past have taken those hard decisions, quite often with some political cost, but in the end we all enjoy the bounty of that today. That is why we have one of the strongest economies in the world. It will keep going from strength to strength. It will keep growing.

The Leader of the Opposition comes into this place and says, 'We are all about wealth creation, not wealth redistribution.' I tell you what: no government in the advanced world, no developed economy, has been more about wealth creation since the global financial crisis than us. That is why our economy is seven per cent larger today than it was before the global financial crisis. No developed economy in the world has grown in that period to the extent that we have. The only reason we even get to have a debate in this country today about wealth redistribution is that we have created the wealth. Along with industry and the private sector, this government has created wealth. We helped to create that wealth by investing and supporting jobs through the global financial crisis. As for those opposite—and the Australian people will always remember this—when the tough times hit we were there to stand up and to support jobs, while they were asleep. And now we see that they just cannot wait to scurry away from the chamber at every opportunity, because they do not want to be here for the hard decisions.

See this speech in context