Clare O'Neil (Hotham, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

This important discussion goes right to the heart of the falsehood that is being peddled by those on the other side of the House. It sits at the heart of the debate about the budget. Over the past weeks we have heard some ridiculous claims made by those on the other side of the House as they go around Australia. You get the feeling that the Treasurer believes if he repeats that we have a budget emergency frequently enough and loudly enough then it will start to come true. There is a problem, though. The facts do not support the statement. Let us turn to some of these facts.

As previous speakers have mentioned, we have a public debt to GDP ratio in Australia of somewhere around 20 per cent, about a fifth of GDP. The member for Casey asked who do we want to compare ourselves to. Is the OECD the right spot to put the bar? Let us take a look at those who have AAA credit ratings. Australia is one of 13 countries around the world which has a AAA credit rating. By my list Australia has the lowest debt to GDP ratio of all countries with a AAA credit rating. I have not worked out the average myself, but by eyeballing this list I would say the average debt to GDP ratio is about 55 per cent, so we are sitting at just under a half of the debt to GDP ratio for all those countries with a AAA credit rating. You do not have to take my word for it because, as is becoming quite apparent, we are struggling to find a serious economist in Australia who will stand behind some of the fatuous claims made by the government. Even Tony Shepherd, who produced the infamous Commission of Audit report, would not state that Australia is in a budget emergency. The only people who are making this claim are those who are sitting on the other side of the House.

Given all this evidence, why do we see all the rhetoric? We have heard some very interesting views from this side of the House speculating on what they are trying to do. I have been thinking about this for a few weeks and I have my own theory. I think what we are seeing on the other side of the House is what economist Paul Krugman has called a very serious person syndrome. This syndrome occurs when right-wing politicians want to get up and create some sort of crisis. They get really serious and really tough on the topic to show off a professional veneer. The problem is, as we have just talked about, the facts just do not support it. I do not like the politics but I think you have to admire the moxie, given how far away from the facts they are.

There is another problem with the rhetoric that is being spun on the other side of the House—that is, the government decisions that are being made simply do not line up with this idea that we are heading into a huge fiscal crisis. What we have seen in the announcements that the Treasurer has made so far are some massive new areas of spending going to some of the wealthiest people in our community. One of the examples that I know we will hear more about is the paid parental leave scheme, which will give somewhere between $50,000 and $75,000 to some of the richest women in the whole of Australia. This scheme is going to cost $5.5 billion a year. That is about as much as the whole amount of federal spending on child care. If you go out and talk to the mothers of Australia about what they would prefer investment in, I think we all know what the answer will be.

Something else I want to talk about is the government's attempt to abolish carbon pricing and in its place create this taxpayer-funded slush fund that will pay the companies which are the biggest polluters in Australia to try to cut down carbon emissions—a scheme which we know is not even going to help Australia meet its carbon goals.

What we see along with these massive areas of spending are some significant areas of cuts. The cuts, as we have come to expect from those on the other side of the House, are affecting the Australians that can least afford to pay. I am talking about a tax on people who are sick. I have been doing mobile offices during the sitting break, and I am sure that you guys have had this experience: constituents have been coming up to me and they have been so afraid; these are people who have illnesses and just cannot afford to pay $6 every time they go to the doctor. I know that those on the other side of the House tend to represent electorates where there may be fewer people in this situation, but I can tell you that the constituents of Hotham are incredibly concerned about things that will tax people who might be sick.

All the while, we have these very serious people on the other side of the House paying $140,000 for a private jet to bring them to Canberra and having a lovely time sitting in the parliamentary courtyard puffing on Cubans. I would just say to those on the other side of the House that it might be time to stop trying to pretend you are so serious and tough, get real with the facts and start listening to those on the other side of the House who actually have some experience and understanding of economics.

See this speech in context