Tony Pasin (Barker, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Excuse me if, having listened to the member for Jagajaga and the members for Richmond, Shortland, Lalor and Fowler, I feel like I have been flogged by a feather. Just a brief observation: you know an argument does not have a lot of punch when you have to invoke all three whips to speak. I think that is an example of the reality of this situation: that no-one on that side wants to own the member for Jagajaga's claim, which is born of an intention to scare the pensioners of Australia.

I know those opposite have spent time at the member for Lilley's special school for economics, but they really need to get over this idea that more means less, that less means more, that a budget surplus means a deficit and that a deficit means a surplus. We really need to get to the bottom of this, so let's have a think about what our government has done in the 18 months while we have been here with respect to pensions and pensioners.

Chronologically—because I find that easier—the first thing we did, of course, was to scrap the carbon tax. I will not go into any great detail about that, other than to say that those opposite, at the first practicable opportunity, will seek to re-establish that tax. However, in addition to scrapping the carbon tax, we kept the carbon tax compensation, meaning that the pensioners of Australia are $14.10 per fortnight better off for a single and $21.20 better off for a couple. For those opposite—those alumni of the Lilley school of special economics—that is more money in pensioners' pockets. It is $366.60 per annum for a single or $551.20 for a couple.

The next thing we did is that we maintained the very long tradition of twice-annual increases of the pension. Pensions went up in March 2014 and in September 2014. They went up again in March 2015—indeed, last Friday. That means that single pensioners in this nation are, as a result of those increases, $51.80 better off per fortnight, and a couple is $78 better off per fortnight. What does that mean in annualised figures? It means that a single person living on the full pension is $1,346.80 per annum better off, and couples are $2,028 per annum better off.

That is more, not less. I repeat it because I am worried for those opposite, who, as I have said, spent time studying at the member for Lilley school of economics. It is a six per cent increase over 18 months, far outstripping wage growth—six per cent in 18 months. It clearly exposes what we are seeing here as a false and misleading scare campaign. In addition to that—

See this speech in context