Bernie Ripoll (Oxley, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Industry and Innovation) Share this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, you would recall that in the last election the Prime Minister spent an absolute fortune in time, resources and taxpayer dollars to convince people that he, John Howard, the Prime Minister, was totally, 100 per cent, responsible for interest rates—that he was the sole driver of interest rates being kept at record lows. Guess what? People believed him. He did a good job; people believed him—so much so that they still believe him today. They still believe that the promise that the Prime Minister made in 2004 stands today. That record stands because members of the government still say today that that commitment stands.

Well, guess what? After nine interest rate rises in a row—five since the last election—people still believe that he is 100 per cent responsible for interest rates. But they are starting to ask the question: if he is 100 per cent responsible for interest rates, why is he making them go up? Why is he making people’s lives so difficult? The Prime Minister promised back in 2004 that he would keep interest rates at record lows, but today they are just going up and up. With the fifth interest rate rise since the Prime Minister made that promise to keep them at record lows, families in the western corridor of Brisbane and Ipswich are suffering more than they have ever suffered before.

But such suffering is not just restricted to people in my electorate; it is right across the whole country. Whether they are in Wentworth, parts of Sydney, Brisbane, Western Australia or Perth—it does not matter where they are—people are genuinely suffering because the Prime Minister promised to keep interest rates low and he did not keep that promise. It is as simple as that. We have had nine interest rate rises in a row, five of which have been since the last election. The problem we have is that the Prime Minister still thinks interest rates are low. But official data says that households are now carrying three times the level of debt that they used to carry about 20 years ago. Three times the level of debt actually means three times the pain and the impact on the ordinary family.

In my local area, the Liberal candidate, who thinks he is quite clever, is reported in a recent newspaper article, when asked about interest rates, as having said: ‘Things are going so well from an economic point of view that it is not even an issue. It will just come down to local little things, maybe post office boxes and a couple of local roads.’ The question is: which planet does he live on? There is nothing more local, more personal or more important to families today than being able to meet their mortgage payments, and the reality is that, under this government, mortgage payments have never been so high as a proportion of income.

I am sure that the economic geniuses in the government will be able to at least work this out: as a proportion of their income, families are now paying more than 30 per cent. Thirty per cent is regarded as the absolute stress point, that breaking point, at which for families there is no going back. Now they are paying more than 30 per cent, and some are paying 50 per cent. It makes you wonder why the Prime Minister would have the gall—some would call it arrogance—to walk into this place and say, ‘Families have never had it so good; they’ve never been better off.’ Maybe he is just talking to the wrong families, maybe he does not care or maybe his promise at the 2004 election to keep interest rates at record lows was just another non-core promise. Say anything, do anything, spend anything—the goal is to get re-elected. It is not about running the country. It is not about having a vision. It is not about the future. It is not about housing affordability. It is not about anything else. It is just about winning government.

That draws me to what is happening now. Some significant events have occurred in the last couple of days, particularly one in relation to the Treasurer’s birthday. The Treasurer always has an answer for everything; he is a very clever guy, just like the Prime Minister. But he was actually stumped on a question for, I think, the first time ever when somebody asked him: ‘What’s your vision for Australia?’ He hesitated. That let people know the truth for just a minute: he actually does not have a vision for Australia. It is just about getting re-elected and becoming the Prime Minister. The Treasurer of this country does not have a vision.

The problem that this country has with housing affordability is that the government just does not care and it does not listen. It is just about winning the next election. To fix a problem, you have to acknowledge that a problem exists. Once you acknowledge that a problem exists, you then have to set about having a plan. You have to have a solution. You have to do something. Labor has a plan. The government just wants to win an election. We have convened a national housing affordability summit, we have committed $500 million to a housing affordability fund to tackle undersupply and we will establish a national housing supply research council, Infrastructure Australia—a statutory body with a cabinet level minister responsible for it. You can do something.

Just in the last couple of days, we have announced a national rental affordability scheme. We want to create 50,000 new affordable rental homes at 20 per cent below market rates. There is something that you can do, but only if you care, only if you believe that a problem exists and only if you actually believe that working families are doing it tough. This Prime Minister and this government do not believe that. (Time expired)

See this speech in context