Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Hansard source

Then on the absolute question of where we stood on 24 November, the fairytale being woven by those opposite, their Alice in Wonderland tour of the economic reality of the country, is this. On 25 November inflation became a problem. On 25 November, at least until this most recent intervention, which was remarkable, interest rates became a problem. We have now been blamed for interest rates in the last six months as well by them. Of course, on 25 November suddenly petrol prices became a problem and grocery prices became a problem and I presume everything else suddenly became a problem. The delivery of services to schools, and hospitals all became a problem. The unavailability of broadband services in the bush became a problem. So the underlying realities of this country suddenly went whoosh on 25 November—all changed. In 12 years it did not happen, not one bit.

I do not think the Australian people believe you. They have looked long and hard at the government as it was leading up to the election of last November and said, ‘You know, this mob have had a long time to prove whether they are fair dinkum; a long time to prove they are fair dinkum on dealing with the impact of inflation on interest rates; a long time to deal with the problem of the skills crisis which fuelled inflationary pressures in the economy—20 warnings from the Reserve Bank on that and infrastructure; 12 years to act on the infrastructure bottlenecks of the nation, and they failed to act; 12 years to act on the crisis in our hospitals, and instead they pulled out $1 billion; 12 years to act on our school system, and instead they simply said, ‘Blame the states;’ 12 years to act on climate change, and they said, ‘Find me a hole in which to bury my head and I will bury it there and bury it very deeply.’ That is the rationale of those opposite, that the entire universe changed on 25 November 2007 and none of these realities existed before. I say again that I do not think anyone out there believes the position being put forward by those opposite.

We have a view that when it comes to the challenges faced by working Australians, working families and those doing it tough, you have to deal with it at multiple levels. You have to deal with the system of tax we have in the country. Another bogus claim by the Leader of the Opposition is on the tax package. What did they stand for? An extra $3 billion or $4 billion to be delivered to people earning north of $180,000—that was their position going to the last election. What did we do by contrast? We took that money and we said: we are going to give it back to working families who are dealing with the cost of funding their kids’ education in schools, both government and non-government, through, for the first time in the nation’s history, an education tax refund—$4.4 billion into the pockets of working Australians out of the pockets of those who earn north of $180,000. And they say there was no contrast in the tax positions the parties took to the last election. If you think $4.4 billion is irrelevant to the daily budgets of working families across the country struggling with the cost of educating their kids, I think you are on a different plane of reality.

When it comes to the family budget, it is tax that counts, it is the education tax refund that counts, it is the childcare tax rebate that counts, it is the measures being promoted by the Minister for Housing to deal with housing affordability and also the measures that we have announced in terms of the Medicare levy surcharge that count. The assumption by those opposite that those on $50,000 a year are somehow wealthy and should have this impost on them is extraordinary and demonstrates of itself how out of touch they are. When you put all those measures together, none of them represents a silver bullet. But, if you have got money coming in from the tax cut; money coming in from the childcare tax rebate going from 30 per cent to 50 per cent; for the first time, the education tax refund; and, if you are in the $50,000 to $100,000 bracket, the additional benefit which flows from the change to the Medicare levy surcharge, these things add up in providing some additional practical help and they help deal with some of those pressures that families are under. What is the alternative? A 5c change in the excise, which even the alternative Treasurer and alternative Prime Minister, the member for Wentworth, does not support. That is the alternative. So we have an approach which says, ‘Here is tax, here is the childcare tax rebate, here is the education tax refund, here is housing affordability, here is what we are doing on the surcharge imposed on those people’—each of these delivering something by way of support to working families, and you say, ‘Here is our policy: 5c on excise,’ which the gentleman behind you does not support but has in fact used as a tool to undermine you.

See this speech in context