House debates

Wednesday, 19 August 2009

Veterans’ Affairs and Other Legislation Amendment (Pension Reform) Bill 2009

Second Reading

11:53 am

Photo of Wilson TuckeyWilson Tuckey (O'Connor, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Well, let’s get something straight. It is amazing how you can rewrite history in this place. I can see Tom Uren and the others marching in the street and giving our soldiers a hard time. For your information, I am a nasho. I did not go to Vietnam but I do know what it is all about.

Putting that aside, the fact is that this legislation, as it applies to veterans, is virtually a replica of what Brendan Nelson put to this House, and he was treated with contempt when the government failed to address these matters in its first budget. Let’s get a few things on the record. When Brendan Nelson brought forward a proposal that primarily recognised the relative needs of single pensioners he was attacked because he did not mention everybody—at a time when the government was supporting nobody. They are the facts of the matter. They are clearly recorded. The member for Shortland carries on about it being a good idea, but it was acted on very slowly.

Pensioners who voted for this government were promised reduced grocery prices and fuel prices. Of course, any reduction in the cost of groceries and fuel is the same as an increase in the pension. How were those promises delivered? There was GroceryWatch, which the minister at the table, the Minister for Competition Policy and Consumer Affairs, had the good sense to cancel after it had cost about $8 million or thereabouts. That was absolute tokenism. And of course it took the good sense of the opposition to stop the government from—

Comments

No comments