Bruce Scott (Maranoa, National Party) Share this | Hansard source

Now they are trying to say that in the next financial year there will be a surplus of $1.5 billion. Really! Just look at the record. I say to taxpayers out there, the hard working Australians, just look at the record and that will tell the story. The carbon tax will have a very real impact on my electorate—and not only my electorate but also right across Australia. Look at the impact on outback tourism, a significant part of the economy particularly at this time of the year. Southerners from other parts of Australia get out of the frosty plains of the cities and towns and come to western Queensland to see the wonderful weather and tourist attractions that we have out there. But it will cost them more to get there, whether they come by bus or plane or drive in their own vehicle. When they get there the accommodation will be dearer, so it will cost them more to travel. Outback tourism is a significant part of our economy in western Queensland.

Food producers are at the start of the chain of food production in this country. They will not be able to pass on the increased cost of electricity when they pump water, or grow food or fibre or cereal grains, as they do in my electorate. A few weeks ago I was in Stanthorpe looking at the possible site for a new dam which has been on the drawing board for over 20 years. It is a significant salad vegetable production area in Queensland, particularly in the summer months because it has a moderate climate. Those producers will not be able to pass on to the consumer the increased cost of producing that food. They will have to absorb it or not grow it. One of the concerns they raised with me, and others who were with me at those meetings, was that perhaps it would be cheaper to import it from overseas where the Australian carbon tax would not impact on the cost of producing basic food items.

I have two councils—Western Downs Regional Council and the Maranoa Regional Council. They have been identified as great big polluters and they are going to have to pay a carbon tax. Who will pay it? The councils will pay it but who will pay it ultimately? The ratepayers—the pensioners, the senior citizens, the businesses whose costs will be driven up. It is not rebateable. Will the farmers be compensated for the increased cost of production? This government seems to say that what it pays upfront is a compensation for the increased cost of living for a household. But no, the farmers will have to absorb it.

We talk quite often about a two-speed economy in this nation but what we are is two nations in this country that we all so love. We talk of the horizontal fiscal equalisation distribution of the GST welfare state. What I would like to see is some horizontal fiscal equalisation of that money, when it is transferred to states, to across the states, to the rural and remote parts of Australia. One particular priority for me is the area of health. The other day I was looking at the work of John Humphries from the Monash University School of Rural Health. To put it this way, if I were to hold up two photos of two newborn babies, identical in every way except that they lived in different Australian postcodes, they would show the difference in postcodes meant a difference of up to seven years in life expectancy. That is because one comes from rural and remote Australia compared to one living and growing up in the capital cities. The Monash University study showed that life expectancy in Australia decreases as remoteness increases. As I said, it is a differential of up to seven years, merely on the basis of the postcode of where you were born and grew up and lived. That paper also went on to say that life expectancy is increasing 20 per cent faster for urban Australians than their country counterparts. So, the lot for those who live east of the Great Dividing Range—anywhere between Port Douglas and the mouth of the Murray River—is that you have a greater chance of living another seven years. For those who live in urban Australia it is rapidly increasing; yet there has been no significant increase for those who live in rural and remote Australia. That is an issue that all levels of government have to address.

I think the big thing here really is access to education, specialist services and primary health care. We need to make sure that we can bring more services to those people who live in rural and remote Australia. Those figures should ring alarm bells for every level of government in this country. I repeat that number: a child born today in rural and remote Australia, just by virtue of the postcode where they were born, has a life expectancy seven years less than if they were born in Melbourne, Sydney, Brisbane or anywhere east of the Great Dividing Range, which is a great divide. It divides this nation into two nations, not one. That is an issue that has to be addressed and it is one of the great passions that I have.

I also want to talk about the issue of access to post-secondary education, because that is another area where we have a great divide. The participation rate in post-secondary education—

See this speech in context