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

It is a privilege to speak on the first occasion as the member for Barker on the budget that was recently delivered. I thought I would begin by waxing lyrical about the process, but in truth—perhaps because I am feeling a little homesick—I will reflect on a discussion I recently had with my daughter who is four. I must say, she is particularly advanced—she takes after her mother rather than me. I knew Bella had reached a level of maturity when she said, 'Daddy, I have made a mess and I'll have to clean it up.' That speaks to maturity. My daughter, barely a few days over four, knew that having made a mess she would have to help to clean it up.

It is disappointing that those on the other side of the chamber do not have that level of maturity. Having made a mess, and that mess is a gross national debt of $667 billion, they intend to make it difficult for us to clean that mess. The other difficulty here is—it is new to me as a new member of this place—the exercise in misinformation. It is a monumental attempt at academic dishonesty, if you like, when it comes to the situation we find ourselves in—as I said a gross national debt of $667 billion and the interest alone is $1 billion a month. If we are to talk about what is best for the young people of Australia, and much of this debate has been about what is best for the young people of Australia, clearly what is not best for the young people of Australia is to saddle them with our debt today to be dealt with tomorrow. That is why difficult decisions with respect to this budget have had to be made.

I thought I would take my time to debunk some of these myths, because quite frankly I am alarmed at the level to which the Labor Party will sink to effectively scare the constituents of this nation. They want them scared, they want them to fear the decisions that are being taken in this budget, because if they did not want to scare them they would not be using words like 'cut'.

There was a rally recently in Mount Gambier and you will not be surprised, Madam Deputy Speaker, that a stalwart of the Labor Party spoke at that rally. A chief organiser of the CFMEU spoke at that rally, and I happened to listen to the coverage. What people heard, with the recitation of these lines of misinformation, is that effectively this budget is about cuts when in fact it is nothing of the sort. I was concerned to speak to a pensioner, who said to me, 'Tony, why is my pension being cut? I am being told that my pension is being cut.' I took a considerable amount of time to speak to this particular constituent and, at the conclusion of that discussion, she said to me, 'So you're telling me that my pensions will continue to increase twice yearly.' And I said, 'That's exactly the position.' She said, 'That's not what I'm being told. I'm being told that my pension is being cut.' Herein lies the harm. We need to be honest with the Australian people—not just honest with the headline gross debt figures but honest in terms of the impacts on individuals of the decisions we have made. There will not be pension cuts. What there will be is a continuation of twice-yearly increases, at a different rate and calculated on a different basis, but still twice-yearly increases.

Much of the rally in Mount Gambier spoke to the reforms in the education space. As someone who was lucky enough to achieve a tertiary degree, this is an area I feel passionate about. ABS statistics that have been quoted consistently throughout this debate tell us that, over the course of a lifetime, those who attain tertiary qualifications are, on average, likely to earn a million dollars more than those who do not. Equally, under our current system we have falling standards in our universities, in that we no longer have a university in the world's top 20, and we have very few in the world's top 100. What we have is a system whereby 60 per cent of the costs of delivering a tertiary degree is met by the public purse and 40 per cent is met by the individual. There is obviously good reason why we embark upon educating our young, but what we are doing through these reforms, and what we have made clear through these reforms, is asking for an increase in the contribution by individuals towards their education in a such a way that they will be, along with society, the principal beneficiary of that education. I need to also remind the chamber that not a single individual student will be prevented from undertaking a tertiary degree. There will be no requirement for up-front fees. When I heard at this rally the alarmist suggestions that nobody will be able to afford university and that university will be just for the rich, quite frankly it saddened me, because that is nothing more than a wolf whistle. It is the kind of politics that I thought we had left behind in this country in the 1960s. It is divisive. It is class politics. It is base politics and, quite frankly, it is incredibly sad.

Speaking briefly in the area of health, in this country 260 million GP visits are provided free. Of course, medical treatment has never been free to the public purse and I respectfully suggest that it should not be free to the individual. What we are asking for is a modest contribution from those who seek medical treatment. There are adequate and substantial safety nets. You hear the catch cry from those opposite that this administration is taxing the sick, but they do not offer the academically honest observation that there are in fact these safety nets; for pensioners, for people with health care cards and for children under the age of 16, the number of co-payments they have to pay is limited to 10 a year.

None of this is easy; cleaning up a mess and correcting errors is never easy. But the first and most important thing one has to do when embarking on this course is to accept that there is a problem. That is why, as disturbed as I have been about the rhetoric around this budget, what disturbs me most is that those opposite continue to promulgate the idea that there is no problem here. Of course there is a problem. With the interest payments on our national debt, we are effectively using one credit card to pay off a liability on another credit card. Ordinary Australians know that we just cannot sustain that. If we had not taken corrective action, each and every Australian would be saddled with $25,000 worth of debt. For the average household, for a family with two children, that is $100,000 of debt.

Those opposite who say this is a budget that takes from the poor and gives to the rich ignore the fact that not only is there to be an adjustment to the highest marginal tax rate but those who find themselves in that tax bracket—including me and other people in this House—pay close to $60,000 per annum in tax. Notwithstanding that fact, we have moved to increase the tax rate for those in the top marginal tax bracket. Why? Because everyone needs to do their bit. Whether it is local government, state government, high wealth individuals or those in receipt of benefits, each and every Australian needs to do their bit.

There has been misinformation around the decision to move the age of eligibility for the age pension to 70 by 2035. The level of misinformation on this has been quite surprising to me. I have dealt with inquiries from people close to the retirement age who say it is unfair that they should be expected to retire at 70 as a result of decisions taken in this budget. It has taken some time to explain to them that this change will take effect from 2035—that it will affect me but perhaps not them. We should be celebrating the fact that, as Australians, our life expectancy is increasing. We should celebrate the fact that 70 is the new 55 and not be scared of working until 70 if we can. Of course, we should remember that the Labor Party put us on this trajectory in 2009 by raising the age pension eligibility age to 67 from 2023.

I began my comments by talking about my young daughter. In the few minutes I have remaining, I wish to mention her again. She, like many people her age, is a massive fan of Peppa Pig. I never thought I would become a connoisseur of children's television, but I can recite almost every skit the Wiggles have ever embarked upon and I find myself knowing about not just Peppa Pig but her extended family. So if we are talking about the egregious way in which those who oppose these measures have gone about whipping up hysteria in the community, I cannot go past the suggestion by the ABC that this budget will see the end of Peppa Pig.

Let's be clear: the ABC and the SBS as the nation's broadcasters have been asked to find a one per cent efficiency dividend. I come to this place having spent a long time in private business. I grew up at the feet of my parents operating a small business. If they were not finding efficiency dividends of that and more per year they would not have been lucky enough to continue in business. This might go some way to explaining why particularly the ABC and particularly in my electorate of Barker has given such significant coverage to the budget. Quite frankly, I am glad they have, because it has given me the opportunity to explain the need for these measures.

Nobody makes tough decisions because they think that it will be a fun ride. The Prime Minister and Treasurer have not taken these tough but fair measures because they thought it would be great to run these ideas around the park. They have taken them because they, like me, do not want to bequeath to the next generation of Australians mountains and mountains of debt—$667 billion if we take no action. Quite frankly, that is a debt limit you could not fly a rocket over, and yet those in the Labor Party would have you think, 'There is nothing to see here. There is no need for change.' Indeed, recent announcements would have seen that debt level increase by over $100 billion.

I am proud of the budget that has been delivered. I am proud because, having been asked to make the difficult, sensible and appropriate decisions, the Abbott coalition government has done that. This budget is one that will show its merit in years to come. I am certain that not only the constituents of Barker but the wider Australian community are ready to fix the problem. They elected us to fix the problem. We have taken the first step on that road, and I am looking forward to completing the job.

See this speech in context