House debates

Wednesday, 17 June 2015

Matters of Public Importance

Pensions and Benefits

4:18 pm

Photo of John CobbJohn Cobb (Calare, National Party) Share this | Hansard source

I never thought I would rise in this place to say that we are here today talking about the fact that the Greens have shown a maturity and responsibility that you normally only see in a mainstream party. But obviously that has all changed, and I am still stunned that I am standing here saying the Greens are showing more responsibility to our country than an old institution like the Labor Party, which has always claimed to stand for the underdog. They are not standing very straight for it and their bark is very quiet. In fact, I would say the Leader of the Opposition has caught himself out somewhere, thinking this could not happen. Well, it has. Not only do we have a divorce between Labor and the Greens, but that formal coalition that existed in the last parliament would seem to be gone, and we now have Labor showing a lack of respect for people who need it.

We need to talk for a while about the facts. There are 170,000 pensioners at the bottom end of the scale who will see their pensions increase substantially. It will also mean that 50,000 more who are part pensioners will qualify for a full pension. Ninety one thousand current part pensioners will no longer qualify for the pension, and a further 235,000 will have their part pension reduced. I do not want to have a go at anyone, but this is to make it sustainable through into the future, taking into account those whom those on the other side said will be coming onto it. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition spoke of 700,000 people in the next few years coming online. We need to make sure that they too can be part of a sustainable pension plan.

Jenny Macklin, the member for Jagajaga, says we are hurting middle Australia with these cuts to part pensions. She does not say that we are helping those Australians less well off who surely do need that assistance. She does not say that her government made it much harder to spread largesse around to those in Middle Australia. Why does she not say that? Perhaps buried somewhere there is a note of conscience that they have—if I may put it this way—stuffed up the Australian economy pretty well. How could you say it is bad when we are lifting the asset-free test area by $50,000 for single homeowners, by $100,000 for single non-homeowners, by $90,000 for couple homeowners and by $140,000 for a couple who are non-homeowners?

As our Prime Minister alluded during question time, the Leader of the Opposition has surely caught himself out. I guess we can only call him, as we have seen in recent times, the Rasputin of Australian politics, a master of regicide. In fact, if you want to talk about the Leader of the Labor Party rather than the Prime Minister, he is certainly the Macbeth of politics, because he not only gets rid of the kings; he takes their place. The true regicide here is the fact that our Prime Minister got rid of two leaders of Australia who brought us to the position we are in, where we cannot afford to run as generous a system as we have in the past. It is the opposition's fault from when they were in government and it is the fault of the Leader of the Opposition—as I said, the master of regicide, the Macbeth of Australian politics. He has brought it upon himself and he has caught himself and his party out. When the Greens are more responsible than Labor, they are in trouble.

Comments

No comments