Chris Hayes (Fowler, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I will be after the next election.

We should not be very surprised about today's debate. Some things we should be able to take in our stride. What we are talking about today are those opposite returning to type. We saw in 2013 how they put paid to electoral promises. They said they would not cut health, they would not cut education and they would not cut pensions. They actually gave a new dimension to pork-barrelling. They dispelled the notion of their trustworthiness.

In 2014 they brought down their first budget. They could not help themselves. What did they do? They attacked families. They attacked low- to middle-income families. By the way, they have had their opportunity; they just elected a new leader not all that long ago. He had the chance to reposition that government. He had a chance to give some substance to those words he preached about fairness and decency and how we would deliver that. But they have not done that at all. They have continued down this path of attacking low- to middle-income families. Now we see that they are trying to cover the traces of looking at hiking the GST. They know it is going to disproportionately impact on low-paid families. Those opposite know this because they are being attacked in their own electorates at the moment. They had a chance to do something about that but failed to do it.

In terms of the cut to family payments: nationally, 1.5 million people are going to be affected, but that is nationally. Like most MPs here, I am going to focus on my electorate. That is 17,000 families that are going to be impacted by this. They are going to lose payments of $726 per child per year. They are going to be worse off.

I see those smarting on the other side, but I will tell you a little bit about my electorate. Most people know my electorate is the most multicultural in the whole of the country. We are great, diverse, very colourful and very vibrant, but my electorate is not a rich electorate. My electorate has much disadvantage. It has significant challenges. The average family household income in my electorate is just a tad over $50,000, so this is going to have a high impact on low-income families. If the government gets their way in where they want to go with the GST and have 15 per cent on everything—on fresh food, on education, on health—that is going to have such a huge impact. It will be a double-whammy. For families that are living on $50,000 a year, that is going to be something very hard to absorb.

As I said, my community is not rich, but they do work hard. Mums and dads do a lot to support their kids. They want a bit of assistance. They do not want a handout; they do want a hand up. There are a little over 15½ thousand families in my electorate receiving tax benefit B at the moment. They are going to be $354 worse off. Single-income parents—and we have many in my community—are going to be anything up to $4,700 a year worse off, and we are expecting them to suck it up?

This government had the opportunity to take a real positive look at those in need, and they have done the reverse. They are going to propose tax measures that will be less of a burden for high-income earners than it will be for those struggling to make ends meet at the moment. It is consistent. Look what they did. The first thing they did when they formed government was attack the schoolkids bonus. I know about most people on this side of politics, but I think most of them felt the impact of this as well. When you take off parents $842 per child attending high school or $422 for a primary school kids, that significantly cuts into the budget of those who need it.

Maybe they represent electorates that do not need it—I do not know—but in areas like mine, of which I am sure there are many on the other side too, people are in need and struggling to make ends meet, and we owe it to them as a parliament to work for their benefit, no to line the pockets of those who are rich. I know much has been said about superannuation, but our first and foremost duty in this place is to look after people in need.

See this speech in context