Patrick Gorman (Perth, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister) Share this | Hansard source

This action from those opposite, who voted against energy price relief, is one in a long list of actions to undermine the social safety net which millions of Australians rely upon. Labor brought the age pension into reality in this country, which was undermined by the conservatives opposite. Labor built up Medicare and Medibank. They tore it down, and we had to rebuild it again. They undermined it time and time again—so much so that, if you want to become the Leader of the Opposition, the Leader of the Liberal Party, the best way to get there is to attack Medicare throughout your career. He proudly tried to introduce a GP co-payment of $7. The Leader of the Opposition proudly had his big policy idea to make sure that the first thing you needed to give when you rocked up at emergency was not your Medicare number but your credit card number. He tried to increase the price of medicines by $5, and because of all of those actions—many of which failed because those on the Labor side proudly blocked those terrible ideas—those opposite chose to make him leader of the federal parliamentary Liberal Party.

Labor builds up the social safety net. We built up paid parental leave. Those opposite go to elections promising to expand paid parental leave, but they never actually follow through when in government. Again, we built up the National Disability Insurance Scheme, a proud outcome and deliverable of Prime Minister Julia Gillard, and we made sure it was fully funded. Those opposite put a staffing cap in place and left people waiting and waiting for packages that they should have received. So I'm proud to stand as part of the Albanese Labor government—a government that came to office promising and committing to support a pay increase, whereas everyone on that side went to the election saying they didn't even think people should get a dollar-an-hour pay increase on the minimum wage.

I want to go back one year in time. I know that those opposite often want to go back 10 months in time. I don't know why they only ever want to go back 10 months, but let's go back a whole 364 days:

… war rages in Europe. The global pandemic is not over. Devastating floods have battered our communities. We live in uncertain times.

They were the words of Treasurer Josh Frydenberg in framing his budget. Since then, we know the global outlook has become less certain. We've seen the impact of inflation and the interest rate rises which started under the coalition and continue to impact the budgets of governments around the world and, indeed, here at home. But there can be no doubt that this government has acted on the cost of living. I know those opposite might be sceptical, so don't take it from me; listen to the Leader of the Opposition. This is a quote from him before he went into hiding, before he lost his visa to the state of New South Wales, before he decided that he was no longer able to visit Victoria for unknown reasons that end about 6 pm on Saturday:

… we commend several good measures in Tuesday's budget: the extension of the childcare subsidy to more Australian families; the commitment to reduce the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme co-payment, to lower the cost of medicines; the support for housing for our veterans; the initiatives to combat domestic violence; and the funding to help Australians recover from devastating floods.

It was a rare moment of honesty from the Leader of the Opposition in October 2022. I commend him for once—possibly the only time in his political career—actually saying that there was something good happening. He said more than just no. Indeed, he supported some important cost-of-living programs put in place by this government. They didn't do it in the 10 years they were in government, but I commend them for supporting it in their first year in opposition.

We have to look at context. As they often say when you want to get somewhere: 'You wouldn't start here.' And you definitely wouldn't want to start here when it comes to the economic situation that was left by those opposite: a trillion dollars of debt, a 49 per cent increase in childcare fees, $3.4 billion for submarines that were never built, 85,000 Australian manufacturing jobs lost, an NBN built four years late with second-rate copper and $28 billion over budget. Who signed off on all of them? I got out the Expenditure Review Committee membership and there, right in the middle, is the now Leader of the Opposition signing off on the trillion dollars of debt, signing off on the closure of manufacturing jobs across this country, signing off on $3.4 billion for submarines that were never built, signing off on a 49 per cent increase in childcare fees.

But there was someone who wasn't on the Expenditure Review Committee; I went down and looked for the member for Bradfield. He wasn't there. He was giving us lots of free advice, and he must have given lots of free advice when he was in government, back in the day, sitting around the cabinet table wondering why he hadn't been chosen to be placed on the Expenditure Review Committee. But that didn't stop him from doing huge economic damage. There was the $28 million blowout in the National Broadband Network, for which he was responsible. As arts minister, he was busily arguing against giving JobKeeper to the very arts sector he was supposed to be advocating for. He did achieve one thing, proudly: he purchased 21,000 kilometres of extra copper. That's enough copper to go all the way around the circumference of the world, purchased by the now member for Bradfield when he was busily doing his little bit to build up that trillion dollars of Liberal debt that's now left for the Albanese government to resolve and pay the interest on because those opposite lost control of their budget.

But losing control and losing arguments are not something that are new to the member for Bradfield. I note that he was out there recently, advocating that those opposite should have backed the government's initiatives on the safeguard mechanism. In the Guardian of 8 February we read:

… Paul Fletcher and Simon Birmingham pushed back against a decision to oppose the Albanese government's planned overhaul of the safeguard mechanism during shadow cabinet deliberations over the past fortnight.

There are many interesting things about that. It was kind of someone else in the shadow cabinet to have shared that information with the public at large through the Guardian. But it's also interesting that there's obviously disagreement on that side about the decision that was made by those opposite not to engage with the government on the safeguard mechanism but instead to try to continue their role as climate warlords and to continue the climate wars. That's the approach that they've taken.

And so we come to what the two competing approaches are in this place. One side of this chamber wants to get wages moving. We did that proudly by supporting an increase to the minimum wage. Those opposite wanted to have low wages as a deliberate design feature. They ran around, proudly, saying that it was a deliberate design feature to keep wages low. Those on this side want cheaper medicines, and delivered them from 1 January. Those opposite were too busy looking at GP taxes and charging people to walk into emergency departments. This side wants cheaper child care and, in less than 100 days from now, we're making sure that 1.2 million families get cheaper child care. Those on the other side were happy to sit back and do nothing as childcare fees went up and up and up—there was a 49 per cent childcare fee increase on the watch of those opposite. This side is proudly expanding paid parental leave to six months, and we all remember the promises they made—particularly those in the past, from 2013—about expanding paid parental leave. The minute they were elected they did absolutely nothing about it. On this side of the chamber we have an energy price plan that everyone on this side of the chamber proudly voted for. On that side, they said no to price caps and no to energy relief. The only thing those opposite said yes to was to hide a 20 per cent power increase until after the election. This side of the chamber backed a $10 billion investment to build 30,000 affordable homes. Those opposite are saying no—no to the housing that we know is so desperately needed.

See this speech in context