Aaron Violi (Casey, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I have to be honest. When this motion came up, I was very happy to speak—the cost of living is a huge issue in my community—but, after I got the motion, I did get my team to double-check it. I thought that maybe the second part of the motion was missing—there are two notes pumping up their own tyres on the cost of living—but, no, the government are talking about how it's their No. 1 priority and they bring up two measures. That's it. That's all the government have to talk about when it comes to the cost of living for the Australian people.

In many ways, this motion sums up everything about this government. It's symbolic. It talks a big game, but, when it comes to delivery, they're not there for the Australian people. My community knows that. They know that every time they have a bill come in, they have to pay the power bill or they go to the supermarket. We have over $300 million of energy debt in this country—over $300 million that Australians owe to their energy retailers because they can't afford to pay their bills. What is the government's solution to that crisis? 'We'll give you $150; with $150 the job's done, we've sorted it out, there is no more energy crisis and no issue for the Australian people.' You're going to get $150 off your energy bill; that's it. It's the No. 1 measure that they've got, handing back taxpayer money without actually dealing with the source of the issue.

We then go to the second measure—the second of the two measures on the cost of living, which is supposedly the government's No. 1 priority. It's the battery scheme. The member for Gilmore just talked about how the battery scheme will save Australians $4,000 on average, because it gives them 30 per cent off. Those were the member for Gilmore's words. I'll do a very quick calculation—maths wasn't my strong point; I'll be honest—to see what that means for a household that wants to take up that battery. I'm a fan of batteries—I think they have a role to play in our energy grid—but to couch it as a cost-of-living measure in this motion and hear the Prime Minister stand up and talk about it as cost-of-living relief is asking the Australian people, based on the member for Gilmore's own numbers, to put up another $9,000. You at home are struggling to pay your bill, we've got $300 million of energy debt in this country and this government, this Prime Minister, is so out of touch that he's saying to you, 'We will give you cost-of-living relief.' But guess what? You've got to pay $9,000. I'm sure plenty of people in the Prime Minister's electorate, in inner Sydney, might have $9,000 in the bottom cupboard that they're happy to pay with. But to, with a straight face, move a motion asking the Australian people to put $9,000 on the table to get $4,000 back as a cost-of-living relief measure—how out of touch is this prime minister, this treasurer, and this government?

It's clear they have no agenda when it comes to the cost of living or to actually dealing with any of the economic challenges we face. We saw that at the productivity roundtable last week. We have seen the division that has developed between the Prime Minister and the Treasurer. It's clear they are not on the same page. One day it's a productivity roundtable; the next day it's economic reform, and then we're back to productivity. At the start, everything's on the table. The next day, the Prime Minister rules out any tax changes until the next term; they're going to take it to the election. The only problem with that is, the next day, the Treasurer comes out and starts talking about wanting to tax EVs—contradiction after contradiction. The Treasurer was out on the weekend saying, 'This will inform our tax policy and our tax changes for the next three budgets.' Hang on—didn't his leader, the Prime Minister, just say they weren't going to change taxes? This is all about the leadership ambitions of the Treasurer and about the Prime Minister defending his legacy and trying to serve as long as he can.

The sad part about this internal focus from this out-of-touch government is that it is the Australian people that are paying the price. It is about those in the community in Casey and all across the country who don't have $9,000 tucked away to pay for a battery but are contributing to this $300 million of energy debt. They get $150, because this government is more focused on itself, and it does not have any solutions to the challenges that the Australian people face.

See this speech in context