Rebecca White (Lyons, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Women) Share this | Hansard source

Our government knows that some people across our country are doing it tough. That's why we're so focused on helping them responsibly, thoughtfully, deliberately. If you look at the statement that was released by the RBA today, it talked about an increase in private demand. It didn't talk about government spending, which is the premise of the motion that we're debating here in this House today. That's a false premise, because what we know is that what our government is doing is helping Australians.

Have a look at what our government inherited from the opposition. They left us inflation with a six in front of it and rising. Now it's much lower than that. They left us with higher spending, no savings and bigger deficits. They went to the election with a plan for bigger deficits and more debt and a plan to hike up taxes for every taxpayer to pay for nuclear reactors. And weren't they popular—particularly in my home state of Tasmania, which is renowned for and proud of its renewable energy efforts with hydro? The fact that you were taking a plan like that to the election went down like a lead balloon.

We are focused on the cost of living; they are focused on themselves. We're focused on turning two budget deficits around and making them budget surpluses. Wages have come up. Unemployment is down compared to what we inherited, and our government is focused on supporting Australians dealing with the cost-of-living issues that they are facing. And we are serious about that—not just empty statements from the Leader of the Opposition about a plan. What plan? The opposition doesn't have a plan. They haven't even got a plan to reconcile with their former coalition partners. It's false promises from the Leader of the Opposition.

I think it's important to put it in context. Look at the decade of the former coalition government and think about that decade as a lost decade, a decade of cuts and neglect. They left the country with structural deficits, wages stagnating, a housing crisis. They did nothing about it. For the Leader of the Opposition to come in here and lecture us about our program to build more homes, to support Australians into homeownership and to support them into affordable and social housing, when they did barely anything at all to support Australians dealing with this, is offensive. Think about the way that they left families struggling to access affordable child care and people struggling to find a bulk-billing GP. How many Medicare urgent care clinics did you build? Zero. The member for Lyne up there is giving the member for Lyons a bad name because she gets ejected and people think it's me! Our government is building Medicare urgent care clinics; their government didn't build a single one.

The records of those opposite speak for themselves. The Australian people voted them out for a number of reason. Amongst them was the fact that those opposite didn't have a plan to help tackle the cost of living. In fact, the opposition leader got up just now and said they've got a plan. Where is it? You certainly didn't take it to the election. You didn't present to the Australian people an option for them to vote for you, because you were outlining a range of measures to help to support them to deal with the cost of living, and you haven't done that since. The reality is that those opposite have nothing to offer Australians today. What solutions are they providing? Those opposite can't agree on who should sit where in the chamber. We saw that again today. We're focused on the cost of living and delivering for Australians; those opposite are focused on themselves.

I thought it was notable today that, when the opposition leader was giving her remarks, the member for Hume was missing. Where was he? The division in the opposition benches is clear for all to see. Those opposite can't help but have a giggle about it because they know it's true. It's on display for all Australians. How can we take you seriously—how can Australians take you seriously—when you can't take each other seriously? You can't even show up for the speech the opposition leader gives in this chamber on the first day back of the parliamentary year on the official calendar. I think it was interesting, some of the remarks made by the opposition leader. She spoke about a 'pain the Labor Party simply does not understand'. Was she talking about herself—the pain of the coalition split? When she talked about going around in circles, stuck in some kind of holding pattern, was she talking about this malaise the opposition find themselves in as they negotiate behind closed doors to roll her?

The government is focused on Australians. Our priority is supporting them to make sure they live a life of dignity and live a productive life. That's why we've been serious about taking deliberate steps to support initiatives that not only reduce the cost-of-living pressures Australian families are feeling but also increase the productivity of our economy. Look at some of the measures that our government has invested in. This is not wasteful spending, and I challenge members opposite to tell me which of these initiatives you don't support. Some of them we know—you don't support tax cuts, for one. We know you don't support tax cuts for hardworking Australians. You've made that plain. You voted against it, and you took a policy to the election to increase taxes. So we know you don't support that. Energy bill relief is another thing you didn't support. In fact, you wanted to spend taxpayer money building nuclear reactors—billions of dollars. That would have put power prices up through the roof for hardworking Australians.

What about more free GP visits? This has been a hallmark of our Labor government that understands the value and the importance of Medicare. It's in our DNA. Do you propose to roll back the investments that we've made to fund Medicare urgent care clinics across our country? Is that reckless spending? What about the increase in the bulk-billing rate? We've seen 1,300 more practices convert to be fully bulk-billing across the country since 1 November last year. Is that reckless spending? Is it? Are you going to roll that back? Are you going to introduce the co-payment again? Why don't we go back to the ghosts of Liberals past, like the former member for Dickson, and introduce a co-payment? The opposition leader, when she was the health minister, did nothing about addressing the falling rates of bulk-billing. What did she do about the Medicare rebate? Did she increase it once? Doughnuts.

I think the record of the Liberal Party speaks for itself, but maybe it's an interesting question for constituents in their electorates and the Australian public to ask them. Is spending on health care reckless spending? Is increasing the bulk-billing rate for Australians, who can now finally see a doctor for free, reckless spending? Is investment in Medicare urgent care clinics, which are supporting millions of Australians to see a health professional in their time of need, reckless spending? What about cheaper medicines and the $1 billion that Australians have saved on cheaper medicines because of our government's commitment to lower the price of medicines to support Australians to get the health care that they need? Is that reckless spending? These are serious questions for the opposition to confront, and there's no response.

What about free TAFE? We know you're not a fan of that. This is a productivity-enhancing measure. This is about equipping Australians with the skills they need to be able to go and pursue their dreams to get a job here in our country and support in areas of economic activity, in child care, in aged care and in teaching. These are investments that are supporting Australians to live a good life. This is not reckless spending. What about the cuts we made to student debt of 20 per cent? Are you going to put that back on? You're going to increase student debt by 20 per cent. This is what Australians need to ask themselves when they hear the Liberal opposition leader talk about reckless spending.

The RBA has been clear in its statements today. It's private demand that's been the key reason why they've made a decision as an independent board to lift rates. There is no doubt that this will hurt some Australians who've got a mortgage, and that is why our government has been so single-mindedly focused on delivering cost-of-living relief to all Australians. It's why we've supported pay rises for some who are working in highly feminised industries, like aged care and child care. It's why we've supported pay rises for those who are on the minimum wage. We're supporting parents through enhancing paid parental leave, access to cheaper child care and more childcare places, because I know that this is one of the key ways that we unlock opportunity for women, in particular, to participate in our economy. These are productivity-enhancing investments. This is not reckless spending.

I would like to just finally make the point that, when Australians think about who's going to give them a fair go, I feel confident when I look at our benches that there is a competent group of ministers and a team here working every single day in their electorates for that single purpose—to give Australians a fair go. Do those opposite really think they have anything to offer Australians at the moment with respect to a comprehensive economic narrative? Do you? Really? You can't even work out who's going to be your shadow Assistant Treasurer. It's just embarrassing. You can mark yourself up if you like, but I think Australians are marking you down right now. (Time expired)

See this speech in context