Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade and International Security) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is again to the Prime Minister. How does the Prime Minister reconcile his assertion that the Liberal Party is the party of family values with the fact that, under the government’s industrial relations legislation, Australian mums and dads can now be required to work more than the standard 38-hour week and not be paid overtime? Prime Minister, isn’t it the case that the government’s industrial relations legislation means that mums and dads cop it both ways: no compensation for longer working hours and less time with the family? Prime Minister, isn’t it a fact that the government’s IR legislation is a further fundamental assault on Australian families?

John Howard (Bennelong, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The short answer to the question is no. In fact, it is no, no, no. The slightly longer answer is that, if you look at the aggregate benefits of our industrial relations changes over the last 10½ years, they are manifestly pro family. I have never made the assertion that the only people in the community who are interested in happy and stable families are members of my two parties; family life is important to all Australians. I would not be so absurd as to make a claim to the contrary. But I do make the entirely reasonable claim that over the last 10½ years we have deliberately followed policies which have been designed to help Australian families.

One of the oddest claims that have been made over the past few days is that we have followed some kind of social Darwinism in our attack on Australian families. Indeed, the reverse is the case. I have occasionally read some commentators, who could loosely be called to be on the economic right of the debate in Australia, attack me for having been too generous to Australian families. They have attacked the family tax benefit system and they have attacked some of our childcare policies, but I welcome those attacks because they have been a reminder that the government I lead has governed very much for the great mainstream of Australian families. If you look at the way in which our family tax benefits have burgeoned, if you look at the extraordinary performance in the area of unemployment and if you look at the fundamental changes to Medicare which have been outlined by me and the health minister over the last few minutes—the boosting of bulk-billing, the introduction of the Medicare safety net and the funding of private health insurance—all of these measures, so far from undermining families, have been profoundly pro family.

I have said before, and I will repeat it again, that the proudest boast that I was able to make in the last election campaign was when I opened the Liberal Party’s campaign in Western Sydney and I said that under the government I led we had done more for the workers of Australia than a Labor government could ever have dreamt to have done. We had given them lower interest rates, we had given them lower taxation, we had given them and their children more jobs and we had boosted family support.

I welcome any debate on support for families because nothing has driven me more consistently over the last 10 years than a desire to profoundly advantage the families of Middle Australia. It has meant more to me than anything else and it remains at the core of my political being. I welcome any debate on that particular ground.