Bruce Scott (Maranoa, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

(Hon. BC Scott)—Order! Before I call Mr Cheeseman, I remind honourable members that this is his first speech. I therefore ask that the usual courtesies be extended to him.

Darren Cheeseman (Corangamite, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I stand before you on Ngunawal land with great pride, the first Labor member for Corangamite to make a first speech in the national parliament in 28,470 days, or 76 years. The last time a Labor member for Corangamite was elected, things were a little different. Thomas Edison had just died, aeroplanes were Kittyhawks and Charles Kingsford Smith had just become the first man to fly solo from London to Australia. It is really great to be here.

First, I would like to take the opportunity to acknowledge the work of the former member for Corangamite, Stewart McArthur. Though our backgrounds and views of the world differ, I have always admired Stewart’s willingness to be honest about his views, even when he knew they were not popular.

Winning Corangamite took a massive effort by many, many people. I acknowledge all those people who worked on my campaign. I cannot name them all; there were hundreds and hundreds of people who campaigned to see Labor win Corangamite and government. I must acknowledge Richard Morrow, Joe Taylor, Nathan Oakes, Mike Atkinson, Annette Downie, Liz Day, Gavin Ryan, Matt Hammond, Judy and Peter Loney, Chris Reilly, Kosmos Samaras, Clancy Dobin, Brett Collett, John Sawyer and Sonia Kociski. I also thank Young Labor, my federal parliamentary colleague Gavin Marshall and my state parliamentary colleagues Gayle Tierney, Jaala Pulford and Michael Crutchfield. I would also like to thank all of my local Labor Party branches; my former employer, the Community and Public Sector Union; and, in particular, Karen Batt and Jim Walton for their friendship and support. I want to thank the union members who helped me via the ALP Your Rights at Work campaign.

Lastly, I would like to acknowledge my family: my wife, Kirsty, who was so strong and supportive despite the trials of being pregnant for all of the campaign; my mum, Ondria, who is a hard-working charge nurse; and my father, Leicester, who recently retired as a technical officer with the University of Melbourne’s school of forestry. Thank you all so much.

It is daunting to be elected as only the third Labor member for Corangamite since Federation. Previously, the voters of Corangamite have turned to Labor during momentous events. Corangamite voters first turned to Labor in the lead-up to the Great War, when James Scullin was elected. It happened again in the Great Depression, when Richard Crouch took office. Of course, I have been elected during another very significant period: 2007 and the years preceding it saw the great cultural war—the coalition’s war on fairness and the great struggle to retain the central Australian cultural value of the fair go. To have Labor standing on this side today is a great victory for the Australian fair go.

Corangamite has been a safe Liberal seat for decades. It has received little attention and many members may not know a great deal about it, so I will give you a brief travelogue. I would like to use the journey to describe the character of these communities and the challenges they face and to make my commitments to them. Firstly, Corangamite is the country of the Wathaurong, Gadubanud and Gulidjan people. I acknowledge their ongoing attachment to country and the contribution they make to our region today.

If we are to pick a geographic point to start to describe Corangamite now, we should begin at Point Lonsdale and Queenscliff. Here Victoria’s colonial history and the great change began. You can look across to the Port Phillip Bay heads and the Rip. Through this gap the first wooden ships sailed and dropped anchor. William Buckley passed here in his remarkable 30-year solo odyssey as the first whitefella to visit the region. His survival, due to the generosity and compassion of the local indigenous people, was the genesis of the great Australian phrase ‘Buckley’s chance’. Buckley’s chance, by the way, was a phrase often applied to my own campaign. Winning this seat is evidence of the wisdom of another great Australian phrase—that is, ‘Have a go, mate!’ We then travel in a westerly direction to Ocean Grove and Barwon Heads. These towns, of course, now define in legend Australia’s sea-change phenomenon. Who could forget the quintessential Australian characters of Diver Dan and Laura Gibson? Dan was laconic, rugged, cynical and hiding his vulnerability. Laura was game, feisty, passionate, introspective and honest.

To my mind, the success of these characters said something about Australians. It said something about what we aspire to as Australians. I want to talk about these values. We heard a lot about the aspirationals, the sea changers and the tree changers in the recent election. They certainly played a big part in Corangamite. We, as politicians, appealed to the aspirationals. We courted them; we cajoled them; at times I begged them. But, to me, the pitch often appeared to be about the material things and gaining a higher status. There was the expectation that you should be leaving the old values behind for a new, classier life. I think we are missing a fundamental point: aspirational Australians are also aspiring to better values as a community and as individuals.

The aspirationals are searching for those great Australian values of openness, friendliness and a close community. That was the appeal of the SeaChange show. I believe that as politicians we have a responsibility to display and inspire those great values. Until recently, these were the values for which Australians were known. These values are what I was taught as a boy: to treat people as equals, to engage with people, to be encouraging, to be understanding and to be a reliable friend. My pledge to all of you here today, including those on the other side, is to always strive for these values—the values Australians know as common decency. To my electors, I pledge the same: to always be available, to be accountable, to support you and to be there for you.

The Great Ocean Road is the next stop in Corangamite, with the coastal towns of Torquay, Anglesea, Aireys Inlet, Lorne and Apollo Bay. These are rapidly growing towns and communities. The Great Ocean Road is Australia’s largest monument, built by 3,000 Australian ex-servicemen as a tribute to those who made the ultimate sacrifice. If you have not been to the Great Ocean Road, you have seriously missed out on both the history and the view.

However, these towns, the Great Ocean Road, the Surf Coast and the whole of the Bellarine Peninsula face daunting challenges. Climate change and rising sea levels are a deadset frightening scenario, with predictions that much of the Bellarine Peninsula will be inundated. We will lose major industry, houses, and recreational and community facilities. The Great Ocean Road, the engine room of the tourism economy, will be breached in place after place. Local towns will be become local islands.

Sustainability is a massive challenge for all Victorians. In our region and in Australia we have to learn to provide water, power, housing, sewerage and transport services to these growth communities sustainably. Per head, we come from the worst offending state in a nation that is one of the worst contributors to greenhouse gases. There is no greater challenge for us. We have to work with business, all levels of government and everyone in the community to stabilise the planet’s climate. What a breath of fresh air it was to see Labor make a start and sign Kyoto. Labor’s future initiatives on carbon trading, greenhouse gas targets and other climate change measures are also so important. I pledge to my electorate to support these changes and to push hard for pre-emptive action at local, regional, national and international levels on climate change.

There is another great sustainability challenge our society faces—that is the challenge of sustaining affordable housing. It is a simple fact that most kids in the Surf Coast and many other areas in my electorate will never be able to buy where they grew up. How did we get to a situation where, according to the latest figures, the average Australian family has to pay up to 50 per cent of their net income on mortgage repayments? Labor has pledged to implement some important initiatives on housing affordability. I will push every council, every developer and all governments for affordable housing in every new housing development, every chance I get.

So, we follow my electorate from the Surf Coast into the hinterland, on to Colac and Winchelsea and the many small inland farming communities, including Birregurra, Lavers Hill, Gellibrand and other small towns within the Otway Range. These people are fiercely proud of their towns. They are loyal to them. The people of Colac and Winchelsea have been through a lot over recent times. They have suffered with major transition in primary production—in particular, in the timber, livestock grazing and dairying industries. Many of these small rural areas are still drought affected, doing it tough—farmers every day working long hours so that we can have meat, milk and grains on our table. These are strong, supportive communities with resilient characters, who are rapidly adapting. In 2007, Colac voters put their trust in Labor. Many logging and farming families in the region have given Labor a go for the first time. My pledge to the people of Colac, the Otways and the surrounding region is that I will do my level best not to let you down.

Corangamite stretches up from Colac to just south of Ballarat. It then cuts across to Rokewood, Dereel, Linton and Smythesdale—all strong farming townships, all with a strong sense of community. From here we travel to Bannockburn and then the south-west suburbs of Geelong and the rest of the Bellarine Peninsula. Within this area is another huge growth corridor, home to tens of thousands of young families working towards owning their own homes, looking for job security and a healthy and safe life for their kids. The needs of these families have been ignored over the last decade. They need support to make them feel a part of their community.

I have the task of representing one of the most diverse, dynamic and beautiful regions in Australia. Corangamite has it all: friendly, spirited people; a wide range of industry; world-class coastline; superb bays and beaches; and fantastic forest and farming areas. We have great sporting clubs, cultural organisations and terrific volunteer groups, making up a great community. In the next three years we have a great opportunity to build even stronger communities. To me, that is what Labor is about.

Over the last 11 years, those great Australian values I talked about earlier were, I believe, degraded. We were encouraged to turn our back on our fellow workers. We were encouraged to blame the disadvantaged for their disadvantage. We were encouraged to fear and distrust cultural difference. We learnt how to spread fear with coded words and coded acts. The Australia I want is not this Australia—that is just not Australian! We need to remember what we were and then build on it. We were one of the architects of the UN declaration of human rights. We led the world in workers’ rights. We led the post-Cold War Western world into China and Asia through trade and culture exchange. We welcomed refugees from war-torn neighbours. We were known for our inventiveness. We were known for our compassion and plain speak. That is the Australia I want.

For way too long there have been almost no community-building initiatives in Corangamite. Where they have happened, they have been fragmented and disjointed. I am on about smart community building, where taxpayers’ dollars get maximum value. It is about coming up with a range of ideas that fit together as a whole, where one bit of infrastructure complements another. I believe we should not cream off tax dollars from working families as an unfettered right. We are entrusted with tax money—working people’s money. We are given it and we are expected to use it wisely, because the vast majority of Australians believe we are not all just little individual islands. Most Australians know we are part of a community and that we have to keep working on developing our community. We are given tax dollars to use efficiently to help build vibrant, healthy local communities where everyone benefits and those in need or at a disadvantage are given extra support.

I am pleased to say that, during the election campaign, we were very successful in winning support for some fantastic community-building projects. But, most importantly, all of those projects go together to make a whole. It is a matrix of projects that will make a real difference to our community. In the Surf Coast and the southern Geelong suburbs, for example, we have funded brand new sports, community and recreational precincts. Going with this is a major water saving and recycling plant which will feed the sports fields and at the same time be available for industry and parks.

In this same region, we are building a whole new road transport system that will make access to the region much easier and travel to and within it more efficient. These roads will also open up new growth corridors for affordable housing, new businesses and new jobs. The same road system will provide better access to a major driver of the regional economy, the Great Ocean Road. We are also making funds available to improve the environment and facilities available on the Great Ocean Road. This is an integrated community-building vision. We have created the vision by bringing together people with local knowledge and ideas, by looking at a creative way to fit projects together and then by going out and strongly advocating for it.

I want to say a few words about issues that were decisive in the election: workplace laws and a fair go. The Labor Party and the Australian society were founded on a fair go. The fair go now has broader application but, originally, it was born out of union workplace campaigns from over 100 years ago. The culture created by Work Choices and its Trojan Horse, AWAs, was and is appalling. It was totally un-Australian. Australia will be an infinitely better place for the fact that these laws will be overturned. My pledge to the people of Corangamite is to always support workplace laws that are fair and balanced.

In winding up I want to say that, just over two weeks ago, my first child was born. Isaac is only a couple of weeks old now. I look into his eyes and a sense of wonder and a deep well of love takes over. I feel an absolute duty of care. I just want Isaac to grow up in a world that is kind, where he will be safe, where he will have opportunities and where no one will bully or stand over him. I do not want him to be an adult in a world where human-induced climate change is causing dislocations to communities and whole nations. I do not want him to go to work being afraid express a different opinion from that of his employer. I want him to grow up in a community where he walks down the street and instinctively exchanges a ‘G’day mate’ to a passer-by. I want him to teach his children, my grandchildren, that Sunday is the day they bring a cup of tea to mum and dad in bed.

We are part of an exciting nation—an Australian society that overall is amongst the most free, innovative and successful in the world. We got here not by some magic ideology; we got here by sticking to the values of tolerance, a fair go and decency—and that is exactly what I will be fighting for in this place. Thank you.

Tony Smith (Casey, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Education, Apprenticeships and Training) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I congratulate the previous speaker on his first speech. I also join with him in his remarks recognising the very long and good service of his predecessor, the former member for Corangamite, Stewart McArthur, who served that community and this parliament with great distinction over a long period of time.

I am pleased to speak in this address-in-reply debate following the election and my being elected for the third time as the member for Casey. All 150 of us in the House of Representatives are very fortunate to represent the communities that we do. We represent every corner of Australia. This House brings together a diverse range of people, representing the great diversity that is Australia. To be a member of this parliament is indeed a privilege.

In listening to the first speeches of the new members from both sides, I found it refreshing to hear members recognise those people who helped them so much. None of us can get elected to this parliament on our own. We all know that. You need the great help and support of family and friends and, of course for most of us in this chamber, of our respective parties. It is important to recognise the great democratic role that our parties do play.

We all look back to election day—Mr Deputy Speaker Bevis, you have had more election days than me—and at the sheer process of the party organisation in making sure that the right number of people are handing out how-to-vote cards at so many booths. You hope that the couple of hundred people involved all turn up on time and at the right place. The first thing I think about when the alarm goes off on election day is that everyone has turned up and that they are all in the right spot. It is something that the major parties do not recognise enough. While we have different views on so many policy issues, we recognise that the members of our respective parties are truly dedicated to the causes we believe in and that they play a critical role in our election to this parliament.

I want to thank my campaign team. Of course, those who helped numbered in the hundreds, but I particularly want to thank the Liberal Party campaign committee in the federal electorate of Casey. They include the state member for Kilsyth, David Hodgett, who was the chair of the campaign; Annette Stone, the electorate chair; Jill Hutchison; Christine Fyffe, the state member for Evelyn; Fran Henderson; Neil Gryst; Clive Larkman; Jim Dixon; Ralph Inglese; Peter Manders; Bryan McCarthy; and John Lord. I particularly want to pay tribute to them for the tireless efforts they put in on my behalf and on behalf of the Liberal Party to run a first-class campaign last October and November in the electorate of Casey. As I said earlier, without the efforts of these people and of so many others, my election would not have been possible—and that is true of every member in this House at this time.

The major parties and the party system get a pretty poor wrap from time to time. The party system does have its faults, but they are absolutely overshadowed by the contribution that the system makes to this parliament and to our democracy in Australia in giving it stability and order. Obviously I was very disappointed in the election result of last November, but that the transition to a new government took place in such a smooth way was particularly Australian and democratic. There has been much said and written about the wonderful democratic culture that allowed that to occur.

But the other thing that is not often recognised is that so much of that stability, order and ability for a smooth transition very much rests on the fact that we have major parties—the Liberal Party of Australia in coalition with the National Party, and the Australian Labor Party—here in this parliament. I do not say that in any way to denigrate the role of Independents but I do not shy away from the fact that if this House were filled with 150 independents, you would not have had the smooth transition that we had. The major parties bring stability and order to the democratic process so that the will of the people can be easily identified. A new government can be formed, sworn in and begin work prior to the commencement of parliament, and there is a certainty about a government being able to bring its program forward. I think it needs to be recognised in this debate that, for all the criticism of the major parties that occurs, without them this parliament would be a very different place. You only need to look to those parliaments around the world where there are multiples and multiples of parties and the lack of stability that brings to their system.

While I am talking about the election result of last year I want to spend some time, as you would expect—and I know as the minister opposite would expect—talking about the important legacy of the previous government. We left the country and the economy in very good shape. Having said that, we fully expect, as is the role of an opposition, to be blamed for absolutely everything that goes wrong for a considerable period of time. That is part and parcel of politics, but it does not square with the facts of the matter, particularly in terms of economic management.

In 1996, when we took the government benches, the budget situation and the economic situation in Australia were very different from what they are today. I particularly point out that the $96 billion of debt—and we hear that figure repeatedly—was a very real figure. It had been caused by successive budget deficits of $10 billion, $11 billion and more, which in today’s dollars is much bigger when you consider that the size of the budget has pretty much doubled. It had a very real impact on what the federal government could do. Part of the problem was that we had a failing tax system—a system that could not provide the revenues that a federal government needs to perform the important services that we all care about. We have a lot of differences, but we all care about education, health, defence and all the other key issues. But to fund those issues requires not only a strong economy and a strong budget position but, importantly, a strong revenue base. When we set about tax reform, it was absolutely key to providing the stable revenue base that is the backbone of the budget and our economy today.

Of course, we were opposed in effecting that reform. I remember, and it has been said often in this parliament, that the now Prime Minister particularly—and he was not alone—opposed that tax reform. He declared in this House in 1999:

When the history of this parliament, this nation and this century is written, 30 June 1999 will be recorded as a day of fundamental injustice—an injustice which is real, an injustice which is not simply conjured up by the fleeting rhetoric of politicians. It will be recorded as the day when the social compact that has governed this nation for the last 100 years was torn up.

Of course, as we approach the ninth anniversary, he does not believe that. He was engaging in cheap political point-scoring. We know he does not believe that, because he is not seeking to reverse either those reforms or what they have provided. But that tax reform, which was introduced with great opposition, and the paying off of government debt have left this country and particularly the new government in a very strong financial position. I will give you some idea of what $96 billion of government debt was costing the budget each year: about $8½ billion. With government debt paid off, that $8½ billion can now be spent on things other than interest. It is $8½ billion that is free to be spent on all sorts of priority areas.

Budget deficits are now being replaced by budget surpluses, and the talk of the budget is not how big the deficits will be but how big the surpluses will be. We have future funds that have been created, but that $8½ billion every year importantly enabled the previous government to fund new programs that could not have been envisaged when we were saddled with high debt, recurring deficits and a tax system failing to provide the revenue that the nation needed. Specifically, it allowed the government to step in and bypass state failure in a number of key areas. It enabled the government to step in and create community partnerships and direct communal links from the federal government right down to the local level.

I specifically refer to the Roads to Recovery program, which is a good example, and I urge those opposite to keep that program. I specifically refer to the Investing in Our Schools Program, which enabled the government to step in, bypass the bureaucracy that was holding back our local schools and fund local schools for the sorts of programs and projects that they determined were important. The $1.2 billion program over four years helped a huge number of schools—particularly primary schools, who spent $800 million of the $1.2 billion. We point out to the House that that program has been abolished. It should not have been abolished. Our local schools will suffer, and that direct link to the federal government has been severed.

At the local level—and I know the member for McPherson, here with me, will share the same experience—it had a huge impact on local schools. In Casey, $6.7 million was delivered to 139 projects at 59 schools—that is every school, government and non-government—for all manner of things that were key priorities at the school, from a performing arts extension at the Croydon Secondary College to shade structures at Monbulk Primary School. Croydon Primary School spent a significant portion of its money upgrading its toilets because they were in a state of disrepair and had had no work for 20 or 30 years. The state government had failed and, because of the extra resources from paying off government debt, the previous federal government was able to step in and create that program.

Another important program was the security cameras and crime prevention program. I fear that that program will go the same way as the Investing in Our Schools Program. The federal government stepped in directly with local communities to fund crime prevention strategies and security cameras, and that had a huge impact. In the electorate of Casey, security cameras have been installed at Lilydale and Croydon and are to be installed at Mooroolbark and Mount Evelyn. In Lilydale where they have been installed, there has been a 70 per cent reduction in crime. I say to the members opposite, particularly the new members: your communities will want to pay on results. They will not be interested in problems being unsolved or in being told that problems will be solved by the state government one day.

These direct partnerships are being severed by the new government. They are being severed in the name of its so-called new dawn of federal-state cooperation. From election day, this government has proceeded to cave in to state pressure. As I said, it has done so already on the Investing in Our Schools Program and I fear it will do so on security cameras. But I predict that this new federalism, which will evolve from its heady days now to reality tomorrow, will become a serious problem for this new government down the track as the failing Labor states seek cooperation to slide back to their comfortable position of failure and low standards. Federal-state cooperation cannot be cooperation to cover up problems rather than fix them up.

In the first three months of this government, we have seen a federal-state Labor love-in, as you would expect, and it is being hailed as a new dawn. We saw that very much with the comments of the Treasurer and other new ministers at the time of the first COAG. Of course, right now, they can meet and congratulate each other, and they can blame every failure on the previous government. They can blame every failure on John Howard. They can do that for a period of time. That was the way of the Labor states. Whatever problem occurred in the Labor states under the previous government, they pulled out that reusable fig leaf to blame the federal government for the whole period.

It is the case that right now the federal government and all the Labor state governments right across Australia are very much backslapping each other. The wedding has occurred. The confetti has been cleaned up. What will evolve in the future that will be important is how the marriage is going to work in practice. The difficulty for the federal government will be getting the states to actually perform their role. The state governments will want cooperation all right: they will want cooperation to cover up problems. If the Labor federal government does not agree to that cooperation to pretend things away, if it does not agree to cooperate to cover up state failure, in time the state governments will be blaming this federal government.

The real issue in federal-state relations is getting those state governments to meet their responsibilities. The rhetoric of blaming the previous government will work for some time, but soon, in reality, the important issues of actually fixing the problems that we have in our local schools and local crime hot spots will need to be addressed. The strategy may sound good now, but if the plan of the new government is to handball responsibility on all these issues back to the states—and it is pretty clear that that is the plan of the new government—we know what the result will be, because, when something is handballed to the states, they drop the ball. They do it every time. They cannot catch.

This federal government will hand back funds to the states for local schools, presumably, and then on the ground, when those projects are not being fixed like they were in the Investing in Our Schools Program, this government will be held to account. If the federal government decides to cave in to state pressure and abolish the Community Crime Prevention Program, that will be not just clear in this parliament but very clear in the electorates of those members opposite.

I would urge those opposite, as the heady days of this new federal-state marriage subside, to look with reality at the practice. I can say that Labor state governments certainly are not perfect, and state governments of a Liberal persuasion in the past have not been perfect either. At the end of the day, our responsibilities are to fix the problems in our local communities. At the moment, the only solution seems to be to handball every single responsibility back to the states so they do not have a light shone on their failure. As the states fail again in the future, as they have failed in the past, this federal-state cooperation will very much be a problem for this government that it will have to address in the months that lie ahead.

Arch Bevis (Brisbane, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Before I call the member for Flynn, I remind the House that this is the member’s first speech. I ask that the House extend to him the usual courtesies.

Chris Trevor (Flynn, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker Bevis, and congratulations on your appointment. I rise today in these great but somewhat formidable surroundings to speak as the first ever federal member for the newly created seat of Flynn. In doing so, the Australian Labor Party and I create a little bit of history, a fact of which we are immensely proud. I acknowledge the traditional owners of the newly created seat of Flynn and Australia generally and, in doing so, also take this opportunity to personally say sorry to the stolen generations of this land. I offer my congratulations to the ALP class of 2007 and all of their support crew and I look forward to their companionship and company during my stay here, no matter how long destiny determines that may be.

It is right and proper for me to inform the House about the great Australian whom the newly created seat of Flynn was named after. The new seat of Flynn was named after the late Reverend John Flynn, who was the founder of the world’s first flying medical service, the Royal Flying Doctor Service of Australia. Back then, as it is now, no matter where illness or accidents strike, medical help was on call thanks to the man known as ‘Flynn of the inland’. My thanks go to Stephen Barber from the Parliamentary Library who was kind enough to provide me with the following passage which puts the matter so succinctly. I quote from the AEC that the seat of Flynn was named:

... in honour of the Reverend John Flynn, founder of the Royal Flying Doctor Service, who, in the early days of flying and also of radio (beginning in 1928) harnessed both to the relief of suffering and the saving of lives in the remote regions of Queensland and, ultimately, Australia. The flying doctor service for the provision of emergency medical care he pioneered was the world’s first, and is still the most comprehensive service of that kind.

May I add that, if one looks at the $20 note in one’s pocket, this great and compassionate Australian, the Reverend John Flynn, appears on the same, immortalised and honoured as he should be. I say to Reverend John Flynn’s surviving relatives: it is indeed a great honour to serve in the name of Flynn as its first ever federal member.

It is also a great honour to be part of a Labor government which acknowledges the outstanding contribution the Royal Flying Doctor Service continues to make to my community of Flynn. To take an example: in February this year Minister Albanese announced funding in my electorate to upgrade the Tambo, Springsure, Rolleston and Alpha airstrips, which will improve safety for all Flying Doctor planes. I thank him on behalf of those communities for that and also behalf of the Longreach community, where we have committed to contributing $6.6 million to their airport, which will among other things improve safety for the Royal Flying Doctor Service.

Flynn contains within its vast boundaries the birthplace of Labor, and I am both humble and proud, as is Labor, to represent the people of Flynn and, among other things, to be part of a team that will put an end to that insidious piece of legislation, Work Choices. The seat of Flynn covers an area of 314,305 square kilometres, give or take an inch or a yard. I sincerely thank the community of Flynn for the great honour they have granted me in allowing me to represent them in federal parliament. I have not and will not let them down; I do not think I ever will. Already, significant community announcements have been made for the electorate of Flynn. They are far too numerous to mention here, but on behalf of my community of Flynn I thank the Prime Minister and the Australian Labor Party for their recognition and ongoing support of Flynn. I have only recently welcomed back to my electorate the Prime Minister and Treasurer and, hopefully, the community cabinet will follow shortly.

Flynn is one of the most diverse electorates in the land and includes, but is not limited to, primary production such as coal, oil, gas, orchards, cotton, grain, seafood, cattle and sheep. Gladstone, or the ‘Port City to the World’ as our local community champion Mayor Peter Corones describes it, is that part of the electorate where I live. It will soon, in my opinion, be the industrial capital of Australia and is already home to significant major industry with the port, under the watchful eye of CEO Leo Zussino, being the major export facility for the area. My home town of Gladstone is facing a cusp of major industrial development in the next few years and, unless government takes notice of the substantial infrastructural and social building blocks necessary to support this growth, Gladstone will fall over the cliff. I want to make it clear at this juncture that I believe a major portion of my community of Flynn sent a clear and unequivocal message to the previous coalition government that they grew tired of contributing billions of dollars worth of revenue to the federal government coffers only to get lip service for their loyalty in return, when it came to, among other things, simple, basic government services such as a Medicare office in Emerald and completion of a ring-road like Kirkwood Road in Gladstone. I am pleased that my government has already acknowledged their contribution and has made amends in respect of both of these long overdue community necessities. I give notice that I will be calling for a lot more because, in my opinion, my community has been ignored by government for far too long. In saying this, I also give notice that I will not let any government, no matter who they are, take advantage of my people any longer. I commit today my unswerving loyalty to the people of Flynn, and if I should fall on my sword as a result of it then so be it.

Today I bring to the attention of this House so that the matter is on the record if things go wrong that the Gladstone Airport runway may soon have to close because of its state of deterioration. This would have a devastating impact on current and future industry in Gladstone and bring it and the community to their knees. The people of Flynn, as diverse as they may be, from farmers in the west to the South Burnett to the coalminers in the east, are a can-do lot. They are both friendly and helpful but also stoic in the face of adversity. Somehow they manage to cope with droughts, floods and coalmining disasters. In saying this, I acknowledge the financial support of my government during the recent catastrophic floods in Emerald, Gemfields and surrounding areas. I also acknowledge and thank Premier Anna Bligh and state government ministers Tim Mulherin and Neil Roberts and National Party member for Gregory, Vaughan Johnson, for their compassion, understanding and support to those residents in Flynn affected by the recent devastating Emerald floods. I pay tribute to Emerald Mayor Peter Maguire, his councillors, the many volunteers, including, but not limited to, the Salvation Army, SES and Red Cross and to all those who assisted flood-affected victims during the peak of the floods and the remediation work which follows. I thank the insurance companies who, whilst not legally required to do so, morally felt an obligation to help victims in their time of need.

I thank the Prime Minister for responding to the Emerald community by announcing funding for flood-affected victims and then acknowledging their need by announcing a weather radar for them. It is only through a miracle that life was not lost recently because of this vital piece of infrastructure being delayed by the previous Liberal-National Party government for four long years. Finally, under a Rudd Labor government, farmers, businesses and the community in general in Emerald and surrounding districts have been respected and their voice heard.

In the process of creating the new federal seat of Flynn there was a need to readjust boundaries, including those of the federal seats of Hinkler, Maranoa and Capricornia. I place on record my special thanks to National Party federal members Paul Neville and Bruce Scott—despite what I believe to be their government’s failings—and Labor Party member Kirsten Livermore for their commitment, passion and public service to the people of their former electorates who are now in the electorate of Flynn. It is with a touch of irony but with a sense of joy that I now occupy both the member for Maranoa’s office in Emerald and the member for Hinkler’s office in Gladstone. I thank them both.

My electorate, which covers the bustling communities of Gladstone, Biloela and Emerald, also covers a massive amount of bush country. It is with great honour and pleasure and a sense of pride that I announce today that I have been chosen as chairman of the Prime Minister’s country task force. The people of the bush across Australia will have a strong voice in Canberra. I must confess that I have often wondered just how much more city folk would appreciate farmers if they stopped sending their produce to market. Farmers are part of the heart and soul of Australia and part of the backbone of our community.

I would like to place on record in this parliament forever my special thanks to Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, who placed his faith in me—and I in him—in handpicking me as his candidate to run for the new seat of Flynn. The rest is now history. To all the people who got me here, including the community of Flynn: thank you. Thank you to Kim Beazley, Bill Ludwig, Jimmy Wilson, my good friend Tony Beers from the AWU, Jim Valery, Michael Reik, Blacky, Dougie, Alex and crew from the CFMEU, Craig Giddins from the ETU, Phil Golby and John Hempseed from the AMWU, Milton Dick, Anthony Chisholm, Leo and Liz Zussino, Bill and Pat Prest, Russell Thomas, Paul Bell, Corrie McKenzie from the Prime Minister’s office and Shelly Holzheimer to name but a few. To all unions, both left and right, who united behind me, also Graeme Crow, Darrell Main, all branch members of the ALP, other helpers and supporters and the Your Rights at Work team: thank you.

My decision to enter politics would not have been remotely possible without the support of my loyal staff and legal team back in Gladstone, including David McHenry and Margaret Esdale at my legal firm, Chris Trevor and Associates, one of Central Queensland’s largest, proudest and most successful legal firms—built on trust and respect.

It would be wrong of me to not specially mention that Barcaldine is part of my electorate. Barcaldine, of course, is the birthplace of Labor and home to the famous Tree of Knowledge. The tree is now dead, poisoned they say, while others suggest it died of shame when that dreadful piece of legislation, Work Choices, was introduced and passed in this parliament. Whatever the reason, I acknowledge the commitment to restore the tree by way of monument by my government and the great work that Mayor Rob Chandler and Pat Ogden and others are doing to bring this project to reality. Like the Mayor of Longreach, Pat Tanks, and others out in that neck of the woods say, tourism will play a big part in the financial future of their communities. This monument, and the support of tourism in the outback, are integral to that part of my community’s sustainability and viability and have my full and undivided attention.

Mr Deputy Speaker, what brings a man like me to hallowed halls and corridors known as Parliament House where only just over 1,000 Australians since Federation have previously gone before? It is not the pay, for I have taken a pay cut to be here and, in any event, I have never judged a man’s or a woman’s success on the size of their wallet or, for that matter, what is in it. It is not the glory, for that is something which, to a large extent, is incapable of being shared.

My primary purpose in being here is to represent my community of Flynn and to give them a strong voice in government. My motive to enter parliament, in all honesty, is not entirely unselfish. It empowers me and strengthens my resolve to do well for others at the highest level. It enables me to continue to share with my community what I discovered at a very early age and what is perhaps the greatest gift of all—the gift of giving. For, if a true confession be made, I perhaps, like others here, am a restless soul tormented by the need and desire to improve the life of others. My willingness to help others, including my substantial contributions to charity, is well documented and is well known widely throughout my community. From words spoken, given freely, to walking down highways for hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of kilometres in the name of charity in 2005 and 2006 to name but a few, I have given for the greater part of my life already almost my all. Now a new chapter of giving for CT begins.

My path to this destination has, like many others before me, not been an easy one. In order to speak up for and represent my community down here, I have had to overcome an overwhelming and petrifying fear of flying. To all of those Australians with phobias I say this: I did it, I conquered it and I beat it, because if you want something badly enough, whether it be what I wanted, to help and to give, or just internal peace, you can do it. Trust me, you can do it.

I have much to talk about on the issues in Flynn and, in coming months, talk I will. Adopting a broadbrush approach, because time is limited for this first speech, not everybody is enjoying the fruits of the resources boom and there is much pain and suffering in my electorate.

Before I conclude today, I want to specially thank my campaign manager, Jon Persley. During the campaign Jon shared my ups and downs, my elations and my disappointments. Whilst we did not see eye to eye on all occasions, to his credit he hung in there. He did teach me one lesson in life, one that even my valued friend and former captain-coach and rugby league legend Chris ‘Choppy’ Close could not, try as he did with me, and that is this: ‘It’s far easier to get across the line by looking for the gaps, CT, than trying to run straight over the top of people.’

I want to acknowledge some very special people in the gallery today: my mum, Iris Trevor; my wife, Colleen; and our good friend the loyal and trusted Jan Vesey Brown. I thank my family: sisters Michele and Sharon; my nieces Sandy and Sharlene; my nephews Daniel and Lewis; Judy and Denis St Ledger; Emma and Linzi; my wonderful sons, Joel, Guy, Rhys and Pryce; and my No. 1 supporter, my 11-year-old daughter, Kiara. I thank my personal assistant, Michelle Jones, for her tireless efforts and wonderful support in bringing this result to fruition.

I miss in the audience today but pay tribute to my dad, the late Allan ‘Foo’ Trevor. I dedicate this first speech to him. We made it, Foo, and whatever else happens from here on in, no-one can ever take today from us. My dad’s hand is the hand which still guides me in whatever I say and do. A kind and gentle man, my dad grew up on his father’s dairy farm, later becoming a Gladstone train driver. A greenie by heart, but staunch Labor man, he would, I suspect, be a little disappointed that his son got many more Liberal votes than Greens vote preferences but proud that his son had universal appeal, just as he had. My dad taught me all about the bush, how to hunt, how to gather and how to live off the land. Together with mum, he provided a loving and caring environment in which to grow—something that money just cannot buy. Thank you, Mum.

Finally, to my dear wife, Colleen, for supporting me in everything I say and do and don’t do, especially around the house: today and in the future she will walk in front of me where she deserves to be. Let the record reflect that she, above all, deserves this finest hour. Thank you, Mr Speaker, and to all of you, thank you.

Sophie Mirabella (Indi, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Local Government) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is a measure of just how resilient our Australian democracy really is when the political upheaval of a change of government occurs with dignity and without rancour. We need to be particularly proud of the fact that Australia is the sixth longest continuing functioning democracy in the world. Other countries would indeed relish the freedoms and the lack of civil strife that are synonymous with our country and its history. The new Labor government will be judged in time on whether it has moved beyond the surplus of circuses which have so characterised its first few months in office and whether it actually makes the hard decisions to plan for the future of the Australian people and this great nation of ours.

I want to speak on a number of issues raised in the Governor-General’s speech as well as some other issues pertinent to my electorate of Indi. Prior to and during the recent election campaign, I made a number of local project announcements that a re-elected coalition government would honour. Since the election, I have sought assurances from the new government that these projects will be supported and delivered. The new government has apparently informed us that it is currently reviewing some of these previously approved projects, projects approved well before the election. This has caused some distress and some uncertainty amongst many organisations in my electorate in north-east Victoria because they had relied on the word of the government that it would make good its grant of certain moneys.

These projects include grants such as the medical infrastructure funds for a new medical centre at Violet Town, infrastructure funding upgrades at HP Barr Reserve in Wangaratta and enhanced medical facilities in Myrtleford, Bright and Mount Beauty. In addition, I have been seeking confirmation from the new government of vital infrastructure projects, such as the Nagambie Bypass project, along with the $45 million allocated to the Wodonga Rail Bypass and whether the new government will continue with the grants to local governments under the Roads to Recovery program, which is a very popular and much-needed local funding program. I have had some positive news on only a couple of these projects and I eagerly wait to hear positive results on some of the others. Just because there is a change of government, it does not mean that the needs of our community change. It does not mean that the needs of rural communities change. I will continue to stand up for the needs of the people of my region of north-east Victoria and continue to fight for our fair share.

At the top of the agenda is water and water security. And nothing is closer to people’s minds in the north-east of Victoria than state Labor’s plans to pipe our region’s water to Melbourne. This is a callous plot that will undermine water security and sustainable water practices in our region. CSIRO’s Ovens-Murray climate change report provides another reason for the Labor Party to plug their pipeline to Melbourne. The best estimate of the report is a 13 per cent reduction in average end-of-system flows from the Ovens system into the Murray River by 2030. In addition, the state Labor government will flush even more water to Melbourne. This is equivalent to a 228 billion-litre reduction in flow to the Murray per year and comes in addition to a series of warnings from the Bureau of Meteorology of already stressed water supplies.

We already live within a water catchment that is severely stressed, and which Labor’s own report says will be stressed more in the future. The system simply cannot sustain piping water to Melbourne. It is not surprising to realise that, if inflows drop, outflows must also drop. In this reduced water environment the correct response is to do what we can to increase the water in our region, not flush it down to Melbourne. Creative and innovative lateral solutions are required for the Melbourne catchment area—and indeed for metropolitan Melbourne—not knee-jerk panic reactions from governments that do not look to the future and that think they can sacrifice rural and regional Victoria because, in the interests of their survival, they see more votes in Melbourne. That is short-sighted, and if this pipeline goes ahead they will be damned forever into the future for such a disastrous short-sighted policy.

The Bureau of Meteorology recently restated:

The deficiencies discussed above have occurred against a backdrop of—

multi-year—

rainfall deficits and record high temperatures that have severely stressed water supplies in the east and southwest of the country.

In announcing the report, the federal Minister for Climate Change and Water, Senator Penny Wong, claims that she is ‘committed to securing water supplies as we deal with the challenges of climate change’. If this is more than a Rudd-inspired political slogan couched in empty symbolism, she needs to secure our water supplies by stopping the pipeline to Melbourne. It is also concerning that the CSIRO report recognised that local towns will have more frequent mild and severe water restrictions under all but the wettest scenario, yet the Labor Party is doing absolutely nothing to secure our local water supplies. This is on top of the news I received via correspondence recently to the new water minister that the new Labor government will not be enforcing the previous government’s restrictions on Lake Mokoan’s decommissioning. As I warned in the past, the Labor states will continue to treat the federal Labor team as a collective patsy. The states say, ‘Jump,’ and the federal Labor Party says, ‘How high?’ As my colleague the shadow minister for water security stated only this week, by allowing the states to set their own allocations, Minister Wong has simply given the green light to the Brumby government to pipe unlimited water out of the Murray-Darling Basin. It is simply nonsensical to have state Labor spend $750 million of taxpayers’ money to pipe water out of the basin when the Australian government has committed to spending $10 billion to increase flows to the Murray-Darling Basin.

The government flaunts its so-called education revolution, but this term is a misnomer. Within two months of its election, the Rudd government put the boot into one of the most innovative funding schemes that our education system has seen: the Investing in Our Schools Program. This was despite the now Prime Minister saying before the election, ‘It’s a useful program worthy of bipartisan support, you bet.’ Well, I suppose until after the election result was known! Last month I attended the Middle Indigo Primary School, in my electorate, for the formal opening of their new toilet block. This school was subject to an investigation by the Age education supplement in 2005, which reported the following:

... Middle Indigo Primary may have the dubious claim to the worst school toilet block in the state. The school of 16 has done its best to brighten it up with a cheery beach mural painted by the children.

The horrors are on the inside. Orange paint on the walls warns where asbestos has been exposed. There are no locks on the doors and no electricity. The toilets are also used by the staff. In the boys’ toilets, the urinal runs into the soil.

Parents say they have been told by local Education Department authorities that the toilet block is a low priority.

It was a low priority that would have continued to be a low priority under the state Labor government. The children and teachers at that school were totally abandoned and ignored. It was only when the school received a $103,787 grant under the Investing in Our Schools Program to repair their dilapidated toilet block and replace it with a new environmentally sensitive block—which more adequately serves the school community—that the school got the basic hygiene services that those students and teachers deserved. It is surely not much to ask for school students and teachers to have access to appropriate toilet facilities.

It was not only Middle Indigo Primary School that accessed the Investing in Our Schools Program funding, but many hundreds and thousands of schools across the nation which had received underinvestment in basic capital grants and basic maintenance. They have managed to upgrade their facilities and provide a decent environment for children to live in and learn in. By gutting the Investing in Our Schools Program, the Rudd government is saying that schools like Middle Indigo Primary School should fend for themselves, irrespective of budget surpluses and irrespective of serious state government neglect and dismissiveness. There are numerous examples of state Labor neglect in our government schools, and the Investing in Our Schools Program filled that gap. It filled that gap as well as it could and it made a real difference to those school communities. It empowered local school communities to seek funding for essential works for their schools to suit the needs of that particular school community. It bypassed the neglectful states who contributed to such a blatant disregard for school infrastructure under their watch. Despite its rhetoric, and far from delivering an education revolution, the new government has delivered an education dereliction—a dereliction of duty and responsibility.

As I just mentioned, its first major decision in education was to cut a popular and important capital works program for schools. But it looks as though things will get worse. Not content with leaving carers and pensioners hanging in the wind, the Rudd government now wants to cull the $700 reading tuition vouchers for students, the initiatives promoting professional development for teachers and important reward schemes for schools who improve their literacy and numeracy results. The Deputy Prime Minister said yesterday that she wanted every Australian child to read and write, and that unfortunately the statistics are giving us all cause for concern. Amazingly, though, Labor believes that the way to confront this is to cut the literacy and numeracy programs initiated by the previous government. My colleague the shadow minister for families and community services yesterday proclaimed—quite rightly—that the government ‘is suffering from compassion fatigue after just three months in office’. We have seen how things change. Gone are the pious platitudes railing against market fundamentalism, gone is the paean to Christian socialism and gone is the railing against Howard’s so-called Brutopia that we saw so hypocritically in the Monthly article in 2006.

This Prime Minister has failed his own parameters of decency and compassion. He can talk the talk in the style of a true bureaucrat, but there are people whose lives are impacted by the weasel words and subterfuge that we have seen in recent days in relation to payments for seniors and carers. Here is a word from some of Rudd’s forgotten people. I read from an email which I received last Friday from two of my constituents who live in Wodonga:

... by removing the carer bonus it will make people worse off than they are. The Labor government said that pensioners and carers would be looked after ... the low income earners are having enough troubles with food prices rising, electricity prises rising, gas prices, fuel prices and now to reduced further by the government.

After I responded to my constituents over the weekend, they again wrote back to me saying:

we are sorry to have to annoy you, but what’s a person to do? The people advising kevin rudd should wake up to themselves and try living in the real world.

That is the word from the street in downtown Wodonga.

If the government has time to apologise to Indigenous Australians and cut education spending, then surely it has time to honour the job and look after those in our community who need the most support—those people like our carers and seniors, who do so much for society and take the burden away from government bureaucracies. Who would have thought that in Australia in 2008, when a new government has inherited a surplus likely to be in excess of $20 billion, we would be debating whether or not carers or seniors will get their hard-earned bonus payment? This is the new era of Rudd Labor—symbolic gestures replacing good policy. Senior ministers cannot raise a peep without sanction from the Prime Minister. It is leadership of the one-man-band variety and it is starting to come unstuck. The honeymoon will survive  for some time, but the Australian public have already started to see through the cracks of the well-orchestrated sideshow we see from the Prime Minister. The last three months have been a triumph of PR and spin but a defeat for the politics of accountability and good policy. The opposition will continue to hold this government to account, as the Australian people rightly demand and deserve.

Alby Schultz (Hume, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

(Mr AJ Schultz)—Order! Before I call the honourable member for Wakefield, I remind the House that this is his first speech and I ask the House to extend to him the usual courtesies.

Nick Champion (Wakefield, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am fortunate to be just the second Labor member to represent the electors of Wakefield. My only Labor predecessor, Sydney McHugh, served just two short years between 1938 and 1940. Sydney McHugh was a farmer from Quorn who also served in the state parliament and who entered federal parliament after the death of the war hero Charles Hawker. In his time here, Sydney McHugh made speeches about the wheat industry, ethanol and pensions and expressed concern about the River Murray running dry. Some things do not change.

For the remaining years Wakefield was a rural seat, and its representation was conservative. The electorate is now made up of the proud working-class communities of the northern suburbs of Adelaide and the busy and picturesque town of Gawler. It stretches out to the Adelaide Plains and the Clare and Gilbert valleys, and at its heart is my home town of Kapunda. The history of my electorate indicates I should make the most of my time in the House, because it may be a brief stay. That I am here at all is a reflection of the love, work and sacrifice of many people, especially my mother, Tina; my sister, Simone, and her partner, Nadia; my first girlfriend, Annette; my Aunty Lynda; and my grandfather, the late Victor Baile. I have been blessed to have kept so many close friends from my Kapunda High School and Salisbury university days—Spike and Robbie, the Grafton and Bettison families, Susie, Lee and Brigid, Lisa J, Brett and, especially, Kirsten Andrews—all of whose friendship I treasure.

There are too many good people to thank from the South Australian Labor Party, because I have been given the great opportunities of being president of the state branch and a candidate for public office. I would not have enjoyed such opportunities were it not for the advice, support and friendship of Don Farrell, Tom Koutsantonis and Michael Brown. I would like to especially acknowledge Tony Piccolo, who is the state member for Light, Nimfa Farrell, Bernard Finnigan, Aemon Bourke, Zoe Bettison, Reggie Martin, Tung Ngo, Annette Hurley, John Quirke, Brad Kitshke, Chad Buchanen, Tom Kenyon, Stephen Mullighan, Mike Rann, Young Labor, the SDA, the CEPU and the Wakefield FEC for their hard work on my campaign. My final thanks have to go to my campaign manager, Peter Malinauskus, who was a driving force behind my campaign and a person who I think is destined to make a great contribution to the lives of retail workers and the Australian union movement.

The Prime Minister once told this House:

We are all the product of our own experiences and the ideas with which we have been confronted.

When I look at all the experiences in my life prior to my election to this place, nothing is as influential in my life’s trajectory as my father’s alcoholism. I loved my father but through his addiction I saw the fragility of family life, how precarious a family’s financial circumstances can become and how the emotional torment of addiction can echo through a family for years. Once addiction hits a family, nothing is ever the same again, and it is easy for families to fall into a cycle of crisis, reaction and, sometimes, despair. I know that, while many in politics talk about strong families, the reality is that many families are often as much defined by their weaknesses as they are by their strengths, so I am proud to be part of a government which takes the misuse of alcohol as a serious policy challenge.

There have, of course, been other defining experiences. I may well be the only supermarket trolley collector ever to enter this parliament and, at the very least, I am probably the first one to admit it. I have had many minimum-wage jobs in my youth—working on farms and at racecourses, picking grapes and apricots, cleaning offices and working in warehouses. But it was collecting trolleys for a contractor at the Burnside Shopping Centre in the early nineties that confirmed my views about how conditions at work affect our society. I learnt about the reality of workplace negotiations. My boss was a nice person, but he would rob you blind if he got the chance! He paid the base award hourly rate but he never paid the penalty rates that were due in the award. I was conscious that, if you complained, your hours would drop or you would be moved to another site far away from your home. Although I was a member of the union and had campaigned against Sunday trading, like so many other workers I was not going to make my working life uncomfortable by directly confronting my employer.

That is the reality faced by so many workers in minimum-wage jobs—not much protection, not much bargaining power and not much choice. When I look back on it I regard myself as pretty lucky. I was lucky because, a few years later, trolley collectors lost what little award protection they had as a legal technicality was exploited by a new wave of ruthless employers. Wages fell as a result of competition between the companies for contracts and the weak bargaining position of workers. In the late nineties in South Australia it was not unusual to find trolley collectors working 60 or 70 hours a week for as little as $5 an hour.

It was these experiences that hardened my convictions regarding industrial relations and compelled me to be active in the Labor party and the union movement and, ultimately, stand for election in Wakefield. My experience as a trade union official taught me that the most important prerequisite for public office is empathy for others. Every time I went to a shop or a warehouse to represent workers, I learnt something new or met a person whose experiences were different from mine. This experience was excellent preparation for being a candidate.

As a candidate I spent a lot of time in what could best be described as ‘struggle suburbs’—places where poor urban amenity, high unemployment, fragile families and antisocial behaviour all intersect. These are communities that have to live every day with the consequences of substance abuse, poverty, mental illness and the growing digital divide. These are places where social problems have become intergenerational and interconnected. Whole communities have largely been locked out of the opportunities created by a growing economy. These communities are made up of many good people who make the best of their circumstances.

Some of the most disadvantaged areas in South Australia are in the electorate of Wakefield. It is important to acknowledge that many government decisions have either failed these communities or not served their interests. These communities paid the price for tariff reductions, the wrecking of the Housing Trust, the deregulation of the workforce and the often callous indifference of Centrelink. The greatest failure, though, is that, at a time when the economy is producing jobs, many cannot avail themselves of these opportunities because they have been out of work for so long that they do not have the skills, the support, the resources or the networks to participate. Once disadvantage is concentrated, it feeds on itself.

To his credit, my predecessor, David Fawcett, made the House aware of some of these problems in his maiden speech. I acknowledge Mr Fawcett’s contribution and note that he was held in high regard by many in the electorate. He had some success in convincing the previous government to fund a community audit in Playford North. It was the only real sign of interest by the former government in 11 long years, despite Playford North being an area targeted for a major urban renewal project by the City of Playford and the Rann government. This project has great potential to ameliorate disadvantage, and it is my hope that many of the government’s policies in housing, skills and training will assist in that goal.

The government has already committed $7.5 million to build a GP superclinic in Playford North. This clinic will provide vital health services to an area in which there is high demand and it will attract new doctors and new services to an area in transition. My hope is that this clinic will be a practical demonstration of our commitment to this area. Urban renewal projects like Playford North provide an opportunity for governments, local councils and non-government organisations to prove that poverty and disadvantage can be diminished through investment, cooperation and a clear long-term commitment. These projects are the front-line of social inclusion and the elimination of poverty and extreme disadvantage.

When I doorknocked, nothing was more confronting than meeting elderly Australians who were reliant on the pension and had little savings. These people are good citizens. They have worked hard, raised families and built communities. They now count every cent in their budgets and there are few if any luxuries. Those in the private rental market are particularly vulnerable. Poverty amongst the elderly is a tragedy. It is only when you see the impact of this type of poverty that you realise how important compulsory superannuation is. Superannuation is the only cost-effective solution for government to prevent poverty in the retirement years. The introduction of occupational superannuation by the Hawke government is Labor’s greatest postwar economic and social achievement. It represented the triumph of decades of political and industrial struggle by the Labor movement.

The benefits of that struggle are obvious. Superannuation provides greater independence, financial security and dignity for those in retirement. It increases national savings in a world where capital is increasingly mobile and increasingly fickle. It has made us less reliant on foreign investment and, to some degree, it has allowed Australians to ‘buy back the farm’ and invest in their own country’s wealth-producing assets. Superannuation is a wealth multiplier and a major contributor to the success of the Australian economy over the last 15 years. Most importantly, superannuation redistributes wealth from capital to working families and individuals. It redistributes wealth at a time when people need it most—in their retirement years.

If our superannuation system has any fault it is that the contribution rate of nine per cent is too low to fund an adequate retirement for the average Australian employee. Labor’s platform sets out a goal of a 15 per cent contribution level and notes that government, individuals and employers all have a greater contribution to make in order to reach this important national objective. I believe we should consider what can be done to ensure even higher contribution rates for those on minimum wages and those who have significant periods outside the paid workforce. Higher contributions will increase national savings and underwrite another period of national economic growth. Higher contributions will ensure that the benefits of the mining boom are not squandered but instead invested and distributed more equally across the community. I believe it is vitally important that we have a long-term timetable for our superannuation system so that the community is given certainty about the additional contributions that will need to be made.

As a representative in a regional electorate, I have spent a fair amount of time in pubs meeting people—and having the odd drink. But one of the sobering observations I have made in my visits is that all the good works undertaken by governments to improve living standards can be undermined in a very short period by one individual’s addiction to a machine. Electronic gaming machines are devices that many in the community misunderstand. The addictive nature of these machines is not immediately clear to the consumer, the community or their representatives. These machines are a riddle wrapped in an enigma for most of us. We do not know how they work or why our fellow citizens fall under their spell, so often we blame the victim and say it is a matter of individual choice or we stereotype the victim—it is just the poor, the old or the bored who are vulnerable. But treatment providers will tell you that they treat people from every walk of life—from surgeons to factory workers, young and old, with a variety of incomes and lifestyles. If you meet recovering addicts, you are struck by how normal they are, but their stories give an insight into how terrible their addiction is. In an information booklet from Pokies Anonymous, one woman, Debbie, recounts her experience:

Pokies hook you so quickly. They get into your head. The music is subliminal and comes back to you at any time of the day and all of a sudden you have the urge to play and head off in the direction of the closest machines. Anytime I lost $1800, I would go home and think of doing something to myself.

The Productivity Commission found that around 130,000 Australians have severe problems with gambling. Many of them are addicted to poker machines. Tragically, one in 10 have contemplated suicide because of their addiction. It is clear that the current regulations concerning electronic gaming machines are insufficient to protect the health of a minority of consumers. I believe that many of the design features of electronic gaming machines make addiction a natural consequence of their operation; that the frequency of winning—the reinforcement schedules—may tap into powerful psychological motivators of intermittent rewards; that the use of unbalanced reels gives some consumers a distorted view of how the game operates; that what consumers see on the screen does not accurately reflect the calculations of the computer inside the machine; that the illusion of the near miss combined with maximum line betting may encourage larger stakes and larger losses; and that the lights, sounds and music may complement the core design features and become associated with the stimulus to gamble.

The design of these machines should be regulated. The manufacturers should be required to reveal to the government their research on design and consumer response. Additional resources should be devoted to academic research into the structural features of these machines which may be addictive. With this information we will be better equipped to legislate for strict requirements on their design and manufacture to prevent problem gambling from occurring from the outset, to minimise the financial damage caused and to empower those addicted to kick their habit.

I began this speech by talking about my Labor predecessor, Sydney McHugh. As I said before, Mr McHugh spoke on many issues of contemporary relevance. In rather old-fashioned language, Mr McHugh stated this about his service in this House:

We come here to give service because we early caught the disease of endeavouring to render public services in some sphere and to leave the world better than we found it.

I hope my time here honours this sentiment and leaves the world and my electorate better than I found it.

Debate (on motion by Mr Windsor) adjourned.