Peter Slipper (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Before the debate is resumed on this bill I remind the Committee that, pursuant to the resolution agreed to by the House on 10 May 2011, this order of the day will be debated concurrently with Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 2011-2012 and Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2011-2012.

Michael Keenan (Stirling, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Justice, Customs and Border Protection) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2011-2012 and cognate bills. Today, being 1 June, we are coming up to the anniversary of when the government entered its second term, and this is Labor's fourth budget since it came to office. Since that time we have seen what amounts to a record spending spree in Australian history. So I want to do a few things today. Firstly I want to talk in a macro sense about how damaging this budget is to the national interest, secondly I want to say something about its negative effect on my electorate, and thirdly I want to say something about its devastating effect on our national security and border protection policies.

In a macro sense, since coming to office Labor have accumulated over $150 billion worth of deficits. To fund these deficits, they borrow $135 million per day—every day, seven days a week—which means that the Australian taxpayer will be spending $7.5 billion on interest payments by 2014. That is $7½ billion that will be wasted every year on interest payments for a debt that Labor have run up since they came to office, $7½ billion that could be spent on much more important things than interest payments on Labor's debt. That does not even begin to look at repaying the principal on that debt, which of course will fall to us when we come to government, as it always does, because every time the Labor Party get into government they do exactly the same thing. They spend wastefully, they ran deficits, they run up debt and they pay interest on that debt. Every time, we are called to come into government and clean up their mess. We will accept that burden again, although quite frankly it should not be that way.

The News Limited newspapers have revealed the total cost of Labor's wasteful spending on government programs alone. Just for failed programs, and I am talking about things like the home insulation disaster and the school halls disaster, every household in my electorate will be liable for $567. So, just for those failed programs, every household in Stirling is going to have to stump up $567 to pay for that gross waste. This is a terrible indictment on the performance of the Rudd-Gillard government and it is another example highlighting the fact that the current debt and deficit really is an astonishing squandering of the inheritance that Labor had when they came to office.

The result of this wasteful spending and this running up of debt and deficit particularly falls on the shoulders of my home state of Western Australia. You only need to look at the record of this government to see that they view Western Australia solely as a cash cow. Even last week a Labor senator coming in through the doors confirmed this. Senator Doug Cameron from New South Wales came through the doors last Wednesday and he said: 'I will be arguing strongly that we cannot have a position where, because of natural resources, because of luck, one state can have a standard of living that is way beyond what everybody else can achieve and everybody else is left to make it up how they can. It's not on.' This is what he said in response to the Western Australian government taking away the concession for the royalty on iron ore fines. That is a very good example of how the Labor Party looks at Western Australia. They think that Western Australia should just pay the bills they are running up at the astonishing rate I have already outlined.

When the Prime Minister comes to Western Australia she pretends that she knows a little bit about what is going on. What is going on there is the most incredible economic transformation that any state in Australia has seen in the history of this country. When she comes to Western Australia she says that she would like to see Western Australia get its fair share. This is the same sort of thing that her predecessor, Kevin Rudd, said when he came to Western Australia, but their actions belie that rhetoric because they only see Western Australia as a cash cow.

I could spend the rest of my time outlining where Labor have failed Western Australia, but I want to highlight a couple of great examples of the damage they are doing to my home state. Firstly, Labor excluded small miners and brokered a secret deal to impose a $10½ billion mining tax. The astonishing thing is that they negotiated with BHP, Rio Tinto and Xstrata, who ran rings around them because Labor had no idea what they were doing. Those companies ran rings around Wayne Swan and the upshot is that they will not be paying any of this tax. The burden will fall on small miners, particularly in Western Australia. That $10½ billion will not be paid by the big resource companies; it will be paid by the junior miners. Quite frankly, the Western Australian mining community is outraged about that.

Seven billion dollars of this tax will come from Western Australia, so about 70 per cent of this tax will come from one state. What we get in return from this government is quite frankly contemptuous. Labor will return only 6c out of every dollar taken from Western Australia under the mining tax. So 70 per cent of that tax will be paid by Western Australians, but we will get only six per cent of it back. Labor have failed to fix the GST arrangements which see Western Australia receive only 68c for every dollar we pay in GST, while other states receive either equal to what they put in or, in the case of some states, substantially more than they put in. Labor have also broken their promise and are considering a carbon tax, which will drive up electricity prices in Western Australia and seriously damage the Western Australian economy for, sadly, no net environmental benefit.

Western Australia suffered because the Labor Party withheld $350 million in extra health funding because the Western Australian government refused to hand over GST funding within the health agreement. Labor have also announced a new detention centre at the town of Northam, which means that Western Australia bears far more of the burden of Labor's failed border protection policies. People smugglers are incarcerated in Western Australian jails at a cost to the Western Australian taxpayer. Western Australia houses more detention centres and more of the detained population than anywhere else within Australia.

Of the funding we provide to this Labor government, very little flows back in funding to my state. The government announced 28 GP superclinics, but only three of those will be in Western Australia. Western Australia will receive only seven per cent of GST revenue and that will fall to less than six per cent in coming years, and of course our contribution to that is significantly greater.

As I said, I could go on forever about the ways in which the Labor government are doing bad things to Western Australia, but the truth is that they really do not understand what is happening there and the only way that Western Australia will get a fair go is when this government is turfed out. Fortunately, I can report that my fellow Western Australians are very keen to do that and they will be coming for the member for Brand, the member for Perth and the member for Fremantle at the next federal election. Not long after Kevin Rudd won the 2007 election he stood in Kings Park while overlooking the city and promised that under his government Western Australians would not miss out, but sadly the facts belie that.

I will turn to my electorate of Stirling. If the coalition had won the last election my electors would be substantially better off not only for all the reasons I have outlined but also because the Labor Party did not make one commitment to the electorate of Stirling in the last election campaign. Through the whole election campaign the Labor Party did not commit to spending $1 in my electorate of Stirling. The Labor candidate there astonishingly did not seem to have enough pull to get her party to make any commitment, which is rather extraordinary considering I was on a relatively small margin.

If we had won we would have addressed some of the electorate's concerns. We have in the past installed closed-circuit television cameras at crime hotspots, and we would have expanded that program throughout my electorate if we had been given the chance to do so by forming government. We were going to increase funding to the City of Stirling for the security services that they run. We would have installed a synthetic playing surface at the Scarborough Sportsman's Club and we would have spent money upgrading local roads. Sadly, there have been endless promises from both state and federal Labor to upgrade local roads in my electorate and not once have those promises been delivered. It has been up to the Barnett Liberal government to fund some of those commitments without $1 of federal money, which is shameful considering that Labor has promised this to my constituency at every single federal and state election since 2004. The Barnett government has come in and will solely fund the overpass at Reid Highway in Mirrabooka Avenue. I am very pleased it is doing that, but I am very disappointed that the federal government has not committed any money. If we were in government we would have committed $10 million to that project.

Crime remains one of the most prevalent concerns of my electors and during the years of the Howard government we pursued our best efforts to have the Commonwealth government play a role in fighting crime in our local communities. We funded the City of Stirling's Safer Suburbs plan which delivered more security patrols through local neighbourhoods and closed-circuit television cameras at Scarborough Beach and throughout the electorate. It also delivered crime prevention methods such as electronic message boards and all-terrain vehicles.

Unfortunately, the Labor Party has not shown the same sense of urgency when it comes to addressing the alarmingly high crime rates across my electorate, across Western Australia and across the country as a whole. In the last federal election the coalition promised to recommit money to the National Community Crime Prevention Program, and I believe that we will be doing the same in the next election because we believe it is very important for the Commonwealth government to use the resources at its disposal to make its contribution to securing our streets. We will pursue real action to boost crime fighting and to do all we can at the Commonwealth level to fight crime. Unfortunately, just as Labor is all talk and no action in Western Australia, it is also all talk and no action in my electorate of Stirling. We will change that once the government changes.

I turn very briefly to my shadow portfolio. The issue I was raising about crime rates within my community is very important because, while the Commonwealth does not have primary responsibility for local crime fighting, it does have significant responsibility to do all it can to protect our borders. We know very well about its failure in border protection, about the flow of illegal boats that has resulted from Labor's changes to our robust border protection system since it came into office; but there is another issue that is less focused on and that is its failure to protect our borders from illicit drugs, its failure to protect our borders from illegal weapons and its failure to stop illicit cargo coming into this country at both our ports and airports because it has massively cut funding for the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service to run those checks. Air cargo inspections are down a staggering 75 per cent because of the budget cuts that Labor has introduced since it came into office. Sea cargo inspections are down 25 per cent. What this means is that it is easier for organised crime to smuggle things into Australia.

The Labor Party's border protection failure is not just its failure to dissuade people smugglers from bringing people down to Australia illegally but its failure to do its job to fight local crime and to stop illegal substances and illegal weapons coming onto our streets in the first place. You cannot trust these guys with any national security issue and the Prime Minister has shown through her behaviour that she really does not see her role in national security as one of her primary considerations. She did not even bother turning up for the National Security Committee of Cabinet. When she came to office as Prime Minister she astonishingly axed the Border Protection Committee of Cabinet. She said that that was going to be one of her priorities and her first act was to axe the cabinet committee that actually looks at border protection.

Labor's failure within my portfolio has been enormous. Every front-line national security agency received a cut in this budget: the Australian Federal Police, the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service, the Australian Crime Commission and every single one of our intelligence agencies. And since the Labor Party came to office there are now 24,000 extra public servants and fewer front-line personnel dealing with national security and crime issues, which is a good indication that they just do not have the right priorities for our country.

This is a budget that failed not only Australia but Western Australia and it failed my electors in Stirling. The hardworking people in my suburbs will be the ones called on to pay Labor's debt, and it is a shameful, wasted opportunity for the country.

Kelly O'Dwyer (Higgins, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak on the appropriation bills that have been brought before the parliament: Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2011-2012, Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 2011-2012 and Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2011-2012. But I would first like to make an observation that the Treasurer looked like a man under pressure in the weeks before delivering his fourth budget. He had every real reason to feel that pressure not because, as he would have the Australian people believe, he is yet again a victim of circumstances—a high Australian dollar, natural disasters and the financial crisis, all conspiring against him—but because even he understands that, deep down, after delivering three budgets the tired web of excuses does not stack up when you look at the economic data.

If you think of the budget as a 100-metre sprint, it is one thing to complain that you had to carry a heavy bag while competing. But when you start the race at the 80-metre point and are kitted out with all of the equipment to run it well, those excuses look hollow. The reason why the Treasurer looked under pressure is that he knows that he has not done the work that needs to be done by a Treasurer of this country. Using my sporting analogy, far from preparing for the event, doing the hard work, this Treasurer has done the equivalent of rocking up to compete after a big night out. He has squandered not only his opportunity but the opportunity of millions of Australians. This government's legacy of waste and mismanagement will be felt not just by this generation but by generations to come.

The Treasurer looked under pressure because Australians are now wise to the promises thrown around like confetti by this government—promises of a surplus but, instead, delivering deficit after deficit; promises of reduced spending, yet at the same time increasing borrowing; promises that it will reduce the cost of living for Australian families, while at the same time hiking up their private health insurance bills and slapping them with multiple new taxes. The budget very clearly reveals that this government does not have any plan other than to tax more and hope that our historic terms of trade and our high commodity prices will continue. There is no plan B. More disturbingly, there is no plan A.

Good budgets are about four things: accountability and discipline, providing for immediate needs, providing for challenges when they come, and long-term planning. Families know this. If a family spends more money on one area, such as repairs to the house or a health crisis, they cut back somewhere else because it goes to their bottom line. They understand that they have to exercise discipline because there is only so much money. They also know that they have to balance their immediate needs with their long-term goals, whether it be to own a home, send their children to a school of their choice or to take a holiday. They also know that they should prepare for that rainy day in case it interferes with their plans. Business also knows this. The coalition knows this. But it is clear that, after four budgets, the Labor Party and this government still have not worked this out. The budget failed on all of these four fronts.

In the time available, I wanted to touch on a couple of the key things in the budget that leapt out at me. Despite the talk of surpluses that have not yet been delivered and rapid fiscal consolidation, the government did a very curious thing. You only need to look at Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2011-2012 to see this. In this bill the government has provisioned to amend the Commonwealth Inscribed Stock Act 1911—the CIS Act—to increase the limit on the face value of stock and securities that can be on issue under the Treasurer's standing borrowing authority. What this means is that the government is seeking to increase its gross debt ceiling from $200 billion to $250 billion. But, more than this, this government is seeking to give itself full discretion to do this. It would not have to provide reasons. This comes not long after a previous increase. It was not all that long ago that the government's gross debt ceiling was $75 billion. This was increased up to $200 billion. So this government, while talking about making tough decisions, reducing spending and reducing the debt, at the same time has hiked up the debt on the nation's credit card. This is a government that says one thing and does another.

We should look to the current deficit that this government has delivered. It has soared to $49.4 billion, and the forecasted deficit in 2011-12 has already blown out by $9.6 billion to $22.6 billion. In November we were told that net debt would peak at $94 billion. On budget night that figure went up—no surprises there—to $107 billion. Not only that but net debt is going to stay above $100 billion for at least the next four years. This is a government that is continuing to borrow $135 million a day. With that borrowing comes interest payment bills that Australian families will have to pay. Labor's debt will mean an interest bill of $7 billion a year. In fact, the cumulative interest on Labor's net debt will be more than $26 billion over the next four years.

If we can, let us just stop for a moment and think about the real cost to Australian families of this interest bill. $26 billion is a lot of money. That money could be paying for real infrastructure investment. That sort of money could be invested in solving some of the long-term problems and challenges that Australia faces, such as escalating medical costs through the ageing of the population and the like.

This budget is very unkind on Australian families. It is worth noting that, since Labor was elected, electricity prices have gone up by 51 per cent, gas has gone up by 30 per cent and water has gone up by 46 per cent. Education costs have also risen by 24 per cent, health has gone up by 20 per cent and rent has gone up by 21 per cent. When my electors go to the grocery store, they can see that their bills have gone up by an average of around 14 per cent. Yet this is the first budget in eight years that has not provided tax cuts for everyday Australians, tax cuts that would help Australians with the cost of living. This government of course cannot do that because it has refused to be tough on itself. Instead, it would prefer to be tough on Australian families. I think it is fair to say that Australians are being squeezed tighter than the Treasurer's drinking glass. The government is stripping away $2 billion from families by freezing key family tax payments and thresholds. All families receiving family tax benefits will have some of their benefits stripped. At the same time Labor is hitting Australians with $6 billion worth of new taxes, including a flood tax. In my electorate of Higgins many residents, many electors, contributed very generously to the disaster relief in Queensland and Victoria. Yet they have been now slugged twice because of the mismanagement of this government.

My electors in Higgins have also been slugged through the changes within these budget bills to the private health insurance rebate. Seventy-seven per cent of my electorate in Higgins have got private health insurance. This will have a very real impact on their ability to keep and hold their private health insurance. It will have a very real impact on their ability to access quality health care. More importantly, because of this ideological war that is being waged by the Labor Party on Australian families, it will have a very real impact on the public health budget as well. It does not make a great deal of economic sense.

Interest rates will definitely go up. This budget has done nothing to reduce the pressure on Australian families and inhibit the Reserve Bank from increasing interest rates. Already the Reserve Bank has warned in its monetary statements that it will need to do this, and this budget has done nothing to stall that. Interest rates have risen seven times since the end of 2009 and are forecast to rise again twice over the next six months. We cannot forget, either, that when we talk about those debt and deficit figures it is not without very direct meaning for Australians. The fact that Labor's debt will reach $107 million means that that is $4,700 for every man, woman and child in Australia.

This government, as everybody knows, has presided over great waste and mismanagement. We have seen that with the installation of pink batts in roofs that are combustible and the resulting bill to fix that up. We have seen that with the mismanagement of the Building the Education Revolution program where some schools were paying double or triple the price they would pay in other ordinary commercial circumstances to build those buildings. We have seen blowouts in the processing of asylum seekers in Australia at a cost to this budget of $1.75 billion. We have seen money raided from the higher education endowment fund with the balance now down to $2.5 billion from $6 billion when the coalition established it. This government does not know how to manage taxpayer money.

Very revealingly, this budget is engaged in a number of deceptions on the Australian people. The budget papers show that revenue from the mining tax will be down by $5.9 billion from the figures that the government released just three months ago. So already the government has had to adjust. The budget says nothing about the carbon tax that it will be introducing before the next budget next year. This carbon tax will have a huge impact on our economy. There is nothing in this budget about the impact that it may have. Let us not forget that one of the greatest deceits in this budget is the handling of the NBN—the off-balance-sheet treatment of the NBN. It makes an absolute mockery of the projected surplus that the Treasurer keeps talking about. It is in fact the most creative accounting that we have ever seen in any set of budget papers.

Another deception is the claim by this government that it has brought forward $22 billion worth of savings. Yet included in this $22 billion worth of so-called savings is the flood tax, which comes to almost one-third of that amount. The government also claims it is going to increase spending on important initiatives like mental health care reform. It claims that it is spending up to $2.2 billion on this, but when you actually look closely at the figures you can see that, in fact, it is going to cut $580 million of GP rebates to fund it and that the real new spending is more like $530 million. This budget has failed the Australian people, this government is deceitful with the Australian people and we look forward to an election where the Australian people can cast their judgment.

Peter Slipper (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am particularly pleased to be able to join the debate on Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2011-2012 and cognate bills. The budget from this government, once again, fails my constituents on the Sunshine Coast. Families are worse off, and the budget indicates that the government is simply out of touch with families on the Sunshine Coast and elsewhere. Unfortunately, there is very little in the budget for families, and the budget does not contain the prescription needed to restore the situation in this country. Unfortunately, through the government's failed border protection policies millions and millions of dollars are being spent. However, if the policies of the former Howard government were adopted that would not be necessary and those funds would be available to provide very necessary infrastructure for the Sunshine Coast and, indeed, for other growth areas of Australia.

The deficit of the budget this year has soared to almost $50 billion and is forecast to be in this situation for some time. In fact, the budget deficit forecast for 2011-2012 has blown out by $9.6 billion to $22.6 billion. That is a matter of grave concern. The Treasurer tells us that the government will be returning the budget to surplus within a very finite period. I hope that the Treasurer's predictions are correct. However, on the indications, and on the performance of this government in the past, one cannot be optimistic that this will occur. Net government debt has climbed to a record $107 billion in 2011-12 and is forecast to remain above $100 billion across the forward estimates. This amounts to more than $4,700 debt for every Australian.

This is another typical old-fashioned Labor budget that is big on taxes and big on spending but fails to help households battling higher costs of living on items such as petrol, electricity, gas, groceries, health costs and home repayments. We also find that the government is launching a $2 billion assault on families by freezing the indexation of key family tax payments and income thresholds for three years. This is the first budget in eight years that has not provided tax cuts for everyday Australians. This government is being tough on Australian families because it has failed to be tough on itself. I mentioned before the money which has to be spent because Labor has lost control of Australia's borders. Offshore unauthorised arrival management has blown out by a record $1.75 billion since last year's budget. The current approach by the government is in complete disarray. The new arrangements for taxing company cars will slug small business operators, tradesmen, farmers and the taxi and hire car industry with increased costs at a time when they are already doing it tough. Regional Australia has again been short-changed by a citycentric government that has cut $500 million in regional funding. There is not a single new cent in this budget for road or rail projects across Australia. Since coming to power in 2007, the government has employed 24,000 additional public servants and the government is asking people on the Sunshine Coast to tighten their belts but is refusing to do the same to itself. Australians are looking for stability and certainty from their government and most Australians would be sorely disappointed, firstly, by what is in this budget and, secondly, by what is not in this budget.

The Sunshine Coast is one of the fastest growing areas of Australia. Because we are a fast-growing area, we never seem to have the infrastructure we require to meet the needs of our growing population. We need to upgrade the Bruce Highway to six lanes all the way from Brisbane to the Sunshine Coast. The former Howard government invested money to upgrade the Bruce Highway from Brisbane to Caboolture and, at the time, that removed the worst bottleneck between Brisbane and the Sunshine Coast. But as road traffic continues to grow, delays seem to be inevitable. The existing four-lane highway—that is, two lanes in each direction—desperately needs upgrading to six lanes. Not to do so is completely unacceptable.

On the Sunshine Coast we have a wonderful lifestyle, we have a very hospitable population but what we do need on the Sunshine Coast are more jobs, particularly jobs for young people. We need clean and green industries and we need government policies which will encourage the development of job opportunities so that young people are not forced to leave the Sunshine Coast to seek employment. The University of the Sunshine Coast is doing a wonderful job. It is giving large numbers of students in our community the opportunity to study in an increasing range of disciplines. We hope that many of those graduates will find work on the Sunshine Coast.

Not only is the Sunshine Coast a rapidly growing area; it is a very interesting area because demographically it is one of the oldest parts of Australia. Lots of people retire to the Sunshine Coast from around the country, and that is entirely understandable because it is a wonderful place to live. But we also have lots of young families and those young families are extremely concerned about the employment opportunities for their children. Part of our unemployment problem on the Sunshine Coast is imported, I suppose. Compare being unemployed in some of the southern parts of Australia and being unemployed in a place that has wonderful beaches and a wonderful lifestyle and it is hardly surprising that people often choose to move to an area where there is less employment but a better lifestyle. That is why quite often our unemployment rate is higher than one would normally expect, because lots of people who would be unemployed elsewhere choose to move to the Sunshine Coast.

It is a pity that the Liberal-National Party coalition was not elected at the last election because we were able to promise a range of infrastructure projects for the Sunshine Coast which would have provided incredible benefits for our local community. I have also spoken in the parliament and I have written to the government to seek to have these infrastructure projects implemented, despite the fact that the Labor Party was elected to office and the Liberal-National Party coalition is still in opposition. We would like to see the Bruce Highway upgraded, we would like to see $2.5 million given to upgrade the Caloundra Aquatic Lifestyle Centre and we would like to see $700,000 for a viewing platform for Maleny's Mary Cairncross Scenic Reserve. The latter would enable people to view the Glass House Mountains in a safe way. At present, the view, which is spectacular, often entices people to wander across the road, placing their safety at risk.

It is also important to recognise that the government needs to invest more in tourism, particularly on the Sunshine Coast. People on the Sunshine Coast are particularly concerned over the fact that the government said prior to the election that it would not introduce a carbon tax and yet a carbon tax is now on the government's agenda and could well be legislated for by the parliament. It is important that, when you stand up prior to an election and say that you are going to pursue a certain policy, once you have received the support of the Australian people, you seek to carry out the pledge that you made.

Very few people on the Sunshine Coast support a carbon tax. Most people, if given the choice between a clean environment and a less clean environment would certainly choose the former. However, given that Australia is a relatively low emitter, if the carbon tax is brought in—and we have heard of the range of charges which will be imposed on Australian families, from $300 to $1,000, depending on the rate at which the carbon tax is struck—Australian families will be slugged, our businesses will be less competitive and our exporters will not be able to compete in world markets as they are currently able to. And, if the rest of the world does not follow a similar policy, there will be no improvement in the world environment. So, on the one hand, our own industry will be committing a form of economic suicide, costing jobs and so on, and, sadly, on the other hand, the world environment will be no better as a result of that action.

I would ask the government to consider a world solution rather than seeking to move unilaterally. I think Australia is a good international citizen. I think we have proven over the years that we are prepared to work with other countries to improve the environment. But to move forward unilaterally is not in our interests and would do very little at all for the environment. That is absolutely unacceptable.

I would also like to talk about the need for safety throughout the Sunshine Coast. We have a very good area; however, it would be very useful if we were able to get CCTV surveillance cameras to boost public safety in key parts of our community. Prior to the last election, we were able to pledge $300,000 for CCTV surveillance cameras and extra lighting in the central business district of Caloundra, $100,000 for CCTV surveillance cameras at the Mooloolaba shopping and tourism precinct and $100,000 for CCTV surveillance cameras in the Kawana Waters community. This commitment was also made prior to the election in 2007. Unfortunately, with the election of the current government, we have not yet been able to get that funding.

The funding would mean that we could better showcase our community as one which people could visit as tourists or move to to become residents. These surveillance cameras would improve the safety of people who are out having a good time. The Sunshine Coast is a relatively safe and law-abiding destination, but I think these cameras would provide a lot of reassurance and would help to boost our tourism numbers. For a relatively small investment, half a million dollars, public safety would be boosted, and that would be a very positive thing. It is important, I believe, to protect our environment. The environment is not the possession of any particular side of politics and I believe that, particularly with the Green Corps, the Howard government will go down on the record as one of the greenest governments in Australia's history, but it will never be given credit for that. But I think it is important to recognise that we do hold our environment in trust for future generations and that it would be wonderful if we were able to leave the environment of Australia in a much better situation when we depart this world than it was in when we arrived. So it is important that all of us, regardless of where we stand politically, focus on the need to make sure that appropriate funding is made available to protect and enhance our environment. We had, prior to the election, promised certain funding for a range of environmental groups on the Sunshine Coast, and I call on the current government to accept that they are very worthy causes and that our environment will be enhanced if those funding announcements prior to the election are implemented by this current government.

This budget does fail the Australian people. It is not a prescription that our country needs at this time, and I would ask the Treasurer to reconsider the budget with a view to bringing in something more appropriate. I thank the House.

John Alexander (Bennelong, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We have a national epidemic of obesity. We have gone from the fittest country in the world to one of the fattest. There are any number of television shows, with titles such as The Biggest Loser, which dramatically tell the story of the desperate actions required to address situations of obesity—the hardship, the heartbreak and the humiliation. Today I am talking about our government's obesity and the radical action that will be required to address this country's problems of excess and waste. The parallels between the two are worth noting because, in the days when our sportsmen and women dominated the fields of endeavour, virtually all Australians would try to emulate their sports stars on the weekend, resulting in their wellbeing, health and fitness. At this time, we enjoyed lean government and we were a creditable nation.

No truer words have been spoken than those contained in the warning by Senator Barnaby Joyce when he said that he had never seen a big problem that did not begin as a small one and that if this rate of waste and misguided spending continued there would come a time when we would not be able to pay back our debt. Credibility and trust borne out of honesty should be the currency that a government or a political party trades on. Broken promises and treacherous behaviour do not build a sense of trust. The promise to build the Epping to Parramatta Rail Link, devoutly made in the heat of battle to win government during an election campaign, fades on even the most casual examination and exposes the fact that this promise to build would be dependent on the government winning a second term, the government being in surplus and the state government putting up the first $500 million. The very people who lose our trust and confidence with such transparently ingenuous undertakings deserve serious scrutiny when they make other promises. The promise made during the recent budget of a $3 billion surplus to come in the third year would be equally dependent on a number of factors and so has equal 'substance' to the promise made by the federal government to build the Epping to Parramatta railway line. Setting this aside, the government's representations put the promise of a $3 billion surplus into perspective. It will follow two more years of excessive deficit—$55 billion last year, followed by $50 billion, followed by $23 billion, and totalling $107 billion of debt. To have the audacity to say that a $3 billion surplus in year 3 is some kind of triumph beggars belief. This is a government that has come to dine at our table. They take more and more every time they need it. They go to their favourite dish—more taxes—creating the weight of debt to fund their lazy, misguided and, above all, wasteful practices. What could have nourished families, small business and industry has been squandered by inept government and criminal waste. It is so plain to see that history is repeating itself. The Howard government when elected inherited some $96 billion in debt. The Abbott government, when it is elected, will inherit a greater debt. The hallmark of the Rudd-Gillard government is that of quick-fix fast food, not the nutrition that our country needs. When we were crying out for vital infrastructure that would build our country and add value we got pink batts, and we got school halls when classrooms and libraries were needed, coated with lashings of waste.

Julia Gillard has justified this by saying that in large projects there will always be waste. This is an extraordinary position to take and it is difficult to imagine that somebody who has found their way to the position of Prime Minister could not understand the dynamic that when building more than one school hall, with a high level of architectural design and requiring no variations during construction, the marketplace will effect lower prices with greater quantity.

And we have the situation of pink batts in roofs, where those who entered the industry after promises and undertakings from the government committed themselves, their businesses and their assets to this new industry, then mercilessly had the rug pulled from under them after more empty reassurances. The government, which should be in the practice of building industries, was setting these poor souls up for a brief boom and an inevitable bust. In the solar industry we had the same scenario. And all the while the government was feasting on taxes, growing bureaucracies, growing inefficiencies and growing the obesity of debt. The next competitor in the Biggest Loser will be Australia after the final great feast—a carbon tax.

Personal obesity accounts for more than 50 per cent of our health costs—combined with other lifestyle choices, an imposition of over 70 per cent of our total health cost. The single best thing that you can do for your physical health or mental health is to exercise. When you exercise in the form of participation in a sport, the component of socialisation is added, which is a key component in the prevention of mental illness.

In the budget there was a promise of $1.5 billion for mental health. A little examination will tell you very quickly that sadly those who need help most are denied. The reduction from 12 appointments with a psychologist to 10 might not have been a devastating blow to many but on a little further examination we learn that those with more acute need for psychological intervention, who would previously have had the right to a further six visits, have now lost those visits.

This is another graphic example of short-term thinking, small savings and long-term cost. Tragically, the cost in this scenario is measured not just in dollars. Headlines this week—a week where there has been many major news events—have found the manner in which the Gillard government attempted to lure FIFA's affections in a bid to host the Soccer World Cup was consistent with their poor ability to manage and ensure value for our tax dollars. We have heard allegations of bribery. There are allegations of $11.4 million of the $45 million given by this government having gone missing and of two sets of books being maintained by the FFA. Despite an inquiry on this reporting back in March, this report has still not seen the light of day and it seems another $39 million has now been sent down the same rabbit hole. On reflection, what is fundamentally wrong with the way in which we attempted to win the World Cup bid is that it was largely contrary to our sporting heritage, which is such a vital part of our nation's history. The building of our character and what we stand for has always lain in the fact that we have previously put all our efforts into excelling in sports on the field, not in fancy hotels and restaurants. We host cricket tests with the greatest cricket nations in the world because we are one of those great nations. We host a grand slam tennis tournament because when the grand slam was declared we were one of only four nations who had won the Davis Cup—we earned our position on the court. We have hosted the Olympic Games twice, punching way above our weight, because we have always punched way above our weight. Australian sportsmen more than anything else have been the epitome of sportsmen: modest in victory and gracious in defeat, playing by the rules and playing fairly.

Without a knowledge of the past and an appreciation of history we are vulnerable not to learn from the past and to allow history to repeat itself. There is a great cost, whether for the individual or for the government, in becoming obese, and there is a great price to be paid for getting back into shape in order to be fully productive and enjoy a long and healthy life. To achieve this goal, an individual needs to take personal responsibility for their diet in the same way as a government needs to take responsibility for the economy and an obese way of living.

If history repeats itself, this government will leave office with a massive debt to be repaid. No doubt this will be undertaken by a lean and fit-for-the-purpose Abbott coalition. The path we then embark upon should be sustained, and we should learn from the past and not repeat the mistakes that have been made. With our dollar at record highs, there has never been a better time to undertake immediately the repayment of our debt.

Tony Crook (O'Connor, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This being my first budget as the federal member for O'Connor, I must say that I receive it with very mixed emotions. This government has made much of the expected surplus in 2013, but this surplus is based on very thin margins and on legislation that the parliament is yet to see. It is also based on the premise that state governments must do as the federal government wants, which, as we all know, is not likely to happen—and I will talk more of that later.

I welcome the bipartisan support that this place has given to mental health and the increased funding that it has received in this budget. With around one in four people being affected by mental health issues, the allocation of $1.5 billion over the next five years is very welcome. Of this, $491 million is allocated to children, teens and young adults for 30 additional headspace centres and 12 early psychosis prevention and intervention centres across Australia. Having recently visited the headspace centre in Albany, I now have a far greater appreciation of the work they do. They are a tremendous asset to Albany and the Great Southern. I certainly hope to see a number of these headspace centres located in regional Western Australia and specifically in the electorate of O'Connor.

The only real concern is that the bulk of this money will be spent in the out years, not in the short term. If my visit to the Albany headspace centre taught me anything, it is that a timely, discreet and professional response to the issues that are here and now is critical. The window to address mental health issues can sometimes be very minute, and adequate resources are needed urgently. It is, however, disappointing that GP mental health funding is to be reduced, because in many cases these are the people at the front line—they are the first point of contact and sometimes the difference between some people's receiving urgent care and not receiving it.

I also welcome the $1.8 billion over six years from the Health and Hospitals Fund to support the development of health infrastructure in regional Australia. As welcome as this is, one cannot help but question, firstly, whether it will be enough and, secondly, what the value of these facilities will be if they are not staffed by well trained health professionals. Not enough is being done to address the gross shortage of doctors in regional Australia, particularly Western Australia. Country local governments across my electorate are literally forking out hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to provide GPs to their communities. One shire is putting up over $900,000 worth of incentives to retain a GP in their community. To put that in context, this investment equates to around 15 per cent of the total expenditure of this local government.

I would like to take this opportunity to mention the state government's announcement of $565 million to substantially reform and improve access to health care for residents of the southern inland of Western Australia. The southern inland health initiative is the centrepiece of the state government's spending on health in 2011 and 2012 and is funded under the Liberal-National government's very successful Royalties for Regions program. This package, to be funded from July 2011, includes $240 million of investment in the health workforce and provision of health services over four years and includes $325 million in capital works over five years. This initiative will fund an equivalent of 44 extra doctors to secure ED services and GP services across eight districts. The most unfortunate thing about the Western Australian government committing to this initiative is simply that they should not have to be doing this.

This is the first budget where we have actually seen a real indication of the much talked about mining tax, or mineral resource rent tax, and where this revenue might be spent. There has been much talk of the windfall that regional Australia will see from this tax. The first attempt is disappointing, to say the very least. Any return to regional Australia from the mining tax is via the Regional Infrastructure Fund. The Regional Infrastructure Fund is a $6 billion fund over 11 years and, according to the budget papers, is 'reinvesting the proceeds of the resource boom in mining communities'. $960 million has been allocated in this budget and the biggest single project, worth $480 million or 52 per cent of that, is a metropolitan project, Gateway WA, which is for the upgrade of Tonkin and Leach highways as well as the freeway. I fail to see how this is reinvesting in mining communities.

There has been much criticism, particularly from the Treasurer, about the Western Australian government's decision to raise royalties on their—and I stress their—iron ore. It is totally unfair of this government to assume that no states will alter their budgets or financial management practices just so the Treasurer can meet his surplus promise. At least 25 per cent of the royalties that the Western Australian government imposes are guaranteed to be delivered back to regional Western Australia via the Royalties for Regions fund, a fund that really does mean regional and is not just tokenism. Western Australia will be the main source of the mining tax revenue for this government and there is no better time than the present for this government to make a fair dinkum investment in mining communities and match the Royalties for Regions funding.

The mining industry is planning to invest $76 billion in 2011 and 2012. If this government wants to reap the rewards of the mining industry by taxing it, the very least it could do is support infrastructure in those regional and mining communities that are delivering this dividend. Both the carbon and mining taxes are set to test, unnecessarily in my view, Australia's competitiveness in the global economy. I have concern for the impact on small to medium business and in turn jobs in Australia if we go down the path of taxing them out of existence in comparison to their global competitors.

On a more positive note, I welcome the extension for an additional year of the drought pilot program that has been running in conjunction with the Western Australian state government. Over the last two years many areas of Western Australia have experienced one of the driest seasons in recorded history. This has had a devastating impact on many of our regional communities, families and businesses who depend heavily on the agricultural sector. Last year the state and federal governments launched a drought pilot program to assist those farmers and families doing it tough through the drought.

This program has provided vital assistance to 67 local governments across WA, allowing farmers in these areas to access a range of support services including Centrelink, financial counselling services and strategic farm management workshops. More than 400 farming businesses and 300 families have benefited from these measures. As indicated in the budget, the federal government and the Western Australian state government will commit a combined $55 million to expand the drought pilot program significantly for the next 12 months. This commitment has effectively doubled the scope of the program and will allow the drought pilot program to be expanded into the south-west region covering a total of 130 local governments. The previous support services will still remain available, including farm business grants of up to $30,000 to help farmers better manage and prepare for future challenges and Farm Exit Support grants of up to $170,000 to support farmers who decide to sell their farm to cover relocation and retraining expenses. The drought pilot program is a very good program for regional WA and I am very pleased to see this program expanded into the south-west region. Many WA farmers have been suffering under the worst seasons ever recorded and it will be reassuring for them to know that their pain has been recognised by the federal government in this budget.

I would like to thank the federal government and the WA state government for ensuring this program is continued, and I would particularly like to acknowledge the work of the WA Minister for Agriculture and Food, the Hon. Terry Redman, for his hard work in ensuring this program continues to assist our primary producers and our regional communities during the dry season. That said, nothing can replace rain and it is slightly reassuring that there was some rain through the wheat belt of Western Australia on Monday night which will no doubt boost the morale of farmers and small businesses that support these communities. We must do all we can to assist our farming communities through tough times like the one that they are currently working their way through.

Education, particularly regional education, has been highlighted in this parliament, as have the inequities of youth allowance. Motions in both the House of Representatives and the Senate have supported a major review of youth allowance. Access to university and higher education continues to be a major issue for families living in the electorate of O'Connor and across regional WA. Due to the tyranny of distance, many students from regional areas have no choice but to leave the family home and relocate to Perth to attend university. This relocation to study is a major financial concern for many regional families who struggle to jump through the necessary hoops required to gain access to youth allowance.

The current youth allowance system as it stands does not afford regional families any flexibility when applying for the payment. The youth allowance system operates on a one-size-fits-all basis and leaves regional families at a major disadvantage compared to their metropolitan counterparts. I have heard numerous stories over the past few months of parents and students who have gone to great lengths to access higher education in the city. Some families choose to relocate to the city, and many students who wish to access university instead seek other career paths as they do not want to feel like they are any burden to their families. If this government is serious about creating sustainable and resilient regional communities, it is vitally important that we remove the barriers to higher education that are disadvantaging so many of our young people.

According to the Australian Council for Educational Research, in the seven years after leaving school, close to half of metropolitan students gain a university or TAFE degree, while only a third of regional students gain a qualification in that time. Many families across regional WA, including my own, are anxious to see the results of the federal government's review into youth allowance which is expected to report on 1 July. This review must deliver a fairer outcome for the thousands of regional students who are struggling to sustain themselves financially while living away from home; unsupported by the federal government. This review must call for greater flexibility for regional students and remove barriers such as the 18-month waiting period which forces students into employment while they study and in many cases takes them out of the education pathway forever. I welcome this review and look forward to seeing the government deliver better outcomes for our regional students.

Many of my constituents have contacted me with their concerns around the mining and carbon taxes. I have listened to their concerns about what this will mean to their families, their businesses and their livelihoods, and I will continue to do so.

I might now make a brief statement finally on the opposition's proposed amendment to this motion. I am not beholden to this government and I have no agreement to take any particular position on this matter. I am also cognisant of the constitutional risks to the institution of parliament when the opposition moves effectively to block supply, which is the basis on which government business and administration has continuing security. That said, and as the House has just heard, I have made it very clear that I have profound objections to a number of measures within the budget. I have just made that position clear in respect of the proposed mining and carbon taxes. I also believe that in processes such as raising borrowing limits the government should be accountable to the parliament. I finish today where I started, with mixed emotions surrounding the benefits for regional Australia and my electorate from this budget.

Kevin Andrews (Menzies, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Families, Housing and Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2011-2012 and cognate bills. Families are at the very centre of our society. Helping families stay together, supporting their communities and ensuring that families can give children the best start in life are not aspirational goals; they are fundamental responsibilities for the parliament and for the government. Over the past 30 years, family policy in Australia has evolved. Family support has developed and to date both sides of politics have generally been supportive. Labor have to their credit kept in step with the coalition, but now, regrettably, things have changed. While Labor are in government, the Greens are in power. Senator Brown has his weekly meetings with the Prime Minister, who calls his party extremists yet remains in a formal alliance with them. The Greens are ideologically opposed to providing real support to families. They would rather pursue their radical agenda of social reform than participate in the continued development of sound family policy. What we have now seen over the past two successive budgets is an unparalleled attack on families. The Labor-Green alliance is undoing the work of the coalition government both economically and socially.

Regarding the cuts to family services, the well-received coalition government's family relationship centres and initiatives have been targeted by a government starved of funds after a spending binge. Labor have stripped $50 million from family relationship services, including ripping $4.5 million from marriage counselling services and snatching $43.9 million from the family relationship centres. These centres are designed to help families experiencing difficulties. They help families stay together. At a time when cost-of-living pressures are hurting families and placing couples under growing stress, these services are designed to offer some assistance and yet they are being targeted with cuts in the government's budget.

The government have decided not to replace for Family Court judges. So family relationship centres will be under even more pressure, unable to provide the same level of support and, at the same time, family law cases will take even longer to be finalised. Indeed, family service agency personnel are reporting that there are waiting lists and growing waiting lists for people wanting to use their services and saying that they will continue to grow as a result of these changes and indeed many couples may not even get to have the services provided which they desperately need. On top of this, the Australian Institute of Family Studies, which suffered a cut of 10 per cent in its total appropriation in last year's budget, is now facing even more cuts.

Family tax benefit indexation has been frozen. The plan to freeze until 2014 indexation of the family tax benefit part A supplement, which is $726.35, and the part B supplement, which is $354.05, will mean that the recipients of FTB A, which is approximately 1.7 million Australian families, and the recipients of FTB B, which is approximately 1.4 million families, will all will be worse off. By freezing the supplement payments for families for both FTB A and FTB B for three years until July 2014, the value of the payment will be eroded over time due to inflation. Recent payment rates over the past three financial years demonstrate this. Without indexation, FTB A recipients will be $81.28 worse off per child by 2014-15 while FTB B recipients will be $39.62 worse off per family by 2014-15. We are now learning that the plan to freeze family benefits was devised by the government before the federal election. This is yet another deception from a Prime Minister whose directionless government will be long remembered as perpetrating a deception on the Australian people in the days prior to the 2010 poll. This budget does little to address the cost-of-living pressures facing Australian families. Across Australia, from the December quarter 2007 when Labor was elected to government at the national level to the March quarter 2011, a number of things are quite evident. Electricity prices have increased by an average of 51 per cent; gas prices have increased by an average of 30 per cent; water and sewerage rates have increased by an average of 46 per cent; health costs—that is, hospital, optical, dental, and pharmaceutical costs—have increased by an average of 20 per cent, and this is not even considering Labor's proposed changes to the private health insurance rebate; education costs—school fees and the other education costs that parents have to meet on a daily, weekly, monthly and yearly basis around Australia—have increased by an average of 24 per cent; interest rates have increased seven times since September 2009, increasing repayments on the average mortgage by over $500 per month—that is an increase of $500 per month in a little under 18 months; the price of bread has gone up by 11 per cent and the cost of fruit has gone up by 28 per cent—the cost of food overall has gone up by 13 per cent; and the amount of rent that people are now paying has increased by 20 per cent. This is a substantial, a significant and a very real slug to the cost of living for ordinary Australians families.

Since 2007, Labor has announced 14 new or increased taxes, including the alcopops tax on mixed spirit drinks, an increase in the luxury car tax, the mining tax, the flood levy, the LPG excise increase, a new tax on Australians working overseas, a cut in the amount Australians can put into superannuation that is tax free, new restrictions on business losses claimable for tax purposes, changes to the employee share scheme, ethanol tax increases, tighter restrictions on tax claims for medical expenses, fringe benefit tax changes announced in the 2011-12 budget and, of course, the carbon tax. This is the tax that this government is gung ho on introducing for all Australians, yet it is not even covered, not even mentioned and does not have a place in the budget. The most substantial tax that possibly any government has proposed to introduce in Australia and which is proposed for the coming financial year—and the appropriation bills which we are now debating in this parliament deal with government expenditure and government revenue—this most significant tax which the government talks about every day and which it is trying to convince Australians will be good for them, is not even in the budget.

Ms Grierson interjecting—

The honourable member opposite says, 'Because it is cost neutral.' We had Professor Garnaut out yesterday with his latest report suggesting that families should be compensated—what?—55 per cent of the amount which is raised by the tax. Try and tell ordinary Australian families that taking away $1 from them and giving them back 55c is going to be cost neutral. And what did Professor Garnaut also say? There is a suggestion in his report that the level at which compensation should cut out is $80,000. Try and tell ordinary Australian families that have got two parents in the workforce who would be earning in the vicinity of—

A division having been called in the House of Representatives—

Sitting suspended from 11:19 to 11:34

Prior to the break for the division in the House, I was responding to the interjection by the honourable member for Newcastle, who said that the reason the carbon tax is not included in this year's budget, in these appropriation bills that we are debating, is that it would be revenue neutral. Even if we assume, for a moment, that that is true—and I will come to why I do not believe most Australians believe it to be true—there are administrative costs associated with the new tax. Costs are set out in the budget for expenditure relating to each department—as to what it is actually going to cost. That ought to be in the appropriation bill, even if it is a revenue neutral measure. But, of course, we do not see that whatsoever.

The reality is that the government's idea of revenue neutral, from what we have learned to date from Professor Garnaut's report, is that for every dollar that this government will take by way of tax—tax which will ultimately be paid by Australians—just 55c will be returned by way of some sort of compensation. I do not think Australian families believe that taking a dollar and giving back 55c—even 60c or 65c—is in any way revenue neutral. The reality is that this is a great big new tax on ordinary Australian families, who will be paying for it on top of all the other mismanagement by this government they have to pay for. Indeed, since assuming office, Labor has managed to do what it does best. It has turned a $20 billion surplus into a $50 billion deficit. It has turned $70 billion of net assets into $107 billion of net debt. It took a decade to pay back Labor's previous $96 billion debt. Now we have gone from having net assets of $70 billion to having $107 billion worth of net debt, and that has been achieved in just four years under this Labor administration—this Labor maladministration—of Australia.

If you look at the carbon tax, you will see that it is going to hit household budgets on top of all the other increases in the cost of living that people are already suffering. Let us take the widely touted figure of $26 per tonne. A $26 per tonne carbon tax would add 25 per cent more to electricity bills. I said earlier that Australians face electricity bills that have gone up by an average of 51 per cent over the last four years. Here we go again with further increases, because the carbon tax will further increase their electricity bills by 25 per cent. Every time you go to the petrol bowser to fill up your car to take the kids to school, to go shopping, to drive to work or to drive home from work, let alone use it for any recreational purpose, it will cost you 6.5c or more per litre for your fuel bill. I say to ordinary Australians: when you go to the bowser next and think about filling up, how much it is costing and how petrol prices have gone up, just think that, when the carbon tax comes in, you will not be paying the $1.28, the $1.32, or the $1.40 or whatever it might be from day to day or week to week in various parts of Australia. Add 6½c a litre to that, and that will give you some sense of just one cost which will flow to you as a result of this tax.

We know that $26 a tonne is only a starting point. That is before the price automatically begins to increase by at least four per cent each year—and that is if $26 a tonne is the starting point. We have already heard from the Greens that they want a starting point of between $40 a tonne and $100 a tonne. The compensation will drop out over time. Even if the compensation were maintained at the same level, the result of inflation means that the real valuation of that compensation would decrease, just like the real value of family payments has decreased because of the freeze that has been put upon them by this Labor government. The working families of Kevin Rudd's 2007 have become Julia Gillard's forgotten families of 2011. On top of that, this tax will cost jobs. Some 45,000 jobs will disappear from industries such as steel, aluminium, cement, glass, chemicals and motor vehicles, and some 23,000 mining jobs will be lost. Once again, that is just the beginning.

This budget has delivered nothing new for families. Well, that is not quite true. It has delivered something new for families: more costs. What is not in the budget, the great big fiscal elephant that is sitting in the middle of the room—namely the carbon tax—is going to deliver even more significant costs for Australian families. It will hurt families, it will hit household budgets and it will put families who are already under pressure under even more pressure. The Labor government has no mandate to pursue this antifamily agenda and it has no mandate to introduce a carbon tax. It is time that Labor kicked its Greens habit. It is time that Labor stood up for Australian families. It is time that Labor called an election to get a mandate, if it proposes to introduce this antifamily carbon tax.

Natasha Griggs (Solomon, Country Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to talk on Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2011-2012 and cognate bills. This is my first budget as the member for Solomon, a role I take seriously and never for granted. While I am in this place I will do whatever is possible to ensure that my electorate of Solomon and indeed the Territory gets its fair share of funding from Canberra.

Despite the endless talk from Labor in the lead-up to the budget, this was not a tough budget. In fact, the Prime Minister was right when she said this was a traditional Labor budget—another big deficit, more borrowing, more debt and more taxes. In November 2010 we were told the deficit for 2010-11 would be $41.5 billion. On budget night it was revealed it had blown out to almost $50 billion. In November 2010 we were told that net debt would peak at $94 billion. On budget night it was revealed that that figure was $107 billion. Not only that but the net debt is set to stay above $100 billion for at least the next four years.

The government continues to borrow $135 million a day, and interest on Labor's debt will be a staggering $7 billion a year. Cumulative interest on Labor's net debt will be more than $26 billion over the next four years. Think of the hospitals, roads and ports that could be built in this country with the interest payments alone. Labor does not like to admit that we have the highest interest rates in the OECD and among the highest home mortgage rates in the world. Unfortunately, Labor's reckless spending and borrowing has seen interest rates higher than they would otherwise be and my electorate of Solomon has been hit hard hit.

Since budget night there has been near universal consensus amongst independent market economists that Labor's budget will have absolutely no impact on the Reserve Bank's need to raise interest rates. But, still, the Reserve Bank is facing myriad inflationary pressures, particularly as the federal Treasurer is predicting the economy will add 500,000 extra jobs over the next two years, bringing the jobless rate down from 4.9 per cent to 4.5 per cent. As a result, it is encouraging variable rate mortgage borrowers to consider fixing their loans as they prepare for one or even two interest rate rises in the second half of 2011.

Although house prices fell in Darwin and Palmerston in the first three months of this year, the median price for a house in Darwin still remains extremely high at $550,000, with a median price of $465,000 in Palmerston. Buying a house in Darwin is becoming increasingly unaffordable even for key workers such as teachers, police, nurses, firefighters and ambulance officers. According to the latest research from Bankwest, Darwin house prices have increased by 69 per cent over the past five years.

In addition to rising interest rates and unaffordable housing, families in Solomon are feeling the squeeze. Since Labor was elected, electricity prices are up 51 per cent, gas prices are up 30 per cent, water prices are up 46 per cent, education costs have risen 24 per cent, health costs have risen 20 per cent, rent costs have risen 21 per cent and grocery prices are up 14 per cent. In addition to this, a $26 a tonne carbon tax would add a further 25 per cent to electricity bills and at least 6½c to a litre of fuel. This proposed carbon tax will in fact see even higher prices for everything in the Territory. But who knows what the final price on carbon will be and what the ongoing impacts will be? The people of Solomon are very concerned about the increasing cost of living and, as I have already stated, they are paying record house prices and the highest prices in any capital city for groceries, petrol and rent, on the back of soaring power bills and interest rates. Unfortunately, the carbon tax will affect every aspect of people's lives and in particular those families that are already struggling to make ends meet. Many of my constituents will simply be unable to afford the power they use. As I mentioned in this place just three months ago, the carbon tax appears to be a tax on remoteness and on the Territory. The tax stands to increase the cost of living and directly impact key industries in the Northern Territory and my electorate such as primary production, mining, tourism and construction. All of these industries will be hit hard by a carbon tax. In just three months, the already high petrol prices in my electorate have significantly increased—without the carbon tax. Last week in Darwin and Palmerston, according to the NT Labor government's Fuelwatch website, the mean unleaded price for petrol was 152.8c a litre. That is up 10.9c from February this year.

How can the Gillard Labor government be trusted when the Prime Minister said before the election 'there will be no carbon tax under the government I lead', and now continues to pursue the introduction of a carbon tax, a tax on electricity and on petrol and a tax that is going to affect all Australians, particularly Territorians, ultimately increasing the already high cost of living? This budget is based on a lie. The carbon tax revenue and associated spending, tipped to be in the order of $11.5 billion, was not included. It is a tax Labor should be ashamed of and a tax that the Prime Minister said would not happen under the government she leads.

My electorate of Solomon is in desperate need of infrastructure to make its economy more productive. As already mentioned in this place by my colleague the member for Hasluck, the Perth to Darwin Highway, in the north of his electorate, is vital for both Western Australia and the Northern Territory in terms of transport infrastructure. Heavy haulage transport engaged in the movement of machinery and goods south from Darwin and north from the electorate of Hasluck is being sadly neglected by this government. Trucks are being forced to operate within a curfew. Gigantic mining trucks being transported fight for space on rural roads, the same roads used by tourists.

In Solomon we are also in desperate need of health infrastructure to give our people better access to health services. Giving credit where credit is due, I was very pleased to see the inclusion of funding for the first stage of a hospital in Palmerston. I have long advocated for better medical facilities for Palmerston and the rural area. Along with the many other advocates for improved health services in the Territory, I will be keeping an eye on this program, making sure that what is promised is actually delivered.

This government has not got a good track record in delivering what they promise. There is a fair amount of spin involved in most of their announcements. This is something my electorate is tired of. I was pleased to see a small increase in the funding for mental health but, as with the hospital finding, I will be watching this carefully to ensure that there is indeed an improvement in services in the Solomon electorate. I want to make sure that this funding does translate into better mental health services for my electorate.

There are more disappointing elements to the budget, in particular that families have been targeted and the perception of a wealthy family is now a family on $150,000. With the high cost of living continuing to apply pressure on family budgets and interest rates, we all know that a family on $150,000 is far from wealthy. In the budget a massive $1.7 billion blow-out as a result of Labor's failed border protection policies was revealed. Families are paying for Labor's failed border protection policies through cuts to family payments.

Many people in my electorate, and family and friends across Australia, have raised with me their concerns regarding the significant expenditure on housing associated with asylum seekers in the Territory. The view is that this money could be spent on infrastructure to build on the Territory's potential and on funding longer term projects within my electorate.

The budget clears the way for $2 billion to be gouged from families through the freezing of indexation of family tax payment supplements and upper income thresholds. Families in Solomon will continue to feel the pinch. For example, a family with two children and a stay-at-home parent stands to lose up to $147 worth of benefits, while a family with both parents working will be $116 worse off. Families struggling to make ends meet on an income of $45,000 will also be hit.

This Labor government's short-sighted measures and poor fiscal management are set to continue the pain for families within my electorate of Solomon. Despite Labor talking down the impact of these changes, the truth is that, at a time when families are struggling with cost-of-living pressures, these changes will hurt two million families in some way, shape or form. I remind this House of the waste by this government associated with the failed pink batts, school halls and solar panels spend up. In this budget one of the biggest savings was on the $1.7 billion flood levy. It is a disgrace that this government has wasted so much money, yet incomprehensibly it could not find $1.7 billion in a $360 billion budget for allocation to natural disasters. It was extraordinary that, given this government's track record of wanton waste and failed program implementation, Labor's big budget eve announcement was a plan to spend $376 million on set-top boxes for pensioners. Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, let me remind the government that a postbudget survey revealed that 60 per cent of pensioners do not want a set-top box. Additionally, we know that Gerry Harvey said he could provide and install them for $168 a unit, compared to Labor's budgeted cost of $400.

The Prime Minister was asked by the member for Denison what Labor would do with the promises made by Labor candidates in seats where Labor did not win. The Prime Minister stood at the dispatch box hand on heart and said, 'Our promises were fully costed, every one of them. Of course they will be delivered. Of course they will. We don't go around making promises that we won't fulfil.' Like the member for Herbert, I also have concerns regarding the statement made by the Prime Minister. Following on from her passionate statement of commitment in the chamber, I wrote letters to the Prime Minister on behalf of my electorate asking for clarification as to when the pre-election commitments made by Labor will be delivered in my electorate of Solomon—promises such as $37,000 for Dragon Boat Northern Territory to maintain their current fleet and construct new dragon boats, and the $1.5 million all-weather world championship level BMX track for the NT BMX. A new music and dance festival, the Big Day Without, was planned in March at Palmerston Senior College, in April at Darwin Middle School, in May at Casuarina Secondary College and in June at Sanderson Middle School. Well, March, April and May have come and gone and no events have occurred, and when I contacted the schools they were not aware of plans for any of these events. Then there was the promise of 1,200 new affordable rental homes in the Northern Territory, priced at least 20 per cent below market rates, under the National Rental Affordability Scheme. This promise was rebadged from the previous election.

It turns out that yet again there is an issue with delivery. Both NT BMX and Dragon Boat Northern Territory have been advised that they do not have the funding, despite all the pre-election hype. These groups now have to apply for grants through the usual process—no guarantee of funding at all. I wonder if this has something to do with the fact that these two commitments were also made by the coalition. This is a very tricky government, one that has been caught out before. For example, this government has taken the high moral ground on education in Closing the Gap programs. However, in the lead-up to the 2010 federal election, the Gillard Labor government committed to the Indigenous Funding Guarantee program, which affects schools in my electorate. The commitment was to provide increased funding to non-remote boarding schools that house more than 50 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students from remote Indigenous communities. Like the community groups NT BMX and Dragon Boat Northern Territory, schools such as Kormilda College, St John's College and O'Loughlin Catholic College were under the impression the funding was guaranteed and was to be backdated. Frustratingly, these schools still seek assurance as to whether the promised but delayed payments of the remote rate for remote students based at their school will indeed be backdated to include 2010. I have raised this issue a number of times, and once again I pose the question to the Prime Minister: when can Kormilda College, St John's College and O'Loughlin Catholic College in my electorate expect to hear the government's decision on whether or not this funding will be backdated? Additionally I ask the Prime Minister: when will the pre-election commitments made by Labor in my electorate of Solomon be delivered?

If the coalition were in government, the people of Solomon would have RAAF base houses available to them. The coalition committed to excising the suburb of Eaton from defence, making 396 houses available for a variety of housing options for Territorians. This is in clear contrast to the current situation, where this Labor government continues on its path of waste and mismanagement. Two hundred and five of the 396 houses sit vacant in the middle of a housing crisis. Is this an example of a government that values taxpayer resources? I do not think so. This is a government that expects everybody else to pay for its mistakes. Labor's working families of 2007 have become the forgotten families of 2011.

Debate adjourned.

Sharon Grierson (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That further proceedings be conducted in the House.

Question agreed to.