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

My question is to the Prime Minister. I refer the Prime Minister to her statement of one year ago that she would like to do anything possible to help families. I remind her that in the first nine months of her prime ministership the price of electricity has risen by 12 per cent, water by 13 per cent, fuel by seven per cent and food by five per cent. Can the Prime Minister explain how she is easing the burden on families by means-testing the private health insurance rebate and hitting them with a carbon tax, a mining tax and a flood tax?

Julia Gillard (Lalor, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Higgins for her question; I know she is frustrated by the Liberal Party's current political strategy and by the absence of its asking for any ideas. I know she is a member who thinks she could contribute to a policy debate, if the Liberal Party ever had one—and that is a difficulty she faces. I understand that there is cost-of-living pressure on the shoulders of Australians, and that is why we have worked to ease that pressure. First and foremost, as the economy continues to strengthen and moves to running at full capacity, the best thing we can do as a government to ease inflationary pressures and the cost-of-living pressures that come with moving to full capacity is to bring the budget back to surplus, as promised—and we will. The opposition stands for an $11 billion black hole, bigger deficits and bigger debt.

On the direct cost-of-living pressures on Australian families, we have moved to increase the family tax benefit for parents with teenagers, to pay the childcare tax rebate fortnightly, to assist with the cost of school uniforms and to bring forward the low income tax offset so people get the benefits of more money as a reward for work. Building on other measures that the government has put in place in the recent budget, we have moved to introduce additional measures to assist families. I understand it is still tough and there are cost-of-living pressures, but we are working with Australian families on those cost-of-living pressures.

On the reforms that the member refers to, I believe it was in the interests of Australian families to rebuild the nation after the summer of floods, and I believe the best way of making sure we paid as we went was to engage in tough budget savings and to have a progressive flood levy which asked upper income earners to pay more. Around half of the flood levy will be paid by people who earn $200,000 a year or more. I believe it is appropriate to ask them for that contribution.

The member referred to carbon pricing. I stand for helping Australian families; she stands for subsidising big polluters. In a choice between families and polluters, we support families; the Leader of the Opposition and the member who asked the question support polluters. When it comes to the mining tax, which the member also raised with me, we stand for the superannuation earnings of Australians; they stand for big mining companies. We stand for infrastructure for mining communities; they stand for big profits for mining companies. We stand for company tax cuts around the nation; they stand for big profits for mining companies. We stand for small business; they stand for big profits from mining companies. There is a theme emerging here, which is: if required in this place to make a policy choice between helping out the little guy, helping out Australian families and helping out big polluters, big business and big tobacco, the opposition is always on the side of big business, big polluters and big tobacco. We are on the side of Australian families, and we will continue to be.