Rob Mitchell (McEwen, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Not from this side, anyway! My question is to the Minister for Community Services, Minister for the Status of Women and Minister for Indigenous Employment and Economic Development. Minister, how is the budget delivering vital support for Australian families and women?

Julie Collins (Franklin, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Community Services ) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for McEwen for his question because we know that this budget is really and truly putting low- and middle-income Australians first. It is a Labor budget that is delivering support for the cost of living for 1.5 million Australian families like the 12,800 families in the seat of McEwen who will be eligible to receive this government's new schoolkids bonus. These 12,800 families will receive $820 a year for high school students and $410 a year for every primary school student. We are ready to provide these 12,800 families in the seat of McEwen, and the 1.3 million Australian families around Australia, with this year's bonus payment in just a few weeks time. That is more than $13 million in support for kids' education that families in McEwen alone will receive. I know the member for McEwen will be standing up for his families in his electorate. He knows how important it is to get that support out to the mums and dads and kids in his electorate and right around Australia.

It is particularly important for the member for McEwen because in his home state of Victoria the Liberal government has just cut back on family support. In its budget, the Baillieu Liberal government cut its School Start Bonus, meaning 40,000 families in Victoria will be losing payments because of Liberal Party cuts. Now we have this Leader of the Opposition standing in the way of helping Australian families just trying to do the right thing by their children.

These are ordinary working Australians and they are in the electorate of every member over there. Like the member for Leichhardt: will he be standing in the way of the 12,500 families in his electorate receiving the payment? Or the member for Forde: will he be supporting the 12,000 in his electorate or will he be stopping them from receiving more than $12 million in just a few weeks time? What about the member for Maranoa, the member for Parkes, the member for Ryan, the member for Longman and the 46,000 eligible to receive this payment in their electorates? Will they be standing up for them?

No matter where they are in Australia, we know that coalition governments cut services and payments for families. But this is not just about payments. It is not just about blocking the cash to these families. They are actually refusing to trust Australian families. The Leader of the Opposition is saying, loud and clear, to parents that he does not trust them with their own family budgets. This is an insult to all Australian parents. It is an attack on their ability to look after their own kids. We know that parents make decisions every day, every week, about their children. But the coalition do not think they can be trusted with some extra cash. (Time expired)

Andrew Robb (Goldstein, Liberal Party, Chairman of the Coalition Policy Development Committee) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. I refer the Treasurer to the blow-out in interest costs on the government's net debt to $8 billion a year by 2015-16. Treasurer, is it not the case that if these $8 billion were applied to the introduction of the National Disability Insurance Scheme it could be introduced immediately, for all 400,000 Australians with a disability, rather than the 10,000 in 2013-14 contemplated in this budget?

Wayne Swan (Lilley, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the shadow minister for his question, and it is a very important question. It gives me the opportunity to address debt and it gives me the opportunity to talk about why we are coming back to surplus and paying down debt.

When the global financial crisis hit we moved with a powerful stimulus to support our economy. Because we did that, hundreds and thousands kept their jobs and hundreds of thousands of small businesses kept their doors open. The consequence was that we, almost alone amongst developed economies, avoided a recession. Avoiding that recession is why we are in such a strong position now amongst developed economies in the world compared to just about anybody else. We avoided a recession. That is one of the reasons we have unemployment at 5.2 per cent and a strong investment pipeline and why opportunities are so big for our country into the future.

When that hit, it hit our revenues. Our revenues have been written down by $150 billion over five years. Those opposite expect the Australian people to believe that if they had been in our position they would not have done anything other than accept that revenue hit and they would not have moved to support our economy. The consequence of that would have been higher deficits, higher debt and higher interest payments, today. If they had been in power during that period of time, we would be sitting here looking at higher unemployment, higher debt and higher interest payments.

Andrew Robb (Goldstein, Liberal Party, Chairman of the Coalition Policy Development Committee) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Madam Deputy Speaker, I have a point of order on relevance: my question was about the blow-out in interest rates in the future—2015-16—not three years ago.

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Goldstein has made his point. The Treasurer is answering the question.

Wayne Swan (Lilley, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We are coming back to surplus because we have a strong economy. We walk tall in the world and as a consequence of that we have the capacity to accumulate surpluses and, over time, pay down debt. That is precisely what we should be doing and that is exactly what we are doing. That is the reason we have put in place $33 billion worth of saves in this budget. The weight will be on those opposite because they have a $70 billion crater in their budget bottom line and every save of ours that they knock back will add to that $70 billion crater. That is the contrast between that side of the House and this side of the House. We take fiscal policy seriously. Those on that side of the House had their auditors found guilty of professional misconduct during the last election campaign. They could not be trusted to run a chook farm.

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

My question is to the Assistant Treasurer. Why is it important to get the budget back into surplus and how will the budget spread the benefits of the economy to hardworking Australian families and to businesses?

David Bradbury (Lindsay, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Treasurer ) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Wakefield for his question. The member for Wakefield knows that the clearest sign of a strong economy is a surplus and that is what this government is delivering. A surplus is the best defence we can provide against any future shocks in the global economy but, importantly, it is also a means by which we can provide the Reserve Bank with all the room that it needs in order to cut interest rates, if it chooses to do that, and to pass on the benefits of that to families right around our country.

The member for Wakefield asked me about how we are spreading the benefits of the economy through this budget. We are doing that in many respects. But we are a government that understands that whilst we are experiencing a mining boom there are many families—and many businesses around our country and our communities—that are not receiving the benefits of that boom. That is why we are determined to spread the benefits of the boom and that is what this budget does. When it comes to the position of those opposite in relation to these matters, we have already seen that, apart from the fact that they cannot accept that Labor will deliver a surplus, they now find themselves in the situation where they are standing between us and the families right around this country that we want to deliver a schoolkids bonus to. We know that they are very unhappy about the budget and the return to surplus, because that is bad for them politically; it is good for the country but it is bad for them politically. But we also know that they now say that they will in fact support the increases to the family tax benefit part A; they say that—even though they have consistently maintained the position that they will oppose the mining tax and oppose any of the benefits that are yielded by that. In fact, the member for North Sydney is on the record, consistently, saying:

The Coalition is opposed to the mining tax. We can’t make promises that can’t be paid for.

We will rescind this tax in government and we will unwind the expenditure linked to it. This is fiscally prudent. It would be irresponsible to keep the expenditure without the supporting revenue.

Then they say they are going to support measures linked to the mining tax—and they have just exposed the fact that they have no capacity to pay for them. By their very own words they are damned. They have a $70 billion crater and it just keeps getting bigger. They keep digging and digging and digging. If this black hole got any deeper, we would need a Stephen Hawking documentary to try and uncover exactly what was inside of it.

When it comes to their black hole, the day of reckoning is approaching. In two days time, or tomorrow night, the Leader of the Opposition will have the opportunity to spell out exactly what savings he will make. If he does not take that opportunity, we know his black hole will only get bigger. (Time expired)