Lucy Wicks (Robertson, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. Will the Prime Minister explain why the measures in yesterday's budget are necessary to ensure our future prosperity?

Tony Abbott (Warringah, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Robertson for her question. I acknowledge that she represents decent, aspirational people who know what it is like to put aside money today for tomorrow. She represents decent, aspirational people who know what it is like to make sacrifices for their children and for their grandchildren's future.

As the member for Robertson knows and as I suspect most of her constituents would understand, this is a budget that is tough but fair. It is a budget that asks for sacrifices from everyone to secure the long-term future of our country, because we simply could not go on as we were when members opposite were in charge. We simply could not go on paying the mortgage on the credit card, because that is exactly what happened when the Labor Party was in government.

The sad and tragic truth is that when the Labor Party were in charge they brought down six budgets, and those budgets gave us the six biggest deficits in our history. Sure, they forecast surpluses. They promised surpluses, but what they gave us were the six biggest deficits in our history. They did not just give us six deficits; they gave us a further four deficits in prospect. They gave us deficits and debt stretching out as far as the eye can see—$123 billion worth of prospective deficits and $667 billion worth of projected debt. Not only did they give us that; they gave us a double-dip deficit, because in 2017-18 the deficit went up again to $30 billion.

We did not create this problem, but we will take responsibility for fixing it. We bring the budget close to surplus in 2017-18. We get the budget back under control, which is exactly what we promised we would do before the election. We are not just restraining spending; we are building for the future with the world's biggest medical research fund and with the Commonwealth's biggest ever infrastructure spend. In 1996 a coalition government brought in a budget that was tough but fair and set our country up for a decade of prosperity—and last night's budget is in exactly that tradition.

Chris Bowen (McMahon, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. I refer the Treasurer to his previous answer and to his answer on the 7.30 program last night when asked:

You know that a co-payment, a levy and a tax are all taxes by any other name.

The Treasurer's response:

Of course they are.

Will the Treasurer now concede that his election campaign was a deceit on the Australian people?

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No. I will tell you why. We went to the last election saying, as the Prime Minister said, that taxes will be lower under the coalition than under Labor. The fact of the matter is that there is a wonderful graph in the budget papers that clearly shows that, as a result of the decisions we have taken since we have come to government, tax collections are lower than they would have been if Labor were re-elected. The thing about Labor is that they are experts when it comes to tax and deceit. Exhibit A was the mining tax. That was the benchmark success for taxation reform laid down by the member for Lilley. He is a very gifted man, the member for Lilley. He manages to introduce a tax that raises no money. That is quite an achievement. In the case of the Labor Party, they promised 'There would be no carbon tax under the government I lead', and then they go and do a deal with the Greens. There was no higher purpose for introducing a carbon tax. The money was not going to go to something that was going to build a stronger nation.

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. In order to be directly relevant, at some point he should refer to his answer on 7.30 last night.

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is no point of order. It was a very generic question. The Treasurer has the call.

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The fact of the matter is that Labor only ever introduced new taxes for political purposes. That is what they did. That was their benchmark. The biggest criticism the Labor Party have—and we have had two questions now—about the budget is about the politics of it.

Opposition members: No!

Oh, yes! It is all about the politics. It is not about the economics of it. It is all about the politics. That is why the Labor Party was not fit to govern. That is why the Labor Party is not fit to govern.

Andrew Southcott (Boothby, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. Why is it important to start the hard work of repairing the budget now? What legacy did the Treasurer address as the government developed last night's budget?

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We need to move now—and I thank the member for Boothby for his question. He would remember the 1996 budget. He was there with us, with a number of other members. The fact was that it was similar in one sense: a coalition government is elected; Labor do not tell the full story about what the budget is. Of course, in those days, it was a $96 billion debt and a $10 billion black hole—the Beazley black hole. But this time around Labor have exceeded their record. On this occasion, it is $667 billion of debt and $123 billion of deficits. And the Labor Party hold their hands in the air and say: 'No train crash here. There's no problem here.' The debt is going up. The deficits are continuing endlessly—'There's no problem here.' Unemployment is rising. 'There's no problem here, everything is okay, we did a fabulous job,' they convince themselves.

The problem is that someone has to pick up the bill. And do you know who has to pick up the bill? The taxpayers of Australia have to pick up the bill. They are the ones who are going to have to pay for the reckless indifference of the Labor Party towards taxpayers' money—$667 billion of debt. In the budget this year, through our decisions, we reduced that by almost $300 billion. In 10 years that represents interest savings alone of $16 billion a year. That is the equivalent of building 15 new teaching hospitals every year. And the Labor Party want to have their way. The Labor Party want that $16 billion a year not to go into some other purpose that is going to build a stronger nation. They want us to provide that money as interest to people that we have borrowed the money from. That is their idea of a priority. Our priority is to have a nation that lives within its means. Our priority is to pay our bills as we go along. Our priority is to leave the Australian people with a better quality of life—

Mr Dreyfus interjecting—

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Isaacs will desist!

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Our priority is not to pass the buck to the next generation, asking them to pay for our lifestyle.

Ms Butler interjecting—

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Griffith will desist!

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. Today the New South Wales Premier, Mike Baird, said the budget last night is ripping $80 billion out of schools and hospitals. He said:

What we saw last night from Canberra was a kick in the guts to the people of New South Wales.

Why should the people of New South Wales suffer because of the Prime Minister's pre-election deceit?

Tony Abbott (Warringah, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am happy to take that question from the Leader of the Opposition. Obviously there were some things in the budget last night that the states liked, such as the record Commonwealth spend on infrastructure. There were other things that they probably did not like, because we are not going to be bound by unsustainable spending commitments that were made by members opposite. We will not be bound by Labor's unsustainable spending commitments. We are not going to be bound by the budget booby traps that members opposite put in. They are state government run public hospitals. They are state government run public schools. The state governments will need to take more responsibility for these in the future, as is right and proper.

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is too much noise on my left!

Tony Abbott (Warringah, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What the people of Australia expect is grown-up adult governments in the states, just as they have now got a grown-up adult government in Canberra. That is as it should be.

Clive Palmer (Fairfax, Palmer United Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. Will the Treasurer support changes to all parliamentary super schemes so that members of parliament do not receive their superannuation payments until they reach the same age as Australia's entitlement for the old age pension?

Opposition Member:

An opposition member interjecting—

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would not go there. I say to the honourable member that there have been changes to the parliamentary super scheme. He might not be familiar with that, but there have been changes to the parliamentary super scheme. I know he is an immensely wealthy man and he might not understand and might not have looked at the documentation in relation to his superannuation scheme. I urge him to do that. The fact is there were changes made some years ago to the parliamentary super scheme and, in addition, we have made changes now to the gold card program. Everyone has to make a contribution. I understand the Labor Party has decided not to support the temporary deficit reduction levy, so the Labor Party and the honourable member obviously would prefer to see others do the heavy lifting and them make no contribution at all.

Sarah Henderson (Corangamite, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. How is everyone contributing now to help build future prosperity for all Australians?

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the honourable member for her question. It is so important that we ask Australians to contribute now. We do so because—and I understand this is an old Irish saying—you fix the roof while the sun is shining. In this case we have $667 billion of debt. If we do not start the process now of trying to ensure that we never get to that level, then the pain associated with dealing with it in a few years time is going to be far greater. We have been very up-front with the Australian people in asking them to pay a temporary budget repair levy on incomes above $180,000. We believe it is only fair that everyone contribute. It is also the case that we are asking Australians to pay for indexation in their fuel excise and, if they contribute that excise, in law we are going to hypothecate it to road funding which is going to substantially increase into the future. In fact, in this budget we are spending well in excess of an additional $11 billion on roads, and the total excise increase would be the equivalent of just over $2 billion.

Mr Husic interjecting—

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Chifley will desist!

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is something that we understand that I am afraid our political opponents do not—that is, if you want to spend money today, you should raise the money today. If you want to spend the money today, you should do everything you can to raise the money today. One of the challenges is that our political opponents did not do that. They spent in excess of $14 billion out of assumed revenue from the mining tax that raised hardly any money. So what happens? The government goes and borrows from the next generation in order to pay for handouts like the schoolkids bonus. Labor is still defending those sort of things even though we have to borrow money to pay for them. They do not understand. If you want to be responsible, and if you want to be responsible across the generations, it is the duty of everyone here to ensure that when we spend money we raise money and we do not go down the path of continuing to borrow money that at the end of the day our children are going to have to repay.

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. Before the election this Prime Minister explicitly promised no new taxes. Last night this Prime Minister smashed Australian families with new taxes on health and petrol. Why should Australian families pay for this Prime Minister's deceit?

Government Members:

Government members interjecting—

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There will be quiet on my right!

Tony Abbott (Warringah, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The whole nation is paying the price of the Labor Party's incompetence.

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Nonsense! You break your promises.

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Leader of the Opposition has asked his question and will desist.

Tony Abbott (Warringah, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Let me tackle the issues that the Leader of the Opposition raises absolutely head-on. Yes, there is a temporary deficit levy. No-one likes it. I certainly do not like it. But it will impact on just three per cent of taxpayers. We are indexing fuel excise. Again, it is not something that people would necessarily like, but the fact is the money is hypothecated to extra road spending, and that will cost the average family 40 cents a week in the first year.

The decisions that this government has made since September last year reduce the overall tax burden by $5.7 billion. There is all this huffing and puffing from members opposite about broken promises and about lower taxes. Well, let us keep the promise to get rid of the carbon tax because that would save every single Australian family $550 a year. This is a government which does not just talk about lowering taxes; this is a government which is lowering taxes—and it delivered that last night.

Eric Hutchinson (Lyons, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. Why is it so important that all Australians have a sustainable safety net? How does the budget ask Australians to contribute in order to build this safety net for the future?

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the honourable member for the question. He knows and I know that it is hugely important that we provide a well-resourced, sustainable safety net for those most vulnerable in the community. It is hugely important. Of course, welfare represents 35 per cent of the total Commonwealth budget, so we spend more on welfare than we do on health care for our citizens. We spend more on welfare than we spend on the education of our children. We spend more on welfare than we spend on the defence of the nation. Of course, whilst it is important to have a well-resourced, sustainable safety net, what matters most is that we can afford it. That is what matters most.

The fact is we do have changing demographics, and I, on this very rare occasion, will quote the former—no, the current—member for Lilley. I am sorry I made that mistake. He said in a press release with the honourable member here: 'Increasing the pension age is a responsible reform to meet the challenge of an ageing population and the economic impact it will have for all Australians. Australia must move towards a higher pension age over the next decade.'

It is quite interesting because the trajectory of our increase in the pension age eligibility to 70 follows the Labor Party's. But, obviously, given that it is going to 70 in the year 2035, I would say to you it is responsible to give people good notice that these are the issues that need to be addressed. It is easy just to put it aside. It is easy to be a critic. All of the criticism from Labor thus far has been political. None of it is about the policy.

Ms Butler interjecting—

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Griffith will desist!

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They are all politics, no economics. They are all politics, no policy. Come on and debate these things. Let's debate the issue in relation to the ageing demographic. Let's debate the issues about how we are going to continue to sustain our health system.

Ms Butler interjecting—

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Griffith will desist!

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Let's debate the issues that actually go to the heart of our economic prosperity. I would say to the honourable members: what we have laid down is a plan to ensure that what we receive in the future is sustainable—

Ms Butler interjecting—

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Griffith is warned.

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

because, on the current trajectories, if we just adopt a business-as-usual line, the pain associated with rectification in the future is going to be far greater. It is going to be enormous. We do not want to get to that point. The coalition will not let it get to that point.

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. Before the last election—indeed, on the very last night before the election—the Prime Minister explicitly promised, 'No change to pensions.' Last night, the budget revealed that pensions will be cut. Why should pensioners pay for this Prime Minister's deceit?

Tony Abbott (Warringah, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Leader of the Opposition, if I may say so, should get his facts right. Pensions are not being cut, but after the next election, if this government is re-elected, pensions will grow at a somewhat slower rate because they will be indexed to CPI rather than male total average weekly earnings.

Jenny Macklin (Jagajaga, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Families and Payments) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Madam Speaker, on a point of order, I seek leave to table the page from the budget that shows how much you are taking out of pensioners.

Government members interjecting—

I can do it whenever I like!

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Jagajaga is abusing the standing orders. You know perfectly well that you may not stand at the dispatch box simply to have an argument. You know perfectly well.

Tony Abbott (Warringah, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The most compassionate thing that we can do for the pensioners of Australia is to ensure that pensions are sustainable and that our social services budget is sustainable.

Ms Butler interjecting—

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Griffith will remove herself under standing order 94(a).

The member for Griffith then left the chamber.

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On a point of order, Madam Speaker: do you recognise that that makes it 100 people ejected from this side of the House and no-one from the other side of the House in the time you have been Speaker? Do you really think that is the way to conduct the parliament?

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would simply say to the Manager of Opposition Business, if you had 100 members you would be in government and sitting on this side. You simply have some recurrent offenders. Believe me, I look equally to my right.

Tony Abbott (Warringah, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I reiterate the point that the most compassionate thing we can do for the pensioners of Australia is to ensure that pensions are sustainable over the long term. That is exactly what we have done. There has not been and will not be any change to pensions in this term of parliament. We have been very up-front with the pensioners of Australia about what we think should happen to pensions in 2017, and if people do not like that they will have the opportunity to vote accordingly at the next election.

Fiona Scott (Lindsay, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. How will the budget assist in building the infrastructure of the 21st century that will secure growth in our economy and provide more jobs for the people of my electorate of Lindsay?

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the honourable member for Lindsay for her question, and I recognise that she has been a fierce fighter for Western Sydney because she wants to see construction and new jobs, and she is determined to have prosperity, in Western Sydney. As the member for Lindsay and all members know, we have now made a massive commitment to infrastructure in Australia that will lead to an investment of $125 billion of new infrastructure over the next few years. The total Commonwealth infrastructure investment in New South Wales is $14.9 billion—a significant sum of money. Why are we doing this? We inherited an economy with falling terms of trade. The mining and resources boom that we have all benefited from over the last few years had a big production phase. It sucked a lot of construction workers out of the rest of the economy and gave them an opportunity to have a well-paid job. That was terrific.

The mining industry has done and still does a great job. It represents 10 per cent of our economy and two per cent of our jobs. But, the mining industry has moved from a construction phase to a production and export phase. We should celebrate that. However, those workers who were involved in the construction phase are now moving into the other 90 per cent of the economy and looking for work. What we are doing is rolling out long-term infrastructure to give them that work. We are rolling out long-term infrastructure to lift the productive capacity of the other 90 per cent of the Australian economy. If we do not move now to build this infrastructure then there will be a fall in growth in two to three years in the Australian economy with the net result that unemployment will go higher. That is unacceptable to the coalition. There is a price that we have to pay. If Australians pay an extra 40c a week to fill their car as a result of an increase in excise, that gives us a revenue stream to move now on the infrastructure that is going to deliver us sustainable jobs into the future. That is how it works. You cannot promise things on the never-never—you need to move now. Our infrastructure program is not just about today's jobs. Our infrastructure program is about tomorrow's jobs and beyond.

Jenny Macklin (Jagajaga, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Families and Payments) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister promised before the election 'We will help families with the real cost of raising children.' Last night, the Prime Minister slashed family payments by $3,000 a year for many families. Why should Australian families pay for the Prime Minister's deceit?

Tony Abbott (Warringah, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I do not deny for a second that many Australian families are doing it tough. The point I keep making is that in confronting the debt and deficit disaster that Australia faces we are all in it together. I imagine that the shadow minister who asked the question is sincere about wanting to ease the squeeze on Australian families. But, if she is as sincere as I think in her heart she is, why doesn't she say to her leader, 'Let's start making it easier for families by scrapping the carbon tax'? If she is seriously concerned about governments keeping commitments and making it easier for families, why doesn't she allow this government to keep its commitment and to make it easier for families by scrapping the carbon tax right away. Do it now.