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

My question is to the Prime Minister. Can the Prime Minister explain why he and the Treasurer think it is fair to cut support from pensioners on around $20,000 a year while at the same time giving $50,000 a year to wealthy Australians who have a baby.

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

You're wrong. You are factually wrong.

Mr Bowen interjecting—

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

There will be silence. The Prime Minister has the call. The member for McMahon has asked his question and will desist.

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

Let me make two observations in response to the shadow Treasurer's question. First of all he is simply wrong when he talks about pensioners. Pensions go up every six months. They go up every six months; they went up in March by about $14 for a single pensioner. They will go up by roughly the same amount later in the year. Every six months pensions will increase.

Yes, in 2017 the rate of indexation will be by CPI rather than by CPI or male total average weekly earnings. But what is wrong with indexing by the very index that members opposite, when they were in government, applied to family tax benefit? If it is wrong to index pensions by CPI, why did members opposite index the family tax benefit by CPI? How can it be wrong to index pensions by CPI, and right to index family tax benefit by CPI?—because that is exactly what members opposite did.

We will fairly index pensions, and pensions will go up every six months. Members opposite should stop scaring the pensioners of Australia. They really should stop scaring the pensioners of Australia. As for paid parental leave, I am very proud to believe that, for the first time, the women of Australia should have access to a fair dinkum paid parental leave scheme. I am very proud that we are responsible for what will be a watershed economic and social policy advance, because, unlike members opposite, we think that paid parental leave is a workplace entitlement. It is a workplace entitlement, not a welfare entitlement. We took it to the 2010 election, we took it to the 2013 election, and we will deliver it.