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

My question is to the Minister for Social Services. I refer to the minister's previous answer about the need for spending restraint. Why is the government bringing back a $1,000 baby bonus, costing the budget $380 million?

Christian Porter (Pearce, Liberal Party, Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

For the benefit of members opposite, the fundamental basic mechanics of what is now on the table as a proposal and the counterproposal, if you like, that members put are very simple. There is a desperate need for reform to the childcare system. Everybody recognises that. There are 165,000 Australian families crying out for change to the childcare system. We have proposed to put $3.5 billion into childcare, which would do three things: remove complexity, changing three very complicated subsidies into one; alleviate inflationary pressure; and provide better subsidies of $30 a week and $1,500 a week.

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Members on my left, I am trying to listen to the answer.

Christian Porter (Pearce, Liberal Party, Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The relevance of that is that $3.5 billion worth of expenditure would be paid for by savings that we have proposed in relation to family tax benefits. Those savings are structured as follows.

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

Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order on relevance. Spending $380 million is not a saving.

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for McMahon will resume his seat. The minister has the call.

Christian Porter (Pearce, Liberal Party, Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The proposals that we have before the House are to save $3.9 billion through the phasing out of FTB supplements. We also propose restructuring FTB-B rates and, indeed, inside that there are some spends, and one of the spends is on stay-at-home mums, which we think is a very sensible idea. Another one of the spends is to increase the rate of FTB-A for every single recipient family. In total, when the saves are accounted for and the spends are accounted for, the overall saving is $4.7 billion. That allows for payment in full of $3.5 billion worth of expenditure on child care as well as making a reasonable contribution to repair of the budget—which is a problem that you left us as a legacy.

Your alternative proposal is to turn $4.7 billion worth of savings into $500 million worth of savings. So how do you turn $4.7 billion worth of savings into $500 million worth of savings? You take it into the Labor caucus. That is their contribution to the debate. When you want to spend $3.5 billion on sweeping reforms to child care, $500 million worth of savings does not allow you to do what you need to do to reform the childcare system. Very interestingly, Shadow Treasurer, you have said some things in this regard. In fact, you said something very, very sensible.

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The minister will refer to members by their correct titles.

Christian Porter (Pearce, Liberal Party, Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, what was said was:

We will set out before the election how we are going to fund our election promises and how we will ensure there are more savings than spending over the decade ahead.

And there'll be more to come in the coming weeks.

Well, we wait with bated breath. I sat down and thought, 'Can I think— (Time expired)