Steve Georganas (Hindmarsh, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I represent a fantastic electorate—the electorate of Hindmarsh. In my opinion, it is one of the best places in the country to live. It's a great community and I am proud to call it home and have always called it home. Like most people in this place, I take my job representing the good people of my electorate very seriously, and I get fairly frustrated when the issues which my constituents raise with me are not taken seriously by this government or by any government.

The government talks a great deal about jobs. We hear the government talking about jobs growth, but I don't see much follow-through. We saw this after the budget, when South Australia missed out on substantial infrastructure projects that were ready to go. The government announced $70 billion for roads, rail, ports and airports across the country, but not a single dollar for South Australia. This has meant that many constituents have taken matters into their own hands to lobby and push for problem areas that require infrastructure to be addressed. For example, the good residents along and around West Beach Road, West Beach, within my electorate, are frustrated by repeatedly missing out on funding for much-needed road upgrades in the area. I have met with the local residents, and I have joined with local residents and councils in the area. I am calling for the problems along West Beach Road to be addressed once and for all.

West Beach Road is shared by the councils of the City of Charles Sturt and the City of West Torrens. Both councils share the responsibility for this road. Together, they have made applications to the federal government for funding, especially Roads to Recovery, for this upgrade to take place. Applications for funding have been repeatedly knocked back and ignored since 2015. This year they have again tried to get this upgrade funded. Once again, I would like to express my support for the residents in this area and for this project. If this project were to be successful and we could get the money to upgrade West Beach Road, it would increase safety for residents along West Beach Road and for visitors using this thoroughfare. We could review parking arrangements on both sides of West Beach Road and improve walking and cycling routes for West Beach Road. With each passing year, this upgrade becomes more needed.

West Beach Road now links some of the area's most important infrastructure facilities in the western suburbs—in fact, in Adelaide. It links the airport. It links Harbour Town, which is a retail and business precinct. It links tourism and sporting facilities at Adelaide Shores and, of course, the West Beach boat harbour, which is one of the only boat harbours in the area. People who go fishing use West Beach Road to go west and then turn left into the beach harbour. And of course it is the main road to one of Adelaide's premiere beaches, West Beach. But it was originally constructed for very low volumes of traffic and to serve local residents. Today it serves local residents but also many, many more people who converge on the weekend for the sporting facilities, the airport, Harbour Town, the retail area, the beach, the boat harbour and all the other activity that takes place down there. Therefore, the road now does not serve its purpose. It was there just for the local residents; now it has taken up lots and lots of volume in motor vehicles, and it becomes a quagmire sometimes on the weekend, when it is bumper to bumper for two days straight—Saturday and Sunday.

Many local residents have contacted me. They've shown me photographs and they've given me their stories, reporting the dangerous experiences that they've had along this particular road. I've had regular meetings with the local residents' representatives, council staff, councillors and the sporting bodies from Adelaide Shores to explore ways that we can improve conditions, and there is only one way of doing it—that is, some funding to upgrade the road to make it safer both for the residents who use it every single day and for the people who use it for the facilities that are down there.

Going back a few months, we decided to conduct a survey along West Beach Road of residents that use it, just to assess the level of frustration. I've got to say that, without fail, the people who responded to the survey that I put out for the local residents told me stories of: very dangerous incidents caused by limited visibility, speeding and poor road conditions; lots of cars parking illegally when there are sporting events, making it very hard for residents to come in and out of their driveways; near misses and, in fact, actual accidents. Specifically, residents reported a high number of accidents, car damage and near accidents.

West Beach Road is very narrow road. As I said, it was established a long time ago to service the needs of local traffic only. The way the road is constructed makes it very difficult for traffic when it converges. In fact, many people think it's a dual carriageway and have used the opposite side of the road. We have had so many near misses. I have heard about residents who have just managed to avoid serious accidents where vehicles were using the wrong side of the road. It's so narrow that you get the impression it is a dual carriageway. People driving on the wrong side of the road have caused so many near accidents.

I have supported this funding and upgrade of the road by submitting a supporting letter to accompany the council's funding applications this year. I am hoping that it will be successful through Roads to Recovery. In my letter, I used the findings from the survey that we put out in the electorate to add weight to the need to improve this road. I'd also like to thank: Leon Williams, who is one of the residents who have been actively campaigning on this now for a number of years, and rightly so; the other residents that have been assisting and helping him; and the residents that ring us and give us all the details of everything that's taking place down there.

So I take this opportunity to once again express my support for the West Beach Road upgrade. Once again, I urge the federal minister for transport to support the West Beach Road upgrade through the applications and supporting letters that I and councils and others have put in for funding under the Roads to Recovery program. I know that an announcement about this round will be made soon, and I am urging the minister to please, please, listen to the voices of those residents and fund this particular project—not only for the residents that have been contacting me but also for the many families with children there. It's a young area. There are lots of children, as well as cyclists, the elderly and all the visitors who use the road, who require a safe road to reach the facilities that they are attending.

Such infrastructure projects are vital for communities. But they are also vital for economic growth because, with the upgrade of the road, there will be jobs created as well. So I plead with the federal government and the transport minister: please, do you really care about jobs and infrastructure? Well, here's a way that you could prove that. It will show in the decision that they make in this next round of Roads to Recovery.

As I said, this road was built many years ago to service local people. In the meantime, we have had Adelaide Shores, which is a wonderful sporting facility, grow as well. There are facilities for soccer, baseball and a whole range of sports that are played there. It draws in big crowds on the weekend. It draws in carnivals for kids and sporting carnivals. These things were not as popular many years ago, because the facilities were not there; they weren't upgraded. Obviously we had a road that serviced the local residents. We now have a road that must service the local residents and the people that visit, and we need it to be safe. We need people to feel safe there.

We must ensure that the government does as much as it can in infrastructure. It affects the infrastructure and the services that people have, but it also creates jobs. Instead of investing in infrastructure projects, the government appears much more interested in cutting welfare benefits, especially to pensioners. I represent a very aged electorate, one of the oldest in the country. Pensioners have been hit hard recently with one cut after another introduced by this government. The government wants to raise the pension age to 70, for example. It's all right if you have a job in a bank or an office, but if you are a bricklayer, an assembly line worker, a cleaner, a nurse or a tradie—people who are on their feet all day—your body starts to break down. So working till 70 is not for those people that perhaps are doing very heavy work. That's fine if people want to work. That's good. But to make it compulsory, as this government is doing, is wrong. That would give Australians, here in our nation— (Time expired)

Craig Kelly (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

About a fortnight ago I made a comment in the media which was treated by some people with a bit of disdain or scoffed at. I would like to go through that. First of all, I proposed that the cost of subsidising renewables in this country was the substantial reason why electricity costs in this nation have been pushed so high, and that was making it harder for Australians to adequately heat their homes in winter, which was resulting in an increased rate of winter mortality in this nation—put simply, more people die in winter because they cannot afford to heat their homes, because of the high cost of renewables.

As I said, some have scoffed, but I'd like tonight to go through the evidence, the facts and the scientific literature that support my claim. Firstly, there is the cost of subsidising renewables. A recent report from BAEconomics estimates the total cost of subsidising renewables in this country at over $3 billion. This is for 2015-16. They estimate the cost for the renewable energy target is $2,073,000,000, made of the LRET, which is mainly subsidising wind turbines, and the Small-scale RES, which is $648 million worth of subsidies to solar. An important thing to remember is that those subsidies get loaded directly on to consumers' electricity bills. They are not a subsidy paid from government taxation revenue; they go bang onto your electricity bill. The jurisdictional feed-in tariff schemes that the states have—through Queensland, New South Wales, South Australia, ACT, Victoria and Western Australia—are an initial $772 million in subsidies. Again, that goes bang straight onto someone's electricity bill. When it comes to the subsidies to solar, that's only in one single year. There was a recent report, about 12 months ago, by the Grattan Institute—hardly friends of the coalition. They said in their report Sundown, sunrise, talking about the cost of solar energy:

By the time the subsidies finally run out—

They are referring to the subsidies to solar—

households and businesses that have not installed solar PV will have spent more than $14 billion subsidising households that have.

They concluded:

But lavish government subsidies plus the structure of electricity network tariffs means that the cost of solar PV take-up has outweighed the benefits by almost $10 billion.

So, it's irrefutable that the subsidisation of the cost of renewables in this country is pushing electricity prices high. And it's a substantial cost; at least $3 billion is direct subsidies. In addition, we also have the indirect and hidden subsidies, the additional costs often, of hooking wind turbines and wind farms up to the grid—many other subsidies—plus the distortion it does to the market, which pushes wholesale prices up. But I will set those aside and will just talk about the $3 billion in direct subsidies that get added on to our electricity bills.

Is that making it harder for Australians to adequately heat their homes in winter? The Australian Energy Regulator keeps statistics on the number of Australian households that have had their electricity disconnected. You go to your house, and you have no power; your power has been disconnected because you have fallen so far behind with your electricity bills that the power's been disconnected. They also keep records on the number of households that are on payment hardship plans, who simply haven't been able to afford to pay their electricity bill and have had to enter into a payment plan with their retailer to pay it off. Those statistics show a doubling over recent years in the number of Australian households that have had their electricity disconnected or are on payment plans. And all of us will have anecdotal evidence in their electorates of constituents who have come to us, some in tears. I have had old pensioners ring me in tears, telling me they cannot afford to pay their electricity bill and cannot afford to turn the heater on at night.

What does that do? What effects does that have, if you are forced to live in a cold home in Australia and you cannot afford to turn your heater on at night? There was a recent study in England, released under the name of the Marmot Review Team, titled The health impacts of cold homes and fuel poverty. The report details some of the adverse health effects if you are forced to live in a cold home. It says that around 40 per cent of excess winter deaths are attributable to cardiovascular diseases and that around 33 per cent of excess winter deaths are attributable to respiratory diseases. It says there is a strong relationship between cold temperatures and cardiovascular and respiratory disease and that children living in cold homes are more than twice as likely to suffer from a variety of respiratory problems as children living in warm homes. It says that mental health is negatively affected by fuel poverty and cold housing in any age group. Living in cold houses increases the level of illnesses such as colds and flus and exacerbates existing conditions such as arthritis and rheumatism. It negatively affects children's educational attainment, emotional wellbeing and resilience and negatively affects dexterity, and it increases the risk of accidents and injuries.

In this nation, although a lot of the media here makes us think that the heat is the main concern, the greater killer of Australians, it is actually the cold. If we look at the figures from the Australian Bureau of Statistics that show the average daily deaths per month, on average an Australian is 20 per cent more likely to die in the month of July or August than during summer time—a 20 per cent higher rate of deaths on an average day in July or August than in summer time. We are looking here at about 380 deaths per day in summer, but in winter around 450. That is about 20 per cent extra.

There are many reasons that people are more likely to die during a cold winter. But the World Health Organisation attributes 30 per cent of those deaths to inadequately heated homes. And I quote from a World Health Organisation document called Environmental burden of disease associated with inadequate housing, from the WHO Regional Office for Europe. It concludes that the annual burden of disease due to cold homes can be conservatively estimated at 30 per cent of excess winter deaths.

We can take that figure and look at how it applies in Australia. We have seen evidence from studies in other medical reports that shows that the number of excess winter deaths in Australia is actually higher than in Nordic countries like Sweden. The professors that have written reports following those studies have said Australian homes are inadequately heated compared to Swedish homes. We simply do not heat our homes adequately. If we are looking at about 7,000 excess winter deaths a year and we attribute 30 per cent of those to inadequately heated homes, that means that over 2,000 Australians die every year because they cannot adequately heat their home. Yet we have policies in this nation that make it harder and harder for Australians to pay their electricity bill. We subsidise renewable energy by $3 billion annually, and that goes straight onto consumers' bills. Yet we are going to push that target higher and higher. The Labor Party even want to copy South Australia and push the target to 50 per cent. And we have seen what that does. As we saw in the Financial Review last Friday, it is gold, gold, gold to South Australia: they have the highest electricity prices in the entire world. They have even beaten Denmark and Germany, the wind turbine capitals of the world. Is it any surprise that South Australia has more deaths from hypothermia than Sweden does?

I call on good members of the Labor Party. I am sure, in your heart of hearts, you cannot see this pain inflicted on your fellow Australians. Please, join with me, and let's suspend the renewable energy target. (Time expired)

Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Inequality is not about having less money than your neighbour. It is not about having a basic home when your neighbour has a mansion. It is not even about whether your neighbour has a jetski in their garage and you don't. To me, inequality is about fairness. It's about having and maintaining hope. And it's about the ability to create a better future for you and your family. Labor understands the concept of inequality, because fighting inequality is the reason for the existence of the proud Australian Labor Party.

More than 100 years ago under a ghost gum, a Eucalyptus papuana, in Barcaldine, near the geographical centre of Queensland, striking shearers met to discuss the best ways to improve their poor working conditions and low wages. This occurred at a time when the wool industry was king. Under the grey leaves of that ghost gum, the shearers formed a compact to have their own representatives speaking for their interests in government. So the mighty Labor Party was born. It was born out of unequal treatment of the shearers, but the Labor Party has been fighting inequality wherever it occurs ever since that historic meeting.

We have achieved great things. For Indigenous Australians, the introduction of the Racial Discrimination Act ensured Indigenous Australians could no longer be discriminated against in employment, in working conditions, in remuneration and in housing. The Whitlam government's amendments to the Migration Act ensured that Indigenous Australians no longer had to ask permission before they could leave Australia. The first Commonwealth legislation to grant land rights to Indigenous people was also a Labor initiative. And the first welcome to country in Parliament House and that historic apology to Australia's Indigenous peoples in 2008 occurred on my first day at work here under Prime Minister Kevin Rudd. For women, Labor's Conciliation and Arbitration Act extended the adult minimum wage to include women workers. We brought in national paid parental leave. We brought in affordable, flexible high-quality child care under Prime Minister Gillard. It was Labor who brought all Australians Medicare and accessible university and needs based education funding. All of these great Labor initiatives have, little by little, chipped away at inequality. But the good fight is never over, to paraphrase the member for Lilley—and, incidentally, one of the world's greatest-ever treasurers. In fact, the good fight has barely begun.

Inequality in our nation is getting worse. This is a fact. Real wages for the top 10 per cent of income earners have grown by 72 per cent over the last four decades—more than three times the rate of the increase in real wages for the bottom 10 per cent of income earners. The latest GDP figures show that 51.5 per cent of income went to employees, and that is the lowest percentage since September 1964. Over the past four years labour productivity has risen nearly six per cent—commendable; yet, real wages have fallen 0.6 per cent over the same time. The wealth gap continues to widen. In 2014, households in the top 20 per cent, the top quintile, owned 62 per cent of wealth, while the bottom 20 per cent owned less than one per cent. And home ownership rates are at a six-decade low, especially amongst younger people. Despite the Treasurer incorrectly asserting inequality had actually gotten better, it is undeniable that inequality has increased. Even the RBA governor, Dr Lowe, said just weeks ago that inequality 'grew quite a lot in the 1980s and the 1990s, and it has risen a little bit just recently'. It has 'become more pronounced in the past few years because of the rise in assets prices—people that own those assets have seen their wealth go up'.

Governments make choices. Their policies either fight inequality or entrench inequality. This Turnbull government is definitely entrenching inequality. You could see the member for Wentworth's attitude to inequality when he was fresh into parliament and voting for John Howard's disastrous Work Choices legislation. I quote the member for Wentworth:

You have to let the free market do its work and let the cost of setting the clearing price—be it for labour, shares, home units or loaves of bread—be as low as possible.

The next month, the coalition begins its fifth year in power; its fifth year in office. Let's consider their visionary proposals: firstly, slowing the rate of pension increases; secondly, cutting the income support bonus; and, thirdly, removing consumer protections from financial advice. I could go on and on. There are so many things that this government has done that entrenches inequality. They have even reduced the pay for people who clean their own parliamentary offices and given a tax cut to millionaires. At the same time, they have launched a relentless attack on working people, where wage growth has stalled, where penalty rates have been slashed and where tax increases have been imposed on the bottom 80 per cent of the workforce. They have attacked unions and workplace rights by launching an expensive, politically motivated royal commission. They established the ABCC and the Registered Organisations Commission. These measures are shifting the balance of power in workplace relations, allowing unscrupulous employers to engage in practices that avoid Fair Work Act obligations, such as sham contracts, dodgy labour hire companies and enterprise bargaining agreements that are terminated as a blunt, brutal negotiating weapon. These tactics are entrenching inequality in this sunburnt land.

Labor understands that inequality is an impediment to economic progress. Providing better opportunity for people to access education not only creates more opportunity for the individual but creates a better workforce for the country. Providing more affordable housing so that Australians can live close to where they work and providing better public transport for Australians to travel safety and efficiently to their work create a more productive workforce. Providing better connectedness with fast and secure internet across the capital cities and the regions would mean that part of the workforce would not need to leave their homes at all and it would also create many economic opportunities. Providing more secure employment for Australian workers would give them greater bargaining power in their workplaces.

Labor will tackle the issues that are entrenching inequality in Australia. In the important area of workplace relations, Labor will fight inequality. Bill Shorten has already committed to making sure that casual work is really that and that it will not be used to avoid giving employees the entitlements they should obtain when continuously working. Labor will increase penalties for employers who do not pay their employees properly, including companies whose business practices are built on the rampant underpayment of workers. Labor will give employees a fair go by making it harder for employers to push their workers into sham contracts that do not provide them with entitlements like sick leave and holiday pay. Labor will increase the penalties associated with phoenix activity, which some unscrupulous companies use in order to avoid paying their workers. Labor will create a level playing field for all workers in Australia, including temporary overseas workers, who are often exploited. Labor will restore penalty rates and awards and legislate so that they can never be cut again.

Labor will also tackle inequality in our taxation system. Rather than having a two-tiered system where some wealthier Australians can just opt-out of paying any tax, Labor will close the loopholes so that we all have one set of rules. The current negative gearing rules are unsustainable, and Labor will act prospectively to close this overexploited loophole. We'll limit the allowable deductions for accountant's advice and lawyer's advice to $3,000 for tax purposes. We'll introduce a standard minimum 30 per cent tax rate for discretionary trust distributions to people over 18 years of age. Labor believe that Australians should share one tax system that is fair for all. That's how we pay for the schools, the hospitals, the social services and the social fabric.

Inequality affects many aspects of our lives. It is not just about the economy, although that is an important aspect of inequality. It also has a big social aspect. With one woman murdered every week by a current or former partner, gender inequality is a serious problem in Australia. Labor announced policies before the last election to tackle gender inequality, including supporting survivors of domestic violence through the courts, funding critical frontline legal services, transitional housing options for women and children escaping family and domestic violence and making domestic and family violence leave a universal workplace right. Labor will continue to develop policies to address gender inequality wherever it occurs, whether it's in the workplace, in education—and I note the horrific recent report into sexual abuse in universities which reported that women experience assaults at a disproportionately higher rate than men—or in financial opportunities like accumulating superannuation.

No discussion about inequality would be complete without mentioning marriage equality. Because of the Prime Minister's weakness, a whole sector of our community will have to endure a public debate about whether they should have the same right to marry the person they love as I have. I can think of no good reason to prevent people who love each other from getting married. We in Labor stand together. Whether you're a police officer in Moorooka, a teacher in Macgregor, a truck driver in Acacia Ridge or a childcare worker in Yeronga, you're a success, and Labor will stand with you. I will call out inequality whenever I see it, and Labor will fight inequality in this parliament. (Time expired)