Peter Dutton (Dickson, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. Prime Minister, we all support planned migration, but your budget announcement to bring in 1.5 million people over this five-year period—more than the entire population of Adelaide—has no plan. Every city is already congested. Infrastructure is cut in this budget, and there is no plan for where these people will live during a housing and rental crisis. Economists have also pointed out that this unplanned migration is inflationary—

Hon. Members:

Honourable members interjecting—

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat. I cannot hear what the Leader of the Opposition is saying.

The Minister for Home Affairs, if she continues to interject, will be warned. I want to hear this question in silence, the first question of the day. The Leader of the Opposition deserves to be shown some respect. So all members—

The member for Lyons will cease interjecting as well. There will be complete silence so I can hear the question, or people will be removed from the chamber immediately.

Peter Dutton (Dickson, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Prime Minister, we all support planned migration, but your budget announcement was to bring in 1.5 million people over this five-year period—that's more than the entire population of Adelaide—and you have no plan. Every city is already congested. Infrastructure is cut in this budget. There's no plan for where these people will live during a housing and rental crisis. Economists point out that this is, as an unplanned migration program, inflationary. It's going to keep interest rates higher, for longer. And why didn't the Treasurer make any mention of this in his speech last night?

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Minister for Home Affairs, if she interjects one more time, will be warned.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The hypocrisy knows no bounds. This is what the Leader of the Opposition said about migration on 2 September 2022:

It's too little, too late. This is a decision that should have been made 100 days ago when the government was elected, but of course they didn't do that.

That's what he said in September. Just in case you think that was a slip of the tongue and wasn't thought through, this is what he said a month later in a speech to the Tourism and Transport Forum leadership summit on 21 October 2022:

… we need migration.

The government's announcement to increase the permanent migration intake has been delayed because of union pressure.

That's what he had to say. What he actually knows—

Hon. Members:

Honourable members interjecting—

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! There is far too much noise. The Prime Minister will pause, and the Leader of the Opposition will be heard in silence for his point of order.

Peter Dutton (Dickson, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, it's on relevance. The figure of $1.5 million was in the budget papers last night. Could you explain the $1.5 million figure?

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Prime Minster will continue, and I will be listening to his answer carefully to make sure he is relevant to the question.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I was asked a question about migration, and I'm spot on. He mightn't want to hear what he was saying about migration. He mightn't want to hear the facts, either.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Fairfax will cease interjecting.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

When they were in government—at least he's not one of the ones hunting you. Worry a bit closer.

Honourable members interjecting—

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The Prime Minister will continue.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The fact is that migration would have been higher under their figures. The Minister for Home Affairs gave a terrific speech at the National Press Club where she outlined all of this. As part of that, the draft new strategy that was released on 27 April fed into the budget that was released last night. This is what they had to say. It was chaired by Dr Martin Parkinson, the former head of Prime Minister and Cabinet under those opposite. It said:

… Australia's migration program is not fit for purpose …

Australia now has a migration program that fails to attract the most highly skilled migrants and fails to enable business to efficiently access workers … there is clear evidence of systemic exploitation and the risk of an emerging permanently temporary underclass.

That's what they had to say.

The Leader of the Nats, in case you think they missed out, said this:

We'll be constructive with this government in saying that we welcome the changes that they're bringing forward, we believe permanent migration is important.

Good on you, Dave.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The Prime Minister will refer to members by their correct titles.

Peta Murphy (Dunkley, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. What does the Albanese Labor government's budget do to address immediate challenges and to set Australia up for the future?

Jim Chalmers (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thanks to the member for Dunkley for her input into the budget that we were proud to hand down last night here in the House of Representatives. The budget we handed down last night was handed down in the service of our immediate priorities and also our generational responsibilities. It was a responsible budget which was all about helping people now get through a tough period at the same time as we invest in opportunities for the future. It had five parts. The budget that we handed down last night had five important parts.

The first one was to provide responsible cost-of-living relief, targeted towards the most vulnerable, in a way that didn't add to inflationary pressures in the economy. It was carefully designed so that it would take some of the sting out of these cost-of-living pressures without making inflation worse in our economy.

The second part of the budget that we handed down last night was historic game-changing investments to strengthen Medicare, including the tripling of the bulk-billing incentive. All of us are aware of how hard it is to find a bulk-billing doctor in our own communities. The steps we took last night as a government invest substantially in addressing that problem.

The third part of the budget was our plans to invest in growth and to lay the foundations for the future economy, with a particular focus on the vast and immense industrial and economic opportunities of the clean energy transformation, as well as how that opportunity interacts with what we need to do when it comes to technology and industry and small business.

The fourth part of the budget was all about extending and broadening opportunity to more people in more parts of our country, particularly when it comes to disadvantaged communities and also to the economic participation of women. I shout out my colleague the Minister for Finance for her work on that.

And then the fifth part of the budget was about responsible economic management. For the first time in 15 years we're forecasting a surplus for 2022-23, a demonstration of the fiscal responsibility that we imposed on the budget, which is entirely foreign to those opposite who used to spend the proceeds of upward revisions to revenue. We've let them flow through to the bottom line so that we can save hundreds of billions of dollars of debt and save $83 billion in interest payments on that debt that we inherited from those opposite—a trillion dollars of Liberal Party debt.

The point that we are making is: as we invested the cost-of-living pressures, as we strengthen Medicare, as we strengthen our economy, as we invest in making our economy more equal, the most important thing that we can build all of that on is the foundations of a more responsible budget—not as an end in itself, but by getting the budget in a much better condition than what we inherited from those opposite, we can afford to look after people and invest in their future.

Angus Taylor (Hume, Liberal Party, Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. Economist Chris Richardson said of the budget:

I had thought the Reserve Bank was done and dusted, but this has notably raised the chance that they will do another swing of the baseball bat.

Why has the Treasurer brought down a budget which makes inflation worse?

Jim Chalmers (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I can understand why the shadow Treasurer is so confused—because the fiscal discipline that we showed last night is completely unfamiliar, completely foreign to those opposite. Those opposite, when they were in office, left behind this bin fire of rorts and waste and economic mismanagement, which was the hallmark of their almost decade in office. Those opposite promised a surplus in their first year and every year thereafter. They printed the back in black mugs. They did everything except actually deliver a surplus. Now, in their humiliation, they get up here and they ask these questions about the inflationary impact of the budget.

I'll explain it one more time for the shadow Treasurer, who has trouble getting his head around some pretty basic concepts in our economy. What we've done, particularly with the cost-of-living package, but more broadly with the budget we handed down last night, was to make sure that it was carefully calibrated and carefully designed to take the edge off cost-of-living pressures, rather than add to inflation in our economy. And that's what guided the decisions in the cost-of-living package, guided our decisions in the growth package and guided our decisions when it came to the fiscal responsibility that we showed in the budget.

If those opposite want to quote economists, Bill Evans from Westpac, a very respected economist, said, 'I don't expect them to put upward pressure on interest rates.' Alan Oster said he thinks the budget is 'broadly neutral' over the coming years. The economists at Citibank: 'broadly neutral' as well. Stephen Halmarick from the Commonwealth Bank said, 'The move to surplus in 2022-23 represents a fiscal contraction that is helpful in moderating the inflation pulse'.

When it comes to the spending in the year after, a big chunk of the spending that we had to do in 2023-24 was because those opposite announced ongoing programs but only funded them in a temporary way, so we had to clean up the mess. We had to clean up the mess. Those opposite left a steaming pile of fiscal irresponsibility, and we had to clean it up. We take responsibility for doing that.

We made progress in a budget last night which will take the pressure off inflation, rather than add to it. That is the considered view of the Treasury. That is the considered view of a number of economists, including those that I just quoted. Those opposite are going to have to do much better than that.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Page will cease interjecting. He's been interjecting constantly during question time. If he continues to do it, he'll be warned.

Sam Rae (Hawke, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is also to the Treasurer. How does the Albanese Labor government's second budget address cost-of-living pressures facing Australian households?

Jim Chalmers (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thanks very much to the member for Hawke for his question. We're very proud on this side of the House that a central part of the budget that we handed down last night had cost-of-living relief at its very, very core. We understand, on this side of the House, that people are under the pump right now, particularly when it comes to rent, particularly when it comes to out-of-pocket health costs and particularly when it comes to electricity. So our cost-of-living package, as I said a moment ago, was carefully calibrated to take some of the edge off these cost-of-living pressures without adding to the inflation challenge in our economy.

Our cost-of-living package—$14.6 billion over the rest of the budget's forward estimates—has a number of parts. There is energy bill relief, with $1½ billion, matched by the states and territories, to take some of the edge off the winter bills that people will be receiving. There is the household energy upgrades fund to make people's homes more energy efficient so that they can get not just their emissions down but also their bills down, compared to what they would otherwise be. Obviously, tripling bulk-billing and making it easier to find a bulk-billing doctor is a substantial opportunity for us to address the out-of-pocket costs that people are facing in the health system. The changes to maximum dispensing quantities for lots of people will halve the cost of their prescription medicine, something that we are very, very proud to do.

There are changes to parenting payment single. I pay tribute to the Prime Minister and the Minister for Social Services for being able to fix the issues in parenting payment single. There is also an increase to the base rate of JobSeeker, and I acknowledge a number of members of this House, from over there and from over here. A lot of us wanted to see an increase in the base rate of JobSeeker, and we were able to do it as well as for the other working age payments and for students as well. At a time when we've got incredibly low vacancies and higher rents than we would like, we are proud to have handed down and announced last night the biggest increase in Commonwealth rent assistance in something like 30 years.

All of these components of the cost-of-living package that we announced last night are carefully calibrated and carefully targeted. Making sure they go to people who are doing it the toughest is an important part of getting people through a difficult period at the same time as we invest substantially in the future. In so many of these areas, what we're actually doing is taking the pressure off inflation. If you take the energy payments, paired with the gas and coal caps that we passed through this parliament in December of last year—without the support of those opposite—that's making something like three-quarters of a percentage point difference to the inflation forecast.

The cost-of-living package is substantial. It won't add to inflationary pressures in the economy, but it will make life a little bit easier for more people.

Adam Bandt (Melbourne, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. Your budget raises more from Labor's increase in student debt than from the weak tax changes for the big gas corporations. You're leaving jobseekers in poverty while giving billionaires a $9,000-a-year tax cut, and 5½ million renters get absolutely nothing. Why is Labor leaving millions of people behind and spending a quarter of a trillion dollars on stage 3 tax cuts while betraying renters, students, jobseekers and people doing it tough?

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Melbourne for his question. It would have been a very different budget if it had been cast and put together by those opposite, in terms of the Greens political party. There is no question about that, because what we understood, as a responsible government, was that we needed to take pressure off families whilst not putting pressure on inflation. That is the task that we set ourselves. To do it within the context of not leaving people behind, we found space in the budget to provide for a $40-a-fortnight increase in JobSeeker; to provide the largest ever increase in rental assistance that has been done since rental assistance was introduced—of course by a Labor government, like all those reforms; and to change the single parenting payment so that it will apply not when the youngest child turns eight but when the youngest child turns 14.

We did all of that whilst making sure that we also built a stronger economy, that we built a foundation for a better future. So the commitments that we took to the election were commitments such as the National Reconstruction Fund to help build manufacturing in this country, on climate, not just consolidating the measures that we had introduced and called for before the election and legislated and put in our October budget but last night's announcement of $2 billion for hydrogen to create a green hydrogen industry in this country—one that can see Australia producing green aluminium, green steel, creating jobs in places like Wollongong and Whyalla and Central Queensland, making sure that we can produce batteries here. We have everything that goes into a solar panel, everything that goes into a battery for an electric vehicle, but what we don't have is manufacturing on any scale here.

If we have cheaper, cleaner energy driving advanced manufacturing, lowering emissions at the same time as creating jobs, making sure that we skill up Australians for those jobs—which is why we created the 300,000 now fee-free TAFE places—that's our vision for the country, responsibly moving it forward whilst understanding that inflation has a much higher impact the poorer you are, which is why we have to be responsible.

We make no apologies for targeting inflation as a major economic priority that we had to deal with in the budget. That's before we go to the considerable support that we have for Medicare and health in the budget as well. (Time expired)