Australians will remember that in 2007 the Labor Party promised to deliver responsible budgets, yet in government they trashed the national finances through wasteful and reckless spending. Labor also promised to maintain strong border protection, yet in government they presided over one of the greatest policy failures in a generation when they weakened those border protection laws. During the last two weeks, it has become evident that Labor has learned nothing from its past failings and is doomed to repeat those failings should it be re-elected. It is thus my view that the Liberal-National coalition will win the next election—
Government members: Hear, hear!
and that the government will be returned to office because it is focusing on the matters that matter to the Australian people. On that basis, I have reconsidered my position as the member for Curtin. I've been contacted by a number of talented—indeed, extraordinary—people, including women, who have indicated to me that, should I not recontest the seat of Curtin, they would seek pre-selection for that seat from the Curtin division of the Liberal Party. Accordingly, I will not recontest the seat of Curtin at the next election and I will work hard in the meantime to assist a new Liberal candidate to win the seat. It is time for a new member to take my place.
I will leave the seat of Curtin in very good shape; indeed, a winning position for the Liberal Party. When I first contested the seat, in 1998, I won the election with a primary vote of 44.6 per cent. At the last election, my seventh election, my primary vote was 65.6 per cent within essentially the same electoral boundary. With a two-party preferred of 71 per cent and with an experienced campaign team and campaign funds already in place, I am confident that a Liberal candidate will have every opportunity to win the support of the people of Curtin.
It has been an immense honour to be the longest serving member for Curtin and also to have been the Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party—the first female to hold the role for 11 years—over half my entire political career. I'm also proud of the fact that I am the first woman to have contested the leadership ballot of the Liberal Party in its 75-year history. It has also been an immense honour to serve in cabinet, first as the Minister for Education, Science and Training and minister for women's issues and then as the Minister for Foreign Affairs—Australia's first female foreign minister. I'm so very proud that my successor, Senator Marise Payne, is the second female foreign minister of Australia.
My five years as foreign minister, being able to represent Australia on the world stage, were a particular privilege. We should be so proud of our reputation and the high regard in which we are held as a nation: as an open, liberal democracy committed to freedoms and the rule of law and democratic institutions; an open, highly competitive export-oriented market economy entering our 28th consecutive year of uninterrupted economic growth—that's a world record—with a lifestyle and a standard of living that is unparalleled.
I thank and acknowledge the prime ministers in whose cabinets I served: John Howard, Tony Abbott and Malcolm Turnbull. I thank the Liberal Party of Australia, my division of Curtin, the state division, my colleagues, past and present, in this place and the Liberal Party members across Australia and living overseas everywhere for the remarkable opportunity they have afforded me to be a member of the House of Representatives since 1998. I have been blessed to work with some outstanding political and ministerial staff who shared my passion for my political and policy endeavours, and I thank them—particularly, Murray Hanson, my closest adviser for 14 years.
I thank my big, beautiful supportive family—my siblings: MaryLou and Joe; Patricia and Ed; and Douglas and Nicole—and David Panton and his family. I say to my many close and trusted friends that I look forward to seeing a lot more of you.
As I said in this place in my first speech, in November 1998, I was brought up to believe that entering public office should be one of the highest callings, that being able to direct your energies and abilities to the betterment of your state or your country was one of the greatest contributions you could make and that I'd always had an intense conviction that an individual can make a difference to the life of their times. That remains my view.
I also set out a goal in that speech: to represent the people of Curtin with all the vigour, courage and ability that I had to offer, with honesty and with decency, and, above all, to put their interests above my own. I will leave this place positive about the future and proud of the service that I have been able to give to my electorate of Curtin, to my beloved Liberal Party, to the state of Western Australia and to my country.
]]>The Labor Party are risking jobs, because they said the Trans-Pacific Partnership was dead. That is providing jobs for Australians across this country. The Labor Party voted against the Turnbull government's multinational tax avoidance legislation, and the Australian Taxation Office have confirmed that that law alone has meant an additional $7 billion in tax revenue into our economy that we are investing in health and education areas. The Labor Party stands for higher unemployment, higher taxes and higher costs. We stand for lower taxes and more jobs.
]]>I am asked if there are any risks from a different course. Yes, the course forecast by Labor is a threat to jobs, to our budget and to our strong economic management. Today the Australian Labor Party voted against corporate tax cuts, which means that Australia will now have the second-highest corporate tax rates across 36 OECD economies.
Ms Plibersek interjecting—
]]>Mr Champion interjecting—
]]>We have turned the corner on Labor's debt. We will return the budget to surplus a year early in 2019-20. Do you know the last time a Labor government delivered a budget surplus? The last time Labor delivered a budget surplus the Berlin Wall was still standing, Ronald Reagan was still in the White House, Maggie Thatcher was still in Downing Street and Bob Hawke was in the Lodge. Twenty-five years ago was the last time that Labor delivered a surplus.
We've fixed the economic mess that we inherited. Remember that after Labor came into government, in the six years of Labor, they blew a $20 billion surplus and never delivered one. They blew billions and billions of dollars in savings. We went from zero net government debt to massive debt. In the six years of the coalition government, we've turned the corner on Labor's debt and we're getting back into surplus.
Did these things have an effect on our economy? Yes, they did. For a start, because of Labor's economic mismanagement, they cut defence spending to the lowest level since 1938. Not one new naval vessel was commissioned for our Navy. Not only did that put at risk thousands and thousands of jobs in the defence industry's supply chain; it put our national security at risk. Then we inherited the mess of the NBN off Labor. In their entire six years they only connected 50,000 households. We are connecting 50,000 every two weeks. Every two weeks we achieve more than Labor did in their entire six years.
What else did Labor do through their mismanagement of the economy? They stopped listing life-saving drugs on the PBS. They stopped listing drugs. Because we have now fixed the budget, because we have now paid off the Labor debt, we are now able to list life-saving drugs on the PBS. At last count, there were 1,800 new drugs listed on the PBS.
But, members, the greatest policy failure in a generation on Labor's part—and, believe me, there's a big list, so I don't say this lightly—was losing control of our borders and inspiring the people-smuggling trade. There were 800 boats, 50,000 people and thousands of children in detention centres across Australia and in our region and 1,200 deaths at sea that we know of under Labor. That's why, through our Operation Sovereign Borders, we restored integrity to our sovereignty and to our borders and we put the people smugglers out of business.
Under the policies of the Turnbull government, we now have the fastest-growing economy in all of the G7. We're growing faster than all the G7 countries. We're growing faster than New Zealand. We're growing faster than South Korea. We have created an environment that has seen 300,000 new jobs created in the last 12 months. That's 1,000 new jobs a day under this government. Unemployment is now 5.3 per cent. That's lower than, say, Canada. It's still too high, but that's why we're working night and day to ensure we can get that unemployment rate down. It's the lowest in six years, but it's going lower. Where does Labor get its inspiration from? It's Venezuela, with higher taxes, higher inflation and lower jobs growth. The coalition stands for the workers.
]]>I'm asked about alternative approaches. Well, the Labor Party's policies are anti-investment, anti-economic-growth and anti-jobs. The Labor Party believes in higher taxes and higher prices. They are so against business that it is having a deadening effect—the mere thought of a Labor-led government would have a deadening effect on investment.
So the coalition stands for jobs, for workers and for investment. Labor stands for higher prices, higher taxes, lower investment and fewer jobs. We are fighting for the Australian worker. (Time expired)
]]>And our plan is working. In the 12 months to last July, over 300,000 more Australians were in work, and we were creating over 1,000 new jobs a day. So it is working.
But we have to ensure that we remain an attractive destination for foreign direct investment, because data released last week by the Australian Bureau of Statistics shows that one in 10 Australian jobs is supported by foreign direct investment. Let me give you an example.
Today I met with the CEO of Japan's INPEX Corporation, Mr Ueda. They are developing one of the largest LNG projects in the world in Australia. It is the largest Japanese investment outside of Japan, ever. This will have enormous ramifications across the economy. Already they're employing, directly, 11,000 Australians. There are over 1,000 businesses engaged in just this one project. And already—
Mr Conroy interjecting—
]]>The independent Energy Security Board has warned that high electricity prices will impact on Australia's international competitiveness. That will harm our economic growth. That will harm our jobs growth. That is why the Turnbull government has intervened in the gas supplies to secure them. That is why the Turnbull government has taken on the electricity generators and the retailers. As a result, we are seeing prices coming down. That is why the big businesses in Australia who employ thousands and thousands of Australians back our National Energy Guarantee, because they know it's a mechanism to bring prices down. In fact, it's estimated that wholesale electricity prices will decrease by 20 per cent. Of course, in addition, we will see the forecasts of average household bills coming down by $550. That poses the question: why does Labor support policies that will harm our international competitiveness and destroy jobs? It is because Labor is captive to the Greens. That is why Labor has an ideological, irresponsible, 50 per cent renewable energy target and an irresponsible 45 per cent emissions reduction target. They will harm Australian industries. They will harm jobs. That is why we back a National Energy Guarantee, because the Turnbull government stands for affordable and reliable power. Labor stands for higher prices, higher costs, fewer jobs.
]]>Mr Champion interjecting—
]]>But none of this can be taken for granted. That's why the coalition government has an economic plan to keep Australia's economy strong and resilient. In recent meetings with foreign ministers, during the winter break, the issue of business competitiveness was a key theme—backing the private sector to create job opportunities in countries around the world. Indeed, at our foreign and defence ministers' meetings in the UK and in the US, global economic security was a key theme. The new foreign secretary of the UK, Jeremy Hunt, and US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo both spoke of the global trend of reducing taxes around the world and backing the private sector so that companies in their countries, and of course in ours, can compete on a level playing field. The United States now has a tax rate of 21 per cent for businesses. The UK has a tax rate for businesses of about 19 per cent, going down to 17 per cent. That's why the coalition government's economic plan is to lower taxes for business, to drive electricity prices down and to pursue free trade agreements for new markets so that we can compete on the world stage.
I'm asked whether there are any risks. Oh yeah, there are risks: the sheer lunacy of the Labor Party's thinking on taxes and costs. The Labor Party believes in higher taxes—in fact, $200 billion of extra taxes. What does $200 billion in extra taxes do for Australia's competitiveness? They want to increase taxes on small and medium enterprises with a turnover under $50 million. We just won't be able to compete. And Labor, we find, believes that higher electricity prices is a sign of market success. No-one in the world believes that having higher electricity prices makes you more competitive. That's why the coalition is backing Australian workers, backing Australian business, because that means more jobs across the country.
]]>On education services more generally, our impressive export performance is driven by businesses that compete in world markets and sell their goods and services overseas. The education sector is, in fact, through our education services industry, the third-largest exporter in Australia, valued at $30 billion in 2017. That's a 17½ per cent increase over 2016. Our education services sector could grow even more if the businesses that were delivering education services could be more competitive on the world stage. That means lower corporate tax rates so that they can put more money in their businesses, invest more and create more jobs.
We must be aware of the fact that our competitors in the education services sector internationally are countries like the United States, the United Kingdom and other OECD countries, which have far lower tax rates than Australia. In fact, on the OECD tax scale, Australia is now the second highest. So, we back SMEs like ARO Educational Services at Bridgewater in the electorate of Mayo. They are providing horticultural training and agribusiness training. They want to expand internationally, and they've in fact received an Export Market Development Grant from the Minister for Trade, Tourism and Investment so that they can expand globally. And we back MRWED, a training company in Caboolture in the electorate of Longman. They've set up training centres across Australia. They, too, want to expand their educational services into the Indo-Pacific and beyond, and they have also received an Export Market Development Grant from the Turnbull government.
So, on this side of the House we are backing businesses in the education sector to sell their services overseas. We are doing so by giving them tax cuts, a lower tax rate and by giving them export grants. We back small businesses in the education sector. On the other side of the House they've declared war on business, they've declared war on the education sector, and they've made them competitively— (Time expired)
]]>I think we should have the ambition of lowering company tax. … because it does improve our international competitiveness.
He got it then. The Leader of the Opposition as Assistant Treasurer said to the Institute of Chartered Accountants in Melbourne:
The Government's tax reform agenda has a strong focus on ensuring that Australia remains an attractive place to invest.
... … …
Cutting the company tax rate is an important step along this road.
We couldn't agree more. But yesterday the Leader of the Opposition went rogue. He went off the reservation when he turned around and said completely the opposite and committed Labor to increasing taxes on Australian businesses, thus putting at risk the livelihoods of millions of Australians across the country employed in small and medium-sized businesses. This was no brain snap. Upon reflection, the Labor Party and its major benefactor, the ACTU, have committed to a war on business. Comrade Sally McManus has often accused business of wage theft. She says that businesses act against the interests of their staff.
Last week I reminded the House of the most egregious example of a nation that has declared war on business, and yes, it's Venezuela. You will recall that the CFMEU is campaigning to have Australia embrace the policies of that brutal dictatorship. It seems that solidarity with Venezuela runs deep in the veins of the ALP. It was not so long ago that the ALP was urging for a guest-of-government invitation to be extended to Hugo Chavez, saying:
… we feel that our shared ideals of social justice and democracy bring us close together … what Venezuela has been able to achieve in so little time will be a source of inspiration and ideas for many in Australia.
I tell you what they've achieved: the wholesale destruction of their economy and the mass exodus of their talent. That's what the Leader of the Opposition offers Australia. (Time expired)
]]>Mr Bowen interjecting—
]]>Mr Watts interjecting—
Ms Burney interjecting—
Dr Aly interjecting—
]]>Mr Feeney interjecting—
]]>Mr Hill interjecting—
]]>An official list of all missing in action was released in 1953. It was in fact published in the media of the day. I have a copy of an article from The Sydney Morning Herald in mid-1953 which lists those missing in action under various categories, both Air Force and Army. It lists them as either 'confirmed POWs, confirmed killed, confirmed wounded' or 'believed POWs, believed killed, believed wounded'. In fact, Flying Officer Gillan is listed on this as 'missing, believed POW'.
Successive Australian governments have sought to ascertain the status of all 43 missing in action but, at the time, the North Korean regime did not confirm their status. I know that successive Australian governments have continued to make inquiries. In fact, I instigated exhaustive inquiries, through the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, with the US and South Korean governments. I responded to the relative of Flying Officer Gillan, courtesy of your office, in writing in October 2016 to confirm that no further information had been made available.
The tragic truth is that the only authority which would have more information, or could have more information, is the North Korean regime. We have very limited diplomatic engagement with North Korea, and that's been the case for some time. Nevertheless, our embassy in Seoul has continued to make representations to the North Korean government about our missing in action as recently as March this year.
The summit meeting between President Trump and Kim Jong-un, and the declaration that was signed that specifically refers to the repatriation of the remains of POWs and missing in action, does give us some hope that there will be a final resolution of the status of the Australian Defence servicemen. Our Defence personnel remain in constant contact with our counterparts in the United States, and I personally raised this issue with the acting ambassador of the United States during the course of this week.
]]>Thank you, Member for Forrest, for raising the issue of MH17. I know the grandparents of the Maslin children are in your electorate. I have met with them and I remain in contact with the Maslin family and the other families throughout Australia of the 38 people who were aboard flight MH17 from Amsterdam. The Australian government's commitment of $50 million is to assist the families of the victims to take part in the Dutch proceedings. There will be a state prosecution led by the Netherlands, and we want to ensure that the families can take part. The funding will also go to support those proceedings. The Ukraine government has entered into the necessary treaty arrangements and extradition arrangements with the Netherlands, so we believe a very full prosecution will be able to take place. But the member for Forrest would also be aware that, on 25 May, after receiving further details from the joint investigation team, Australia and the Netherlands called upon Russia to accept state responsibility for its role in the downing of MH17. We share the grief of the families around the world of the 298 people who were killed, and we'll continue to do what we can to get justice for the families here in Australia.
Your point, Member for Forrest, about the work in the Pacific is very positive because I know that you have joined this mentoring scheme and you have been connected to a bright, young woman from Vanuatu, who was a recipient of an Australia Award. Under this women's leadership initiative, the female recipients of Australia Awards who have studied in Australia will be mentored by an Australian businesswoman or parliamentarian, or a woman from civil society, so that they can maintain that connection through the Australia Awards alumni, but it is also about supporting women in the Pacific, who do face many challenges.
The Australian aid budget is very heavily focused on three elements of support and empowerment for women and girls. First, we're providing women with the skills, the capabilities and the capacity to take leadership roles in their families; in governments, both provincial and national; in business; in communities; and in civil society. Second, we're supporting the financial empowerment, the economic empowerment, of women by giving them the necessary skills and access to microfinance, and ensuring they can join the formal labour market. Third, we're dealing with the scourge of domestic or gender based violence in the Pacific. No country is immune, but it is particularly prevalent in the Pacific. This alumni program is part of our efforts to support women in the Pacific.
You also raised the New Colombo Plan. I'm particularly proud of that, because from a standing start in 2014 to the end of this year over 30,000 young Australian undergraduates will have been overseas, pursuant to funding under the New Colombo Plan. The member for Blaxland says, 'Why don't we have an intern program?' That's precisely what the New Colombo Plan is. Australian undergraduates have the opportunity not only to live and study in one of 40 locations in the Indo-Pacific but to undertake practicums and work experience. We have had some amazing levels of cooperation from businesses and governments and civil society, who are supporting young Australians undertake these practical experiences, working experiences, as part of the New Colombo Plan.
In relation to Kolkata, I point out that it is the centre of India's mining and resources sector. I'm pleased that the member for Forrest asked a question about her constituents. The new consulate general will enhance two-way cultural, education, research and tourism connections and provide consular opportunities, but for the member for Forrest's electorate I think the tourism and the mining opportunities will be enormous.
On the question of aid, the member for Blaxland asks why there isn't a bipartisan approach to increasing the aid budget. I say: why isn't there a bipartisan approach to maintaining a budget surplus and maintaining an affordable aid program? He talks about $11 million in cuts. The trajectory that Labor had embraced was utterly unaffordable and was never going to happen. The aid budget has increased—2.1 per cent per year. (Time expired)
]]>