Lisa Singh (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary to the Shadow Attorney General) Share this | Hansard source

This is not a budget for Australia's future; this is not an economic plan for Australia's future; this is an election strategy—let's make that really clear. This is a strategy for the Abbott government to win an election. It is not a plan for Australia's future; it is a strategy for short-term political survival, particularly the political survival of the Prime Minister. You can see clearly why that is the case when you cut through all the spin that has been provided by the Treasurer and the Prime Minister over the last couple of days. You see that we are still left with so many of the budget measures from last year's budget, when you would think that the government would have learnt a very, very strong lesson from the people of Australia, who resoundingly rejected their budget last year—but no. They decided to rehash all of those cruel elements of their budget and put them, underneath a bit of gloss and a bit of glamour, into this year's budget. There are things such as $80 billion worth of cuts to schools and hospitals that we are still left with, which will, as Senator McEwen said, inadequately meet the demand of hospital services and lead to poorer health outcomes for all Australians. On top of that, we are still left with the $100,000 university degrees that Christopher Pyne wants to bring back into this place, and, of course, huge cuts to family payments.

When you go through these budget documents, you see very clearly that this government is predicting higher unemployment for much longer, more debt, more deficit and a bigger and growing tax burden in this country. This budget has failed the future test and it has failed the fairness test. Somewhere in their lexicon they think that if they use the word 'fairness' it somehow makes it all right, it somehow makes this budget fair. You cannot just use the word 'fairness', you have to believe in the word 'fairness', and you have to show that in your actions as a government by delivering a fair budget. There is nothing fair about this budget. There is nothing fair about making young job seekers go from waiting for six months if they lose their job to, now, waiting for one month. That is still unfair, just as it is still unfair to make such huge cuts to family payments.

Of course, we know that the government think, 'If we just put in some new policies it'll be okay and the Australian public will buy our new budget.' When you look at some of those new policies you soon realise that they are only there for two years. They are only there to get this government re-elected, such as the universal access to preschool, the small business accelerated depreciation and the nanny's program. They are only there for two years. Clearly, that is because this is not a budget for the next decade; this is a budget for the next election. In the meantime we know that on top of that, despite really low interest rates in this country right now, the government are contributing to an increase in debt, a fall of consumer confidence and a rise in unemployment.

My Senate colleagues have added to this debate, and Senator McEwen talked about the attack on working mums, the gender attack that this government has contributed to. I think it is worth noting that the government has gone so far as to use language by saying that new mums are 'rorting' or 'frauding' the paid parental leave scheme. I think those new mums are owed an apology by this government. The government should really consider what it has said out there in the last couple of days and give an apology to all those new mums. The government's cuts to family payments that remain in this budget, some $6,000 cut to the family budget,—whether it is cuts to family payments to fund their childcare policy, or whether it is the attack on the paid parental leave scheme—are things that are going to hurt working women and families in this country. To then, on top of that, say that the mums are somehow rorting and frauding the paid parental leave scheme is absolutely unconscionable. The Liberals, of course, in doing so have shown very much what we all probably knew all along and that is where their ideology is set. They have shown their true colours when it comes to supporting working mums to spend time at home with their new baby.

Unfortunately, although it may be seen through the media that somehow this government is palpable, that it is something that the Australian public can live with, I asked the Australian public. I asked the Australian public to think deeply and look deeply at what is underneath the gloss, because underneath it is the same-old, same-old ideological attack on the working class of this country. You only have to look at the cuts to health and education and the attack on working mums to see that. At the end of the day this budget is not an economic plan for this country, it is not a budget for Australia's future. It is an election strategy to get this government through to the next election, to try to win it with a couple of sweeteners on top of a lot of rehashed budget from last year underneath.

That is why Labor do not support the unfair measures of this budget because, unlike the government, we actually live and believe in fairness and we act out fairness. We do not just add it as a word in our lexicon, or as a slogan, as Tony Abbott is so frequent in using and then thinks that somehow the Australian public are going to buy it. They simply will not. This budget is unfair.

Question agreed to.