Marielle Smith (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Finance, Senator Gallagher. The Albanese Labor government is focused on growing the economy, repairing the budget and delivering practical support for Australians, all while continuing to invest in essential services and long-term national priorities. Can the minister explain how responsible economic management is enabling the government to deliver on the commitments made to the Australian people?

Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Smith for the question and for all the work she does across government, and for the good people of South Australia in representing them, and for the advocacy she provides on cost-of-living support and in the economic debate. So thank you very much.

It's an important question. When it comes to economic management, how we manage the budget and how we deliver on our commitments are all interlinked. When we came to government, one of our first priorities was to get the budget in much better shape. And we have done that. The budget is $233 billion better off cumulatively over seven years to 2028-29 than the budget we inherited. There's also $176 billion less debt than was forecast prior to the 2022 election, and we are saving the nation around $60 billion in expected interest cost based on those forecasts. That was the first bit: to try and get the budget in better shape.

We've delivered two surpluses, and we've lowered the deficits. That work continues. We've been finding savings and repairing the budget over time. That has allowed us to focus on those commitments we made to the Australian people in the first term: looking at how we get wages moving again; looking at how we address all of the failures of the health system, particularly with Medicare, due to the failure of those opposite to invest; and dealing with the investment in defence that we need—again, due to neglect from those opposite, who announced a lot of defence programs but never actually found the money to underpin and pay for those programs. The Deputy Prime Minister worked to get the defence program back on track with billions of dollars of extra investment to make sure that our national security is not compromised. We also looked at education. (Time expired)

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Smith, first supplementary?

Marielle Smith (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Albanese Labor government is delivering practical support through investments across health, housing and education. Can the minister explain why protecting investment in essential services is so important and what the consequences would be for Australians if those services weren't available?

Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Smith for the question. When those opposite complain about the spending that occurs in the Commonwealth budget—and I hear it repeatedly—they are criticising: increases to the age pension; cheaper childcare for families, which we know they are against; the pay rise for early childhood educators; our cheaper medicines, which we saw them vote against in this place; record investment in public hospitals; funding for new medicines on the PBS; expanding PPL and paying super on PPL; expanding access to training, including free TAFE; prac payments for nursing, teaching and social work students; and wiping billions of dollars from student debts. They're opposed to our housing agenda. Those opposite see all of this as wasteful; we see it as funding essential services.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Smith, second supplementary?

Marielle Smith (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister, budget choices reflect values, particularly when it comes to essential services and cost-of-living support. Can you outline how these investments are supporting Australians and what Australians would lose if a different approach was taken?

Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Smith for the question. The answer is that I can, because, two days before the last election, when Mr Taylor and Senator Hume snuck out the coalition's costings, we saw what they were going to cut, and we see them opposing spending now.

They would have cut the three-day guarantee for parents. They would have cut 41,000 frontline workers across the Public Service. They would have cut student debt relief. They would have cut free TAFE. They would have cut the Commonwealth prac payment. They would have cut cheaper home batteries. They would have cut five per cent deposits. They would have cut the Help to Buy program, the build-to-rent program, the National Reconstruction Fund and the Housing Australia Future Fund. They would have cut production tax credits, and they would have cut infrastructure spending.

To top all that off, they were going to repeal the tax cuts. They went to the last election saying that they wanted people to pay higher taxes with bigger deficits and more debt. It was quite the achievement. We will continue to deliver for the Australian people.