Page 1989 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 15 May 2013
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Let us be in no doubt that this is a very bad budget. I do not think we should be surprised. I hear those opposite saying, “This is a Labor budget.” Well, it is a Labor budget, because I think national debt now exceeds $300 billion, and it has now been something like 23 years since the federal Labor Party has delivered a surplus. So it is a classic Labor budget, and it is a Labor budget that is bad for Canberra. I will go through why it is bad for Canberra, but clearly it is, and it is disappointing that the Chief Minister, the Treasurer and other members are not actually standing up. It seems that they are more interested in acquiescing with their mates up on the hill and giving them cover than standing up for Canberrans, which is what they are paid to do.
This budget highlights the absolute—I do not know if I am going to get away with it—hypocrisy of the federal Labor members who have been saying things that quite clearly were not true, and I will go through those.
Looking at the detail itself in terms of what it means for Canberrans, firstly there are the public service job cuts. This mob were railing about what might happen in the future the other week, whilst at the same time we saw that the federal government, the Gillard government, had cut 3,000 jobs in the six months leading up to December last year. No doubt more jobs have been cut so far, they are planning another 1,282 next year and God knows how many beyond that. So while this mob complain about it, they are doing exactly that to Canberra.
There are attacks on superannuants. We know that in Canberra we have a disproportionately high number of self-funded retirees who are dependent on superannuation, and there is a direct attack on those people. Perhaps those socialists opposite would decry these people as the super wealthy, but we do not see it that way. This is an attack on people who have worked very hard to fund their retirement.
There are reductions in family tax payments—significant reductions. Again, this mob over the road say that they care about families. Remember “working families”? That seems to have gone with Kevin Rudd. This is an attack on working families. That is exactly what it is.
Scrapping the baby bonus: I heard Mr Barr making jokes about that on 666 radio. I can assure you there will be many parents who will not find that funny. He tried to make some mocking comments, trying to make light of it. It is not funny. It is a serious issue. There are people who are wanting to have families, wanting to have babies, who are now going to find it difficult to do so because they are not going to be provided with the support that was provided to them to do so. There is a big expense in having kids, and there will be people out there now who are going to make a decision not to have families as a result of this decision.
Ms Gallagher: Well, industry supports it.
MR HANSON: Katy Gallagher sneers across the chamber, “Well, industry supports it.” What about families? Go out there and ask the mums and dads whether they support it. Let us ask them.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video