MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE – THE URGENT NEED FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO ADDRESS THE COST OF LIVING PRESSURES ON AUSTRALIAN FAMILIES
August 22, 2012
Mr CHESTER (Gippsland) (16:33): It is a pleasure to join this matter of public importance debate. It seems that the poor member for McEwen has forgotten where he is. He still seems to be fighting his past battles in Victorian parliament. I will just remind the member for McEwen that he is now in the federal parliament. He actually broached the topic of trust. I am staggered that the member for McEwen would broach the topic of trust, because there are a few things the Australian people expect of us in this place. We come to this place and they expect us to act with honesty. They expect us to act with responsibility. They expect us to act with integrity. They also expect us to act in a way which is in the best interests of all Australians and they expect us to be trustworthy, Member for McEwen. They certainly do not expect us to say one thing before the election, something like—what was it? ‘I rule out a carbon tax. There will be no carbon tax under the government I lead.’
Mr Tehan: I haven’t heard that before!
Mr CHESTER: You have not heard that before, Member for Wannon?
Mr Tehan: No. What happened?
Mr CHESTER: It is funny you mention that, Member for Wannon. He had not heard that before. The member for McEwen did raise the topic of trust. What Australian families do not expect is for us to make their lives harder, and that is the very essence of the matter of public importance before us today.
Mr Mitchell interjecting—
Mr CHESTER: The member for McEwen wants to bring up the GST. There is a significant difference between the GST and the carbon tax, and I acknowledge that the former Prime Minister did change his mind after an election. The former Prime Minister changed his mind and took it to the Australian people and gave them a chance to vote. He had the guts. He had the courage of his convictions. He went back to the Australian people and said: ‘What do you think, Australian people? Would you like the GST?’ And they voted for him. Have we had any other Prime Minister do anything like that? Let me think. ‘No carbon tax under a government I lead. I rule out a carbon tax.’ That was before the election. After the election: ‘I changed my mind. Do I go back and get a mandate? No, I won’t get a mandate. I’ll just scurry around and do deals with the Greens.’
Mrs Griggs: To cling on.
Mr CHESTER: And cling onto power. The families of Australia acknowledge that governments cannot solve all their problems, but they can help. They certainly should not do things to make life harder for Australian people. That brings me to the fundamental issue with a carbon tax. Why make things harder for Australian businesses? Why make things harder for Australian families? This matter of public importance strikes at the very heart of this government’s betrayal. It strikes at the very heart of the fundamental breach of trust of the current Prime Minister. Until this Prime Minister deals with that issue, that fundamental breach of trust, no-one will believe a single word she says.
This is a message that I get every day. The member for McEwen can bellow, he can holler, he can protest and he can rant. But he never mentions what the people in his electorate are saying to him. I know some of the people for McEwen. They are not that unusual. They are not that much different, actually, from the people in Gippsland. It is a good rural and regional mix.
Mr Mitchell: Most of them are intelligent.
Mr CHESTER: Here we go! The member for McEwen says most of his are intelligent. So now the member for McEwen is insulting every Gippslander.
You are a genius, Mensa; you are a genius! Make my job easier, will you! Okay, the people from Gippsland are not as smart people as the people from McEwen. Well done, genius! Good on you, Mensa! That will run well in the election campaign: the member for McEwen says the people in Gippsland are not very smart at all.
Well, the people in Gippsland are smart enough to reject the Labor Party. In the by-election in 2008, the people in Gippsland had the choice of voting for the great Kevin Rudd, the juggernaut at the peak of his powers, but, in a by-election, what did they do to Kevin? They took six per cent off him. At the first chance when he went to an election, they took six per cent off him. And did Kevin front up to another by-election? No, Kevin would not go to another by-election after that. He ran off and hid, and clung to power for as long as he possibly could until Julia got him.
As I was saying, the problem for the member for McEwen—and the problem for the Prime Minister—is that no-one actually believes a word the Prime Minister says. The message that I am getting from the people in Gippsland—and I am sure the member for McEwen is getting the same message—is that they cannot wait to get rid of her. They simply cannot wait to get rid of this Prime Minister. The caucus could do Australians a great favour—they could get rid of this Prime Minister. They have done it once. They could do it twice. The message we get consistently in our electorates is: ‘Get rid of her. Why prolong the agony?’
The very nature of this carbon tax and of the matter of public importance that is before us today is—
Mr Ripoll: Oh, finally!
Mr CHESTER: Don’t start—there has been a little bit of encouragement from the member for McEwen! The very nature of the carbon tax—and of the matter of public importance—is that it is meant to be punitive. It has to hurt to work. If it does not hurt, it does not change people’s practice, it does not change their consumption of electricity and it does not change their consumption of other goods—if it does not hurt, it does not work. And the Leader of the Opposition is right when he says: ‘Every time electricity prices go up, the Prime Minister smiles.’ The Prime Minister likes it when prices go up because that is her carbon tax at work—that is what it is meant to do. If it does not hurt, it does not work.
If you do not believe me, look at the comments earlier this year from the Salvation Army when they polled over 1,700 of their clients. Along with pointing out a whole list of things that people on fixed and low incomes were struggling with, Major Bruce Harmer said:
The increased cost of living has clearly meant larger numbers of Australians are now struggling to keep up with rising utility bills. Many are going without things we take for granted like nutritious food or a warm bed. Many are questioning how they will get through the winter months with what appears to be a never ending increase in the cost of living.
He goes on to say:
The ever rising cost of utilities, motor vehicle expenses and running costs, food, medical expenses, etc. is intensifying the struggle and they wonder where it will end.
There is only one place it can end. It can end with the Labor Party getting rid of this Prime Minister, or with the Australian people finally getting the chance to do that in about a year’s time. There is not a single problem in this country that cannot be improved with a better government. I take up the comment made by the Leader of the Opposition in his address today—a better government can start working to fix some of the problems that are being faced by families right across our nation.
I have a simple question that I have put to members opposite many times over the last 12 months when they have stood up and said: ‘Oh the electricity prices are going up for a range of other reasons. The reason manufacturing is suffering at the moment is because of the high dollar.’ I come back to them and ask them just one question: why make it harder? Why make it harder for Australian families? Why make it harder for Australian manufacturers? And the answer I get is the same answer I am getting now: complete silence—not a word. They have no explanation for why it is a good idea to make things harder for Australian people at an already difficult time. They have not a single answer as to why we should make it harder for Australian manufacturers to compete in very difficult world markets. They have no explanation as to why we should make it harder for families struggling with the cost of living—not a single explanation as to why we should make it harder. If the carbon tax is such a good idea, why not double it? If it is so good for Australia, double it! Why don’t you double it?
Mrs Bronwyn Bishop: They are intending to, actually.
Mr CHESTER: Is that the plan? The Australian people have a very clear choice and that choice is double or nothing. You can double it with the Labor Party, or have nothing with us. We are happy to get rid of the carbon tax.
It is a great pleasure to be here today discussing this issue of the increased cost of living. One of the other great myths—
Mr Zappia: You have said nothing about the motion!
Mr Ewen Jones: He has made it all the way through, Tony; you have been so good!
Mr CHESTER: Yes, the member for Makin has been very good! One of the other great myths of the carbon tax is the Prime Minister’s repeated claims that the 500 so-called biggest polluters in Australia will be the only ones who will pay the carbon tax. That statement is every bit as misleading as the Prime Minister’s promise that ‘There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead’. Everyone pays the carbon tax.
Our local football and netball clubs will pay through increased energy costs to run their lights and they will have to pass on those costs to their members. Local aged-care facilities—I am sure other members have been approached by local aged-care facility owners—come to me and say: ‘How are we going to meet these extra energy costs? We are going to pass them on to our residents who are on very small or fixed incomes.’ I have had hospital board members and chief executives come to me and say, ‘Our increase in energy costs for the next financial year is in the order of $200,000 that is directly related to the carbon tax.’ United Dairyfarmers of Victoria has indicated that the individual cost per dairy farm is going to be about $5,000 per year and that is a direct, added cost to these farming families, a cost they cannot recoup and they cannot pass on because they are price-takers. What concerns me is that this Prime Minister simply has no answers when it comes to the increased cost of living. I call on members opposite to do the decent thing, put this Prime Minister out of her agony, put the Australian people out of their—
(Time expired)