STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS

Mr BIRRELL (Nicholls) (13:51): A feature of this Labor government is that policy is too often based on ideology rather than on what is able to be delivered in the real world. I'll give you one example: taxing unrealised gains of superannuation. It is a tax on the book value of an asset.

It is absolutely unfair and completely unimplementable. Thankfully, we forced a backflip on it. Here's another example: having a policy for an energy grid that is overly reliant on wind and solar.

That can only force prices up. It is unable to be implemented without large damage to regional Australia's environment and our natural economy. Another example is the new Murray-Darling Basin Plan and the buying back of water, with no thought given to whether that water is needed for the environment or even deliverable.

It will, however, certainly damage our food producing capability and our prosperity. There are so many more examples. How about increasing the cost recovery for biosecurity, and getting the farmers to pay for it?

Let's get the farmers to pay for their competitors to bring food into the country and compete with them. We need more common sense, and more thought on policy and whether it can be implemented in the real world. Labor, I suggest you get on with doing that.

The worst-case scenario is that Labor has to backflip on policy and get a bit embarrassed. But what if it's worse than that? What if it gets to the point where some of these policies, like energy, get through and we damage our economy?