MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE
Ms WHITE (Lyons—Assistant Minister for Women, Assistant Minister for Health and Aged Care and Assistant Minister for Indigenous Health) (15:22): I note the opposition leader has fled the chamber. How disappointing that you bring a motion on for debate, and you don't even stick around to listen to the contributions. Honourable members interjecting— Ms WHITE: I wanted to start by saying— The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Ms Claydon ): I'm sorry, Assistant Minister.
I did start this with, 'Let's try fewer interjections.' I would like to apply that. The assistant minister has the call, and I'd like to hear her. Ms WHITE: There's something I'd like to address first before I get into my substantive contribution.
Maybe it's the reason for the opposition leader fleeing the chamber. I wanted to address his remarks, where he characterised a very serious matter, an ongoing police investigation into an alleged sexual assault by the Sydney Swans football players, by describing it and characterising it as lewd behaviour. That diminishes the seriousness of this issue, and, as a leader in our nation's parliament, I think that he should come back in and make further remarks to demonstrate that none of us in this place take this matter as anything other than seriously.
This is an incredibly serious moment for our nation. I'm pleased to see the Sydney Swans respond the way they have this week. I have to say they were a little bit slow to respond in the way women of Australia deserve.
Unfortunately, in this country, one in five women have experienced sexual violence by the age of 15. This is not an abstract concept. It is not lewd behaviour.
It needs to be called out and named for what it is. I urge the opposition leader to do that now. To the contribution that I will make on this motion, I'm an animal lover.
In my first speech, I spoke about growing up on a farm and being Tasmanian. I have a soft spot for one creature in particular. One of my favourite animals is the eagle.
I love eagles, so I'm always on the lookout for news about eagles. It wouldn't be surprising to those in this chamber to hear that I also am on the lookout for news about politics. So imagine my surprise that just this week there was a combination in a news story of politics and an eagle.
I thought, 'How lucky could I possibly be?' It turned out it was rather interesting. I don't know if the opposition leader saw it as well. The Western Australian Liberal leader compared the opposition leader's chances of becoming a PM with his own chances of becoming the coach of the West Coast Eagles.
If your own members in your own political movement rate your chances that poorly, why should any of us or the rest of the Australian population take your leadership seriously? From what I can tell, the chances of the Leader of the Opposition becoming the coach of the West Coast Eagles is about as likely as me becoming the coach of the Tasmanian Devils. The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Ms Claydon ): The member for Page, on a point of order.
Mr Hogan: The point of order is on relevance. The MPI has the content of what we're discussing, and I think the minister is— The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I think it had a pretty wide range in there. I am listening to the minister, which is why I asked people to stop the interjections.
The first few minutes have been in direct response to what the Leader of the Opposition raised, and I'm listening to where we're going next. Thank you. The minister has the call.
Ms WHITE: It's hard to soar like an eagle when you're surrounded by turkeys, though, isn't it, Deputy Speaker? Mr Hogan: I would ask her to withdraw the comment. The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Well, I didn't even get to hear that, because I was talking.
Mr Hogan: To assist the House, I'd ask the minister to withdraw the comment. The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Page, I don't know what was said in that regard. If there was something unparliamentary, I would like the assistant minister to withdraw.
Ms WHITE: I withdraw, if the opposition takes offence. The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you. Ms WHITE: So, instead of being coach of the Devils, I find myself in here debating a motion brought on by the second Leader of the Opposition in this term.
It appears there are some colleagues on the west coast who think we might have a third opposition leader before the term is up. Opposition members interjecting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Member for Moncrieff, Member for Goldstein, Member for Page, Member for Casey— Ms WHITE: Perhaps, there's an attempt now with the relaunch of your glossy brochure to relaunch your chances— Opposition members interjecting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Sorry, Assistant Minister— Opposition members interjecting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Just stop it.
Enough. I've asked you three times to stop the interjections. I'll be asking you to leave the chamber next time.
The assistant minister has the call. Ms WHITE: Thank you. Perhaps in an attempt to boost his chances to remain as opposition leader for the full term, he has relaunched his glossy brochure.
I haven't been lucky enough to get my hands on a copy— Mr Hogan interjecting— Ms WHITE: The glossy brochure he was referencing—he waved it around in his contribution. I haven't been able to get my hands on a copy yet. I look forward to that, because I'm sure there are some gems in there—yes, please pass it down—that we'll be able to refer back to over the course of the next couple of years.
But I did have a look at the website, and I can tell that it's uncosted, it is unfunded, it brings back nuclear power—which went so well for them at the last election!—and it does nothing to help first home buyers get a foot in the door and turn the key in the lock of their very first home. I've looked on your website; I can see for myself that there are absolutely no costings associated with any of these ideas.
The opposition's record speaks for itself. You don't have to take my word for it; the people of Australia voted on that at the last election and rejected their plan. They took a position in this place to vote against every single cost-of-living measure that would help working Australians.
And, even after denying Australians support, they were still somehow able to take a budget position to the last election that had bigger deficits and bigger debt. Australians would have been worse off under a coalition government. And who do you think makes up the economy?
It's the Australian people. If you have just a look for one moment at the data, it shows us that unemployment has gone down under our government to the lowest average unemployment rate for any government in 50 years, four per cent. Unemployment under the coalition averaged at 5.6 per cent.
We've seen wages growth under our government. Annual nominal wages have grown about four per cent for 16 consecutive quarters—the longest run in more than a decade and a half—and the wage growth has averaged 3½ per cent. Now compare that to the record of those opposite in government.
At a time when the Leader of the Opposition was a senior cabinet minister, there was not one quarter in the 35 quarters they were in office where annual nominal wages grew above three per cent, and wage growth averaged 2.3 per cent. The workers of Australia, who drive the productivity of our economy, are better off under a Labor government than they would have been under a coalition government.
Look at the gender pay gap data. The gender pay gap today is the lowest it has ever been in Australia's history. Our employment data demonstrates that more people are in work, and we know that the hard work of Australians, in partnership with our government, has guided the direction of our economy.
If you want to compare our budget management against the opposition's, then the evidence shows on any measure, particularly on debt and deficit, that our government does a better job. If you have a look at some of the fiscal data, it shows very clearly that debt doubled before the pandemic under those opposite. In the period between 2013 and 2022, most debt in the budget was racked up.
It was racked up under those opposite. They're all care and no responsibility. They had their turn, and the evidence speaks for itself.
Have a look at the way our government has worked to pay down debt. We've banked every dollar of tax upgrade for the last two updates and banked 76 per cent of total tax upgrades. Now compare that to those opposite.
They banked around 40 per cent of tax upgrades and never banked all of the upgrades in any one round. Have a look at taxes. I think Australian people know very well about this one.
We've cut the taxes for working Australians. There's a $250 working Australians tax offset in this budget that those opposite voted against. In fact, they took higher taxes to the last election.
There is a clear record to compare here when it comes to budget management. The opposition doesn't support working people. They don't support compulsory super.
They question the merit of paid parental leave. Those opposite—and I'll include One Nation, the National Party and the Liberal Party in my assessment of those opposite when I speak about this—have cast doubt on the value of child care. If you want a productivity-enhancing investment, child care is one of the key investments you can make.
Not only does it provide an opportunity for children to get the best start in life; it enables families to get back into training and to take more time to go to work and to have more hours of work to not only support them but to support our economy too. Not only have they cast doubt on the value of child care; they've argued against wage increases for our lowest paid workers, including in the ECEC space.
We know what they feel about housing. They voted against measures to support our first home buyers, and in that glossy blue document over there they lock that in.