My grievance today is about the government's controversial 2014 federal budget measures and the effect they are going to have on the people in my electorate of Calwell, who will inevitably bear the full brunt of the government's budget cuts.
The Treasurer, in describing his budget, has labelled it as one that brings an end to the age of entitlement. This is a reference which is no doubt designed to impugn the dignity and credibility of those Australians who, for a series of reasons—often not of their own choosing—come into circumstances where they need or depend on government assistance in order to negotiate the daily costs of living.
These are Australians whose hopes and aspirations, and capacity to fulfil them, depend largely on governments making the right choices and investments in the future prosperity of their people. My electorate is a very diverse electorate, on both cultural and socio-economic levels. Many suburbs, including Broadmeadows, more often than not, show up amongst the most disadvantaged postcodes nationally. It is a stereotype that has been worn for decades, but Calwell is home to salt-of-the-earth communities with migrant stories in abundance and pride and resilience aplenty.
People in my electorate have consistently borne the brunt of massive job losses in the manufacturing sector, the most recent blow, of course, has been the closure of Ford Broadmeadows in 2016. The lifeline of many unskilled and low skilled communities has been manufacturing, and its demise, especially the car industry, has hit my electorate hard. This is not through any fault of their own.
People in my electorate are, despite the Treasurer's imputation, keen to work and provide for themselves and their families. Contrary to the Treasurer's labelling of them as 'leaners' they are people who have aspirations and the desire to make a go of it—actually to be lifters. But to do so they need a government that can assist by creating opportunities and investing in creating jobs and making this very much a priority.
The 2014 federal budget hurts people the most who can least afford it. This budget intends to hurt my constituents, and that says everything about the Abbott government's priorities. In this unfair budget of broken promises my constituents are looking at an increase in petrol tax, a new GP tax as well as increases in the cost of medicine and cuts to family tax benefits, changes to the superannuation contribution, a rise in the retirement age and changes to the age pension.
In addition, their children are looking at the prospect of university education being unaffordable as a result of the proposed deregulation of university fees, and there is very little in the way of investment in creating jobs in this budget.
If you ever were looking to understand the disconnect between the government and ordinary Australians, you need look no further than the Treasurer's own now infamous, petulant and dismissive remarks that a proposed fuel excise tax will 'not affect poor people because they do not drive cars'. Many people in my electorate are not well off. In fact, many of them are living on and below the poverty line, but they actually do drive cars. Living in Melbourne's north-west does not provide them with too many suitable alternatives to move around, to get to work and to go about their business, so they have to use cars. As such, these so-called 'poor people' will be adversely affected despite the Treasurer's one-liner routine.
I am not surprised, therefore, at the findings of the recently released report by the University of Canberra's National Centre for Social and Economic Modelling detailing the effect of the federal budget on communities, which shows that my electorate of Calwell is the most adversely affected electorate in Victoria and, indeed, in the top 16 adversely affected electorates nationwide. This study shows that the most disadvantaged communities are in fact propping up, through savage budget cuts, Australia's wealthiest suburbs and communities. In a political context, the report shows that, ultimately, the electorates hit hardest are the ones that the coalition has no chance of winning. Of the 16 most affected seats, 15 are indeed safe Labor seats. This cannot be a coincidence or an unintended consequence, because, in the Abbott government's Australia, we can forget about the Aussie fair go. Team Australia is in fact more about dog-whistling than the good old Aussie fair go.
The government's budget, as evidenced in this report, is tailored to give to the rich and take away from the many less well off people in my electorate. The University of Canberra's report affirms that families in my electorate will be hit by some $783 in cuts in 2017, and for families with children this will rise to more than $2,000. Of course, this is in stark contrast to the federal electorate of Wentworth, where the typical hit for a family is an average budget cut of less than $70 or, for families with children, $620. Coincidence? Maybe, but, in comparing this statistic further, we see that the Treasurer's electorate of North Sydney is the third least adversely affected by the budget measures, which might explain the Treasurer's myopia, while the Labor electorate of Blaxland is the worst hit in New South Wales, with families being forced to cough up a further $2,100. I guess the people in my electorate have a right to ask, without being accused of playing the politics of envy, why they are the ones who are forced to shoulder the burden of budget cuts when, as evidenced in the report, other wealthier and more endowed electorates are less affected.
Such is the alarm about the proposed budget cuts in my electorate that local residents and community groups have come together to stand up, to resist and to fight for the general wellbeing of our local communities. As such, they have formed the Hume Action Think Tank and have called on my office to hold community forums to raise awareness and educate and activate residents to voice their concerns about the budget. For the record, my residents want affordable education, continuing access to universal health care, an adequate age pension and a fairer taxation system where those who can pay should pay. They are particularly angered by revelations recently that multinational corporate businesses such as Google, Apple and Microsoft manage to find ways to avoid paying their share of tax. Above all, they want employment opportunities for all, especially the young people in my electorate.
So, with the Hume Action Think Tank leading the charge, I will, as their representative in this place, ensure that we as an opposition continue to do whatever is possible to oppose and defeat the draconian and unfair budget measures being pursued by a government that has broken faith and trust with the Australian electorate. Today, I have held two budget forums in my office, and there are more planned in the near future. It is my community's intention to keep the pressure on the government. I commend the good people of Calwell on their action and their proactivity and advocacy. They are, after all, a community who have always had to fight for their rights every inch of the way, and they will continue to do so now.
Further concern about the effects of the budget on my electorate comes from the Federation of Ethnic Communities' Councils of Australia, who, in their submission to the Senate select committee, warn that the challenges for people from multicultural communities living below the poverty line continue to linger as a result of the continued uncertainty around the 2014 federal budget measures. This is a gain of particular relevance to my electorate, because it has one of the highest concentrations of multicultural communities in the country, with an emerging new community that has come here under the refugee and humanitarian program. FECCA raises concerns about the introduction of the $7 co-payment for GP visits and other health measures and believes that it will deter culturally and linguistically diverse Australians from seeking preventive medical treatment and cautions that this change will only add to the already-large range of barriers that prevent effective access to health services.
I know firsthand the difficulty associated with getting migrant women into, for example, breast screening programs as well as encouraging people to participate in the bowel screening program, because I have worked hard to raise awareness and to encourage participation. But now it will be harder to encourage participation in what are lifesaving preventive health measures. The abolition of the Medicare Locals that have actually provided vital grassroots services to culturally and linguistically diverse communities, already seriously stretched and unable to meet the geographic needs, will now see increased pressure of the provision and availability of services. FECCA is also very concerned about the proposed changes to unemployment benefits for young Australians, citing that these changes will compound the stress and burden already faced by young job seekers from multicultural backgrounds who already face additional disadvantage in securing sustainable employment. If we cannot invest properly in helping young people, and especially newer migrants, to get jobs then we are letting the entire country down, not just my constituents.
I would like to finish where I began in this grievance debate today. The opposition has valid reasons for opposing this budget. If there was every any doubt, all you would have to do is look to electorates such as mine to see that a serious case of inequity is at play here.
