|
representatives vote 2020-02-27#5
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2020-04-03 11:16:10
|
Title
Bills — Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2019-2020, Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2019-2020; Second Reading- Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2019-2020 and another - Second Reading - Stop Ms Wicks from speaking
Description
<p class="speaker">Ed Husic</p><p>We are talking about appropriation bills that underpin the budget and the way governments spend money. And today we've had an extraordinary example of how the government is spending money. We found out that $10 million was spent by this government for 'the noted country town of North Sydney' so that it could get a swimming pool upgrade, which is fantastic! When challenged on why North Sydney got $10 million in another example of the rorts that have been uncovered in the last few months, the mayor described this as a totally justifiable decision on the basis that people from the country would swim in North Sydney and this would justify a regional grant. I've heard of Pitt Street farmers but not Boorowa backstrokers—and that's what this is facilitating in this place.</p><p>The member for North Sydney is singing 'I've been everywhere man'—from Waverton to Wollstonecraft, from Mosman to Artarmon, from Chatswood to Cremorne, from Naremburn to Castlecrag! This is a joke. It goes to show you how bad this government is when they try to funnel into North Sydney $10 million of money that was supposed to support the regions.</p>- The majority voted against a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2020-02-27.21.1) to stop Robertson MP [Lucy Wicks](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/robertson/lucy_wicks) (Liberal) from speaking, which means Ms Wicks can continue. This type of motion is known as a 'gagging order' and was introduced by Brand MP [Madeleine King](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/brand/madeleine_king) (Labor).
<p>But who knows, this could be a plan by the member for North Sydney to usurp the Deputy Prime Minister by becoming a National Party MP in North Sydney. I think this is what we are looking at; they could have a National Party MP from North Sydney. That's the type of A-grade rorting that the National Party has become renowned for—and now they're bringing it to North Sydney. What an absolute embarrassment it is that you could use taxpayer funds in that way.</p><p>And that's where the joke ends. The way this government spends money on rorts—be it sports rorts or be it road rorts—has made a joke of programs like this, which notionally should be providing support to communities. And it demonstrates yet again that this is a budget from a government with no plan. They have no clue, no idea, no plan and no care for the Australian people. When it comes to using a budget that might be able to, for example, deal with the skills crisis—every industry is saying they don't have enough people—we have a government with no plan for how to fix that and no funding to back it up.</p><p>It's costing people more and more to go to a doctor. Every time they go to a doctor the out-of-pocket expenses have jumped up. In my part of western Sydney, for the people who I represent, they've jumped up 40 per cent. Yet there's no plan by this government to make health care and access to it easier.</p><p>We've got clogged roads and clogged railways in our part of Sydney, and yet all we've got, when it comes to infrastructure, is an ad plan. We've got a plan that can advertise claimed spending but none of the actual dollars going to the people when they need it most, which is right now, and to also help the economy on the way through. Again, this budget has no answers for people who want to see those types of things—health, schools, broader education, infrastructure—fixed up; nothing. But you can get $10 million for a pool in North Sydney as you're trying to save people from losing their seats, potentially, either there or elsewhere. You'll be—</p><p class="italic">Mr Tim Wilson interjecting—</p><p class="italic">Dr Allen interjecting—</p><p>I'm sure the member for Higgins, who's interjecting right now, will probably be a beneficiary as well, and the member for Goldstein, too. They are noted regional members! You could be the luminaries of the Victorian branch of the LNP. You should take that Queensland idea and bring it down here. I mean, look who you're competing with—this is going to be a walk in the park for you. Look at these luminaries that you're up against! You should definitely export this from Queensland. Bert van Manen's up there, the member for Forde—he could give you an idea on how well these things work. And I'm sure that there'd be others as well. Julian Leeser, the member for Berowra—</p> <p class="speaker">Rob Mitchell</p><p>I remind the member for Chifley to refer to members by their correct titles.</p> <p class="speaker">Ed Husic</p><p>I'm just a friendly person who just tries to refer to people by their names. But, Deputy Speaker, you rightly point out that I should use their titles. And we should make this a place that's less friendly—I agree! But the member for Berowra: I could see him in a Driza-Bone going through—what are some of the places in your neck of the woods?</p> <p class="speaker">Julian Leeser</p><p>Danglemah!</p> <p class="speaker">Ed Husic</p><p>And here you go! This is who you could be inspired by: the member for New England, in bringing the National Party approach to the cavalier use of taxpayer funds to your parts of the country. Again, this is a representation, an example, of how—</p> <p class="speaker">Darren Chester</p><p>He's here all week.</p> <p class="speaker">Ed Husic</p><p>Exactly, I am; I could be here all week because there are so many rorts, Minister, that we could talk about. But this is an example of this cavalier approach to the use of money being picked up from that part of the government benches and spread out over here. We can definitely get a sense, too, of the outrage from the general public about the way in which this has happened. They know this is a big issue: sports rorts and road rorts and the fact that people are missing out. People, in good faith, are putting in applications, wanting either to upgrade their local sports ground or to see infrastructure in their area upgraded; they believe they've got a good case; and they're denied. Why? Because, again, it's a government that only spends to save itself, as opposed to helping the Australian people. It's not good enough. In the urban infrastructure program, we've seen the member for Robertson do very well, but that's only one part of the Central Coast; that's not a broad approach to dealing with the Central Coast. People there are stuck in cars for hours, travelling from the Central Coast to Sydney for work, or on trains that they're forced to use because they don't want to use the roads. But only one part of the Central Coast gets the benefit of an urban infrastructure funding program. That goes to show you: this is not needs based; it's not evidence based; it's politically based; and it's got to end. Again, this is a budget that doesn't reflect a plan, an idea, a clue or a care for the people of Australia.</p> <p class='motion-notice motion-notice-truncated'>Long debate text truncated.</p>
|