Mr SLIPPER —My question is also addressed to the Prime Minister. Prime Minister, have you seen recent reports which have confirmed that the coalition's family tax initiative is helping those families who need it most? How much better off will a low income family be under the family tax initiative? Does this confirm that the coalition government is the only government to have brought true benefits to Aussie battlers?

Mr HOWARD —I thank the member for his question. I take the opportunity of reminding the House of the enormous benefits to Australian families of the coalition's family tax initiative. That initiative, worth $1 billion of tax relief to Australian families, is a very generous, well targeted initiative which was delivered in full, on time, without deduction, in accordance with the undertaking that had been given by me on behalf of the coalition parties during the election campaign.

As members will be aware, under this initiative the government increased the tax-free threshold by $1,000 a child for families on incomes up to $70,000. The family tax initiative also provides additional benefits for single income families. If these families earn below $65,000 a year and have at least one child under the age of five, they are eligible for a further increase in their tax-free threshold of $2,500. This income cut-out also increases by $3,000 for each additional dependent child. This, as I know honourable members on the government side will be aware, translates to a $500 a year increase in disposable income for single income families.

The most recent piece of information about this initiative has come to my attention in the past few days. It comes out of a recent presentation at the National Centre for Social and Economic Modelling, known as NCSEM.

Dr Lawrence interjecting—

Mr HOWARD —I notice the member for Fremantle is interjecting about NCSEM. I am glad the member for Fremantle has interjected. She might like to interject on this observation of the presentation. It is particularly important for those in the parliament—and most of them are on my side of the House—who really do represent the average Australian and represent battling Australian families.

This is what the presentation had to say, and it makes very interesting reading against the class posturing of those who sit behind the Leader of the Opposition. It said:

The overall impact of the measure was progressive as the largest gains in percentage terms were received by the families in the lowest private family income deciles.

In other words, what the NCSEM presentation was saying was that this was a measure deliberately and successfully targeted to help the low income section of the Australian community. In other words, it was a progressive, pro-battler tax initiative. It was not a measure designed to help either the big end of town or those people who are able to look after themselves. I think the Australian Labor Party should ponder that presentation, seeing that it tried to destroy the superannuation tax surcharge. What was it—

Mr Costello —Senator Sherry!

Mr HOWARD —Senator Sherry rolled the Leader of the Opposition on that, didn't he? The NCSEM finding also contained a damning indictment of the former Labor government. NCSEM said that the bottom 30 per cent of working families with dependent children had lower private family incomes in 1993-94 than they had in 1981-82. On both surveys the Labor Party loses out very badly. Not only is our measure seen as a pro-battler, progressive taxation initiative but the comparison of disposable family incomes for the low income deciles of the Australian community compare very badly in terms of the Labor years against 1981-82, the last full financial year of the Fraser government.