Mr LATHAM (Leader of the Opposition) (3:23 PM) —It is not that hard to tell when a government has run out of time, when it has run out of puff and when it has run out of value for the Australian people. It is when a government basically gives up on itself. It gives up on being positive, it gives up on good public policy, it gives up on progressing the public debate, it gives up on being a good government and it starts to abuse the system. That is when you know a government has run out of puff and has run out of time—it starts to abuse the system. The biggest abuse of all is the scandal of taxpayer funded political advertising. It is when a government says that its policies and its record can no longer stand in their own right and the government can no longer stand in its own right; it needs to be propped up by a massive public relations campaign at taxpayers' expense.

In this country we used to have a system where governments would try to make policy announcements to help people. They would try to make their policy announcements to advance the public good. Now we have a government that makes policy announcements solely so that it can run extra advertising campaigns. It is a perverse way in which to conduct itself in public administration. This government knows that it has failed to support Medicare and it knows that it has failed to support the rate of bulk-billing around Australia that has collapsed so badly, so it is trying to advertise its way out of trouble. The government knows that bulk-billing rates have collapsed, so it is trying to advertise its way out of trouble—all at massive taxpayers' expense.

In 1995, the member for Bennelong promised new standards on the question of taxpayer funded advertising. But, as with so many areas, eight years later he has abandoned all his standards in a last-minute, desperate attempt to try to cling to power. The Auditor-General has made these guidelines very clear in advice to the government and the parliament that government advertising should be limited to statements of fact—a pretty simple proposition. Government advertising should be limited to statements of fact, it should not contain political content and imagery, and it should target information to people who actually need it. It is hard to see how the government ads meet any of these criteria. There are few facts in the advertisements that we see every night, time after time, on our TV screens, in the material coming through the post and in the material in newspapers at massive taxpayer expense. It is hard to see the facts that are presented, but there sure is a lot of imagery—not imagery designed to help the Australian people but imagery designed to assist the Liberal Party of Australia.

If that is not enough, we are about to get another round of fridge magnets. If people thought you did not have enough Medicare ads on TV, you did not have enough material coming through the postbox and you did not have enough material in newspapers, the Attorney-General has said, `Be alert but not alarmed; we're about to get another round of fridge magnets.' That is how this government hope to defend the nation—through fridge magnets. Not for them a coastguard; not for them effective maritime policing for the world's largest island continent. Not for them a cop on the beat 24 hours a day, seven days a week. No, fridge magnets. Not for the Howard government defending the home front by upgrading regional airport security—a point that has been made by the opposition time after time—in airports like Burnie and Devonport that need screening devices for passengers and luggage. No, not for this government effective protection of the home front but rather another round of advertising and fridge magnets. Not for this government upgrading our port security—no, another advertising campaign in the lead-up to the federal election in the second half of this year.

This is the shame and the scandal of this campaign. This money could have been spent on basic services for the benefit of the Australian people. It could have actually done some good for our nation. It could have been used for a fair dinkum, genuine public purpose. The money that we are seeing is going into junk politics delivered through junk mail, junking our services as a nation. This government has on our screens or in the pipeline $123 million of our money—taxpayers' money—for political advertising. That is $123 million that could have provided an extra 2,000 nurses in our public hospital system. Imagine the good of an extra 2,000 nurses working day by day in our public hospital system or the good of spending $123 million of public money on an extra 2,000 teachers in our schools—teachers who could raise up the flag on the flagpole but also teach our students about the things they need in life to get a good education and to get through TAFE and university in their post secondary years.

Imagine the good that could have come from spending $123 million of public money on an extra 4.8 million bulk-billed consultations. The bulk-billing rate has fallen to less than 70 per cent. We could have turned it around using that $123 million of public funds. Imagine the public good that could have come from spending that $123 million of public money on more than 3,000 extra aged care places. Imagine the good that could have come from having more than 500,000 extra dental procedures to help our senior citizens, the people who have served our nation well in the past and who now sit on long waiting lists, waiting for one of the basics of life, just waiting to get their teeth fixed up. This government says that it is a state responsibility. It is a national responsibility. If this government had used the $123 million, that responsibility could have been discharged in large part.

So the Australian people see these ads, but they also see a desperate government that will not stand before the Australian people in their own right to say, `Here are our policies; here is our record. Judge them on their merits.' No, it is a government that knows that the judgment would be harsh, so it is trying to prop itself up through publicly funded advertising. It is a scandalous abuse of the system that goes against everything the Prime Minister said eight years ago about the need for new standards in Australian public life.

There is another sign of when a government is out of time and ready to go. There is another sign that tells you that a government is out of puff, out of time and ready to go. It gives up on being positive. It gives up on being constructive. It gives up on doing things for people—the real things that make a difference in the daily lives of the Australian people. It is a government that turns to the old politics of fear and smear, and that of course is where the Howard government has gone.

We are finishing a fortnight's sitting in the budget session, but can anyone remember or name one positive thing the government has spoken about in question time over the past fortnight? Name just one positive idea, policy or advance for the benefit of the Australian people. They cannot name one, because it is a government that has given up on being positive, a government that has given up on even trying to do things for the benefit of the Australian people. It is a government that has turned to the old politics of fear and smear. It is the old Tory tactic of trying to plant the seeds of uncertainty and insecurity in the minds and in the daily discourse of the Australian nation. The government has given up on being positive. It has given up on progress for the Australian people. It is part of that miserable existence on the right-wing side of politics. It is the miserable existence of the Tories, who say, `Let's go for the politics of fear and smear instead of the politics of hope and opportunity for the Australian people.'

If you want to look into the mind of the Prime Minister, you always get a good guide on a Monday in the Australian Financial Review, where his alter ego and close ally Michael Baume sets out chapter and verse the Liberal Party tactics. What sort of party has a spokesperson and advocate who, as he did last Monday, puts together an article entitled `PM puts energy into fear factor: John Howard will hold the marginals by frightening voters'? Michael Baume said:

What about a government that actually puts its energy into helping people? What about a government that puts its energy, campaigns and public money into helping the Australian people, doing good things for our nation, instead of using the lowest and most miserable tactic in public life: the politics of fear and smear? It is a government that has run out of time. It is a government that has run out of ideas. It is a government that has run out of anything positive to say to the Australian people. It is a government that should go. It is a government that should go and give way to a Labor administration that has the energy to do some positive things for the Australian people. Labor has the energy to create a national dental program for the benefit of the 500,000 Australians, most of them elderly, waiting on dental lists just to get their teeth fixed up. It has the energy to save bulk-billing. It has the energy this nation needs to do something about youth unemployment in those regions where it is above 30 per cent and is just staying there, stuck above 30 per cent.

Labor has the energy and ideas this nation needs to provide access and affordability in our education system—a system of universities that students can actually afford and a system of TAFE that has the expansion of an extra 20,000 places for the benefit of our students. The Howard government should give way to a government that believes in a needs based school funding system and that has the energy and ideas to say, `We can do a lot better for the school students of this nation.' Let us give them the needs based funding system so that every parent in this country, when they look at the neighbourhood school down the road, be it government or non-government, has the guarantee that it is going to be a well-resourced school that can get results for their children. That is the confidence and the assurance that parents right around the country want.

This is a government that should give way to a Labor administration that has the energy and ideas to care about early childhood development. If you want one signal of the things that have gone wrong—the cynicism, the scepticism and the negativity of the Howard administration—get a videotape of question time today, where, time after time, Howard government ministers, led by the member for Warringah, laughed about children. Why would the member for Warringah laugh about children and think that it is funny to talk about the need for a ban on junk food advertising to address the crisis of childhood obesity? He is doing it now; the grin is on his face. He thinks it is funny. He thinks children are funny. The idea of helping children is nothing more than an amusement to this cynical, negative minister who knows nothing more in his public life than the politics of fear and smear.

Why do the government think it is so funny to talk about reading books to our infant children? Why do they find it nothing more than amusing to hold up public policies that make a significant difference to Australian families? It is not just the Labor Party that they find somehow amusing when we talk about children. Look at their treatment of their own. Look at their treatment today of the Minister for Education, Science and Training. When he stood up to talk about his policies for schools they were laughing behind his back, with the Treasurer saying, `Keep going, Braveheart.' They think anything that helps children in this country is nothing more than amusement. They have grown so cynical and sceptical, so negative, so out of touch with the daily challenges of Australian parents that they think it is funny if someone tries to help parents by banning junk food ads. They think it is funny when someone tries to help parents by providing books and literacy programs so that they can read to their infant children at night. Even when their own minister, in his own hopeless way, talks about helping children, they think it is funny. The government are far out of touch, far distant from one of the basics of public life—that is, doing good things to help our infant children.

Australia needs a new administration. It needs a new government. It needs new, positive plans. It needs the energy and the ideas and the basic compassion to get things done for this nation. In the Labor Party we are advancing these policies. The Australian people know they are genuine commitments. Labor are willing to take the hard decisions to fully fund our policies. Budgets are about choices, and the truth is that we cannot fund everything. We cannot reverse every cutback; we cannot restore the many services abandoned by this government. We need to set priorities to make choices, and some of them are hard choices. That is what Labor have done this week with the PBS. It was a hard decision, but it needed to be made.

In my budget reply speech a month ago at the beginning of this parliamentary session, I outlined Labor's budget pledge to the Australian people, and I meant every single word of it. A Labor government will deliver budget surpluses every year in the next term of parliament. A Labor government will reduce net debt and cut tax and expenditure as a proportion of GDP. Our budget pledge will put downward pressure on interest rates. We built the modern Australian economy and we plan to keep it in good nick. We built the modern Australian economy and we will keep it in good shape through economic incentive, support for small business, good budget management plus doing something that the Howard government refuses to do: investing in the skills of our people. We will make education and training investments for the future. That is the Labor way. We believe in social investment, yes, but also in making savings in the government budget, cutting waste and mismanagement at the centre of government and getting the services and resources out to the communities and the families on the edge.

The Australian people cannot wait to get rid of this government that has grown so negative and cynical about the good deeds that need to be done for our nation. I want to see a government that cares about the Australian people, that puts the rungs back into the ladder of opportunity and that gives people who work hard and try hard a real chance in life. And we are only going to get it after the next election, through the election of an Australian Labor government.