Ms PLIBERSEK (Sydney—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (15:16): Today we are debating a very serious matter of public importance: the government's repeated failure to deliver on its election promises, including its failure to deliver honest and accountable government. We have had, day after day, week after week, month after month, broken promise after broken promise. The government that said before the election that there would be no cuts to health, no cuts to education, no cuts to the ABC or SBS and no threat to pensions has threatened every one of those things. The government that said that they would be a government of adults, that they would be accountable and that they would be transparent have been running interference for weeks now for the Assistant Minister for Health and the stench around her chief of staff and his dealings. Before the election the Prime Minister said they would be a government of no surprises and no excuses. Since then he has said, 'There has been no broken promise and there will be no broken promises under this government.' If only that were true. Let me start with the assistant health minister. The coalition promised before the election in their real solutions booklet—do you remember that one?—to 'restore accountability and improve transparency measures'. What we have seen this week in parliament, what we saw the previous week in parliament and what we have seen right through Senate estimates is obfuscation and unwillingness to answer questions. From the Prime Minister today, question after question was left unanswered. Not just that—the government has refused to release incoming government briefs and information on border protection and has refused to comply with Senate orders or even, in most cases, to return journalists' calls. The Prime Minister said in October last year that what he wants is a government that is transparent and open, yet the Assistant Minister for Health's chief of staff was a junk food lobbyist and was employed by a company that got a $16 million grant from this government, and the Prime Minister is refusing to answer any questions about the relationship of that lobbyist, his role in securing a grant and whether he personally or his company benefited from that grant. Today we heard the news of job losses at Qantas. All of us on both sides have a great deal of deep concern for those workers who are going home today to talk to their families about their future. My father worked for Qantas for 21 years and I know how we felt about the security of his job. He would come home every week in the days of the cash pay packet and hand over the envelope with cash in it to mum. That was everything for us: that was the roof over our heads, food on the table, me being able to go on a school excursion and mum being able to buy me school shoes. That pay packet paid for all of that. Our whole family knew how important it was. That is one of my earliest memories. Because the people at Qantas do not know who will lose their jobs there are thousands of Qantas employees going home today who can no longer give their family that security, who can no longer be confident of their economic future. Let us compare this government's rhetoric before the election campaign with their practice since the election. Before the election they said they would create one million jobs. What has actually happened since their election? One job has been lost every three minutes. Every time a minister on the other side fails to answer a question in this place one job is lost. For every answer not given, for every obfuscation, there is one job lost. Up to today there have been 63,000 jobs lost and, with Qantas's announcement today, another 5,000 jobs will be lost. Contrast that with when we were in government. There were one million jobs created while we had the worst economic circumstances in three-quarters of a century—the global financial crisis. What do we have from the Prime Minister? We have: 'I know nothing. I can do nothing.' The lack of— Mr Bowen: Regret. Ms PLIBERSEK: There is a lack of regret, as one of my colleagues says, and a lack of a plan. One of the most important things a government can do, one of the greatest responsibilities of a government, is to look to the future and say: 'What sort of economy will we have? What sort of society will we have? What will the jobs of the future be? How do we equip our people to make the most of those opportunities?' Has anybody heard a plan for the future from this government or any vision for these workers who have been 'liberated' from the car factory production line? Where are their jobs coming from? These workers who have been 'liberated' from the production line at SPC Ardmona—where are their jobs coming from? These Qantas workers—the Deputy Prime Minister wants to ship their maintenance jobs overseas—where are their jobs going to come from in the future? The Prime Minister pretends that we are saying to him, 'You need to guarantee every single job'. But do you know what would be a great comfort to these workers? A great comfort would be to know that they were going to get immediate assistance from the government to help them cope with the biggest change in their lives. The other thing that would help these workers is to know that the people sitting opposite have some inkling, some idea, some plan for the future. Those opposite also said there would be no cuts to health and no cuts to education. No cuts to health? Let us have a look at the difference between the 2013 budget and the Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook under those opposite. What came out of hospitals in that time? More than half a billion dollars—$560.3 million—cut between the budget in May and the Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook. Ms Henderson interjecting— Ms PLIBERSEK: Oh, one of the members opposite is talking about Victoria. Guess what Victoria is going to lose between the budget and the midyear economic forecast—$277 million. What do you say about that? And there is not only the change to hospitals—what about the $265 million that was announced for upgrades to Westmead Hospital? There is no upgrade for Westmead, no upgrade for St George Hospital, no MRI machine for Mount Druitt hospital, no specialised cancer care in Western Australia and no cancer care coordinators. And the South Australian government needed to step in and build the neonatal unit at Flinders Medical Centre that was already budgeted for. That money was set aside. That money was in the budget, and those opposite cut it. They cut it, despite their promise. Honourable members interjecting— Ms PLIBERSEK: And education. The Minister for Education never comes in here to answer a question on education. When was the last time anybody heard the member for Sturt say a single thing about education? Instead— Government members interjecting— Ms PLIBERSEK: I'm talking about education—he is off on some frolic of his own. But he promised no school worse off under your government, and all of you have to go home and you have to explain to your schools why you are robbing them, why you are robbing those children of education funding. Government members interjecting— Ms PLIBERSEK: You have to go home and explain why you are cutting education funding. Labor's Gonski proposal— Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER: We will have some quiet in the chamber, and I would say to the Deputy Leader of the Opposition: she will address her remarks through the chair. Ms PLIBERSEK: Madam Speaker, $14.65 billion was our proposal. What is their proposal? It is $2.8 billion. What is the difference between $14.65 billion and $2.8 billion? The difference is the education of our children, investment in future generations of Australians to prepare them for the jobs of the future—and you have robbed them. You have robbed them of that future. When the member for Sturt said 'no school worse off', he was wrong. It is just one of the many lies told by this government. Mr Burke: Madam Speaker, I rise on a quick point of order. While I respect that it was rowdy on both sides during that, it is highly disorderly when people interject out of their seats, and I draw your attention to the member for Mitchell. The SPEAKER: The Manager of Opposition Business is quite correct. If you wish to interject, you must be sitting in the correct seat—simple rule.