Chris Pearce (Aston, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Speaker. I appreciate the sensitivity that the member for Denison has on the issue. I understand that he is part of the problem. He is not part of the answer; he is part of the problem—the problem that was created by him and his colleagues before the last election. So I understand his sensitivity. But here we have the new budget that has introduced a whole raft of new taxes—taxes on so-called luxury cars; taxes on ready-to-drink alcoholic drinks, the so-called alcopops; new taxes on crude oil excise; changes to depreciation of computer software; and increases in taxes on passenger movement charges. We have this raft of new taxes.

When we used to talk about new taxes in this parliament, for years and years it used to be as a result of the introduction of new state Labor taxes, but now, of course, we are talking about the introduction of federal Labor taxes. What I think is particularly notable about the proposed tax increase in this bill is—and it is just like all those other taxes I have mentioned—that the Australian Labor Party, under Kevin Rudd and Wayne Swan, did not say anything about any of these new taxes to anybody in Australia before the last election. They snuck into office and now they expose what their obvious tax plans are.

What they did say before the last election in relation to this type of issue was that the Labor Party would set up a review into Australia’s automotive sector. That is what they said. They did not say that they would introduce a new tax; they said that they would set up a review—because, as we know, if there is one thing that Prime Minister Rudd loves it is a review. He absolutely dislikes making a decision, but if there is one thing that you can get Kevin Rudd as Prime Minister of Australia to do it is to announce a review. So they promised that they would have a look into the Australian automobile sector and, interestingly enough, the chairman that was appointed to that automotive review was the former Labor Victorian Premier, Steve Bracks.

What is even more interesting about that review is that their discussion paper—which was released on 31 March this year—actually canvassed the possibility of reducing luxury car tax, not increasing it. Here we have a Labor stalwart, in Steve Bracks, who has been given a ‘job for the boys’ as chair of the automotive review, and they release a discussion paper in late March that looks at the possibility of reducing luxury car tax, not increasing it. So the government are not even prepared to allow this so-called wonderful review to do its work, go through its inquiry and actually come up with any suggestions or recommendations. ‘No, we’re not going to allow that to happen anymore. What we’re going to do is step in, introduce this bill and rush it through the Australian parliament without due debate or consideration.’

I am talking about this bill today on behalf of the people of my electorate of Aston. What the people of Aston have said to me and what I find particularly offensive about this bill is its actual name: luxury car tax. To families and people in the electorate of Aston, buying and owning a Tarago is not a luxury but a necessity. It is a necessity so that they can do what they need to do to look after their families. They are families with children—families with disadvantaged children or people—who need to have such a vehicle in order to move them around. How offensive for this government to now turn around and say to the people of Aston and, indeed, the rest of the country that, because they need to buy a Tarago, a vehicle that might cost more than $57,000, they are wealthy people and they are investing in a luxury car. These people need these types of vehicles in order to get their families around their local community, to take them to school in the morning, pick them up, take them to their sports training events and take them off on the weekends. They have multiple children or, as I said, they might be unfortunate enough to have somebody who is disadvantaged or disabled within the family. They need these types of vehicles. They are a necessity.

Kevin Rudd and Wayne Swan ought to get out into the electorate of Aston and talk to some of these people that own Taragos and similar types of vehicles and say to them, ‘Do you think that you are driving a luxury vehicle?’ The people in my electorate do not think that they are driving a luxury vehicle. They are driving a vehicle of necessity. It is a vehicle that they need in order to undertake the daily travel requirements for themselves and their families. This is an offensive bill and it is a bad bill. It is a bill that, along with so much else, introduces new taxes into Australia—taxes that were not articulated to the people of Australia before the election. There was no discussion about all these new taxes. Kevin Rudd swanned around this country—pardon the pun—telling people: ‘Vote for me. I am an economic conservative. I will look after you.’ He then gets into office and introduces tax after tax after tax.

The opposition has proposed that this tax be referred to a Senate committee for inquiry. Surely that is a reasonable request. Surely that is a request that the government can meet. Is the government so concerned about ‘fuelgate’, so concerned about the crisis it has got itself into on the promise of reducing the cost of petrol and groceries and so concerned about this crisis it is in that it is not prepared to have this issue, an issue that is going to impact on so many people in my electorate, discussed? Many people across Australia need to have big cars in order to take their families and the kids around. Is it so unreasonable to ask the Australian government to have this bill referred to a Senate committee? Please allow people to come and talk to the parliament about why they need to buy these types of vehicles. They do not buy them because they have money to throw away. They do not buy them because they want to drive around in a luxury car. They buy them for the sake of their families. This tax will punish all of those people and all of those families. This is a result of Kevin Rudd and ‘fuelgate’ and being in trouble over promises that could never be kept. This is an abhorrent process. This is the wrong way to deal with the Australian parliament and the Australian people.

I plead with the Australian government: please stop, take a breath and admit that you are in some trouble on ‘fuelgate’. We all know that. You are in trouble with the price of groceries going up. You are in trouble with home loan interest rates going up. Admit you are in trouble. Say: ‘We won’t interfere with the crisis that we are in as a result of the luxury car tax. We will look at it as a separate exercise. We won’t try and muddy the waters. We will look at it as a stand-alone issue. We will refer it to a Senate committee and we will allow some Australian people to actually have a say.’ I think that is the right course of action, and I do not think it is an unreasonable course of action for the opposition to request.

See this speech in context