Nicola Roxon (Gellibrand, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Health and Ageing) Share this | Hansard source

It is interesting that he knows what he is talking about, because I think the member will be very interested when he hears the rest of this answer. It may be that the Leader of the Opposition might like to take the advice of the rest of the frontbench. But let me read the quote first—we will get to that:

… would it be more appropriate, instead of doubling it and probably overshooting the mark, to look at what the figure would be if it had been indexed? I am talking about approximately $75,000 per annum.

The Private Hospitals Association said it would be more equitable to use thresholds of $76,000 and $152,000 to be indexed thereafter. Access Economics, in a report for the AMA, said the thresholds of $70,000 and $140,000 would have restored the system to previous real levels if that was the goal. Even Terry Barnes, former senior adviser to the former Minister for Health and Ageing, Tony Abbott, suggested that the new thresholds might be more appropriate at, for example, $80,000 or $160,000. Senator Xenophon has suggested that the threshold should be lower than we originally proposed, while the Greens have asked for indexation. Having consulted and having listened, we are prepared to take a sensible approach to this matter and to the wishes of the Senate, because we are determined to provide much-needed tax relief for working families.

In the other place this afternoon we will propose new thresholds of $75,000 for singles, while retaining our original proposal for couples at $150,000. If I take the interjections earlier to be any indication, I would ask the Leader of the Opposition to stand up and affirm that the Liberals will now support these new thresholds. This measure will deliver immediate tax relief to 330,000 Australians—a significant number of working families who need this break. True, it is not as many as we would have liked to have delivered relief to, but the position of the Liberals and of the Senate means that, if this proposal were accepted, 330,000 families would nevertheless be beneficiaries of this measure. It is a pragmatic response following a Senate inquiry and much consultation. For two average income earners, each earning about $60,000, this will deliver an immediate saving of $1,200 to those families in the first year. Just as importantly, we propose that this threshold be indexed each year to reflect wages growth. This will ensure that it will remain relevant into the future rather than ever threatening to become the tax trap that was delivered courtesy of the previous government.

There has been a lot of talk, as I have said, in the last few days about the Leader of the Opposition wanting a bipartisan approach to economic responsibility. This is his first test, or his first opportunity. If the opposition truly want to pursue a bipartisan approach to economic responsibility, then this is their chance. The Leader of the Opposition should stand up now or after question time and indicate that he will support this new proposal, which has widespread support, particularly within his own party. He says he is a real leader and he wants a bipartisan approach. This is his chance to stand up and say so.

See this speech in context