House debates
Tuesday, 23 August 2011
Matters of Public Importance
Carbon Pricing
3:59 pm
David Bradbury (Lindsay, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer) Share this | Hansard source
The member for Indi goes on to say:
"Predictions of how the tax will affect people have not been spot on but businesses will cop more costs, forcing some of them to move production overseas …
That is mere assertion, with not one ounce of evidence to support that proposition.
We heard the member for Indi a little earlier in this debate say, 'It is very simple: if you impose a cost upon a business that is not a cost that is imposed on a business elsewhere in the world then that business will shut down and relocate.' So my simple question—and I think this is a question Mr McMaster would be interested to hear—is this: what is the land tax and payroll tax that is being imposed on people elsewhere in the world? And if indeed there are countries in the world where there is not the same payroll tax and land tax that is being imposed by the O'Farrell government in New South Wales, then why is it that this business has been able to continue to operate within New South Wales and Australia?
I must say I am looking forward to the member for Indi and Senator Payne commencing their campaign against these great big taxes on everything—the great big tax on payroll, the great big tax on land. If they were going to have an even more profound impact than the carbon price, as Mr McMaster has suggested, then you would have thought that the federal opposition, so concerned about the competitiveness of industry and the cost of living, would be waging a campaign against Mr O'Farrell's land tax and payroll tax. I have not heard that campaign yet but I look forward to it and I will join with the member for Indi and Senator Payne in that campaign.
The member for Indi has come into this place and talked about the crisis in manufacturing. This is further evidence that people on that side of the chamber are more concerned with talking down the economy and talking down industry than chipping in and trying to assist industry to cope with the challenges that they face. We all know the nature of those challenges—in particular, the rising dollar. If you look at all the commentary that has come from those who have made some of the decisions that are the subject of the discussion here, you will find that they have all cited the high dollar as having the major impact—no suggestion of a carbon price. It is disingenuous to come into this place to allege that an impost that has not even been passed by the parliament, let alone levied, has in fact led to these impacts, when the businesspeople who are making these decisions at the coalface have acknowledged that the impacts are more about with the value of the dollar than any government policy or any other factors.
I note that the member for Indi was interviewed on radio today. She was asked some questions about Tony Abbott's efforts in proposing to cut $500 million worth of assistance to the car industry. That seemed to be something that the member for Indi was not aware of. I know she is only the shadow minister, but you would think she would be aware of a proposed half-billion dollar cut to the car industry. The interviewer went on to ask some questions, and the member seemed a little bit sheepish about it all. Then the host said:
But five days ago Tony Abbott did commit to that policy.
The member for Indi said:
Well, there you go. But this is not a single-bullet solution.
There you have it. At a time when we have, according to the member for Indi, a crisis in manufacturing, she is talking down the economy and talking down manufacturing with all her talk of a crisis. It is so much of a crisis that the opposition's panacea is to rip the guts out of an industry assistance program—half a billion dollars out of an industry assistance program. That is going to help! What sort of crisis are we going to have when we finally allow the member for Indi to have some influence on government policy in this space? She visited Mr McMaster in Girraween and was told, 'Really, the carbon price is not the big issue you're trying to scare people into thinking it is; the bigger issue is actually land tax and payroll tax, and if you really wanted to represent me as a manufacturer in Western Sydney you'd stand up and take on Mr O'Farrell—but, sorry, he happens to be in the same political party, so we won't do that; we'll beat the carbon drum.' And that is what they have been doing.
When the proposal to cut this $500 million from the automotive industry was announced, the Herald Sunreported:
"It removes the additional assistance to the motor industry that the government has provided largely through the stimulus package," Mr Abbott told reporters in Canberra today.
Oh, the stimulus package! It is no wonder Mr Abbott wanted to rip away that half a billion dollars; it was part of the stimulus package that he spent the last couple of years telling us we did not need. Well, go and talk to people in Western Sydney and see what they think. I hope, when the member for Indi goes round on her carnival of fear—her scare campaign—that every time she visits a manufacturer she asks them, 'What would have been the impact on your business had the government not acted to stimulate the economy?' The government provided things like the business investment allowance, which many manufacturers in my electorate took advantage of. They invested in some very heavy machinery and equipment as a result of the very generous tax arrangements under the business investment allowance. So, when the member for Indi goes around and tries to scare people—as scary as the prospect of her knocking on someone's door and coming in unannounced is—by telling them that they will be wiped off the map, that their business is going to have to shut down because this carbon price is coming in, she should also be honest with them about the electricity costs that they currently face and she should outline what her plan is to reduce those costs.
We know that there are many, many businesses out there that are facing the challenge of rising power costs, and when we talk to those in the investment community about why they will not invest in new generation capacity, they all come back to the same thing. They say, 'We will not do it because of the uncertainty due to the lack of a price on carbon.'
Mrs Mirabella interjecting—
We can carry on with this game that the coalition have been playing for the last decade, where they deny the fact that we have to price carbon. It is an inevitability, as the shadow treasurer said—
Mrs Mirabella interjecting—
No comments