Craig Emerson (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Trade) Share this | Hansard source

Who said it was the coalition parties that first introduced the concept of an emissions trading scheme? And he speaketh the truth. Of course, it was the member for Dunkley, the speaker who has just finished his contribution. He proudly linked the coalition to an emissions trading scheme. That was when the coalition believed in markets. But now they believe in central planning—a so-called direct action plan that would impose a tax on households that was originally estimated at $720 per household. But in one of the Leader of the Opposition's more Hansonist moments, he said there would be no international linking of the direct action plan—those dirty rascally foreigners! And that, of course, increased the impost per household from $720 to $1,300. We heard nothing about that impost during that contribution. Of course, many small businesses are householders; many people, in fact, run their small businesses from households. But we heard not one word of sympathy for small businesses from the member for Dunkley. They would have been whacked by a $1,300 impost per small business household. There are so many of them—around 2.4 million households—and we hear no sympathy whatsoever.

Who said it was actually the coalition that instigated work on the emissions trading scheme? In fact, I have in my hand a report I helped author back in 1988 which talks about the regulatory arrangements for trading in greenhouse gas emissions. So proudly said the member for Dunkley. But, of course, under the instructions of the Leader of the Opposition we are back to central planning. This is an opposition leader who said of Bob Santamaria: 'I worship the very water he walks on.' That is where we are at: the coalition supports direct action, central planning; and Labor supports markets and an emissions trading scheme.

The whole contribution from the member for Dunkley was based on the false premise that there is nothing in these bills that has any benefit for small business whatsoever. But this is completely untrue. The Clean Technology Innovation Program will help small businesses move to a clean energy future. It will provide competitive grants of between $50,000 and $5 million on a dollar-for-dollar co-investment basis to support innovative activity such as research and development and commercialisation of clean technology products, processes and services.

But it does not end there. Labor actually believes in providing tax relief to small businesses, and this is what we did during the global financial crisis, against the resistance of the coalition. When we were seeking to save this economy from recession, they did not like the idea of providing tax relief to small business. They said small businesses would not take advantage of it. Of course, they did in droves. It was one of the most welcome and popular measures that this government implemented to save this economy from recession and to keep the doors of small businesses open. And we are doing it again. Under these arrangements, from 1 July next year small businesses will be able to write off instantly the value of any new assets each worth up to $6,500.

But I heard not a word from the member for Dunkley about this great initiative. The reason he failed to mention it is because the coalition would rescind it. The coalition has committed to reversing the instant write-off of small business assets valued at up to $6,500 each. I will explain why and how they propose to go about rescinding that very small business tax relief, which would be worth more than $1 billion to small businesses in 2013-14 alone. So here we have the coalition saying there is not a zack in it for small business, but in fact there is $1 billion in 2013-14 alone. Indeed, in the budget that has recently been passed, we announced that small businesses will also be able to write off instantly the first $5,000 of a motor vehicle from 1 July next year.

So when you look around the political landscape for a party that is interested in providing tax relief for small business it is not the coalition, it is the Australian Labor Party. We have done it time and time again, against the opposition of the coalition. This was a very important reform that passed the House of Representatives today. You will see that, in the sweep of history, it is only Labor governments that have implemented the fundamentally important economic reforms for this country. It was a Labor government that created an open, competitive economy through the reforms of the Hawke-Keating period which the coalition government never got around to doing. We had high tariff walls. Treasury officials got up every morning—they got their Weeties and their tomato juice or orange juice, depending on their taste—and set the exchange rate. They used to set the exchange rate every morning!

So who believes in markets? Labor actually moved to a market based mechanism called a floating dollar, which the coalition was about to do; they were 'gunna' do it. And then, of course, there was the other great reform, superannuation. I was sitting here in the advisers box when the government sought to introduce superannuation for working Australians. And what did the coalition do? They opposed it root and branch. They said: 'No, no, no, no and no. This will tear the heart out of small business, this will rip the guts out of Australia, and we'll rescind it.' Of course, they never did get around to rescinding it.

But there is a promise from the coalition to rescind the increase in superannuation for working people from nine per cent to 12 per cent. I will explain the mechanism in a moment because it is related to another important reform, the mining tax. Today we have seen another major economic reform which the coalition was 'gunna' do. Prime Minister John Howard thought: 'I could have been the champion of the world. I could have introduced an ETS. I got all this work done by Professor Shergold. We were just about to do it and then—damn—the election came along and we didn't get around to doing it.' What a pity. And now we have the shadow minister for small business saying: 'I was responsible for developing an emissions trading scheme in 1998. I had the document, I helped, I was there. We were gunna do it.' But they never got around to doing it. Once again it is the Labor government that is doing the reforms that are necessary to lock in Australia's economic future in this region—the Asian region—in the Asian century. Why is that important? It is important because all Australians—working Australians, small businesses, hard-working people—are getting the benefits flowing through from Australia's economic engagement with Asia. We are making sure, by putting a price on carbon, that we are not left behind—not left at the end of the queue—such that in five or 10 years time everyone else has moved in this direction but Australia is still saying, 'We're gunna do it.' We have gone ahead. We are doing it because it is an important reform for working people in this country. It is an important reform for the Australian community, for working people and for small businesses.

I said that I would come to the mining tax. This is directly relevant to the fortunes of small business. The Leader of the Opposition has said, in relation to the mining tax and the carbon price, that he will rescind both. What does that mean for small business? The mining tax is being used to spread the benefits of the mining boom to small businesses to fund the very $5,000 instant write-off, which has now been increased to a $6,500 instant write-off. What has the Leader of the Opposition said about the mining tax? He said, 'We'll rescind it because mining companies are already paying too much tax.'

That is the position of the coalition: that mining companies are paying too much tax and the small businesses are paying too little. The coalition has pledged to rescind both the mining tax and the carbon price. That would clearly be to the detriment of Australia's small businesses. Can you believe the Leader of the Opposition? He is a Rhodes scholar. He has an economics degree from Sydney University. So do I. I am ashamed that I am, with Mr Abbott, a graduate of economics at the University of Sydney, because the Leader of the Opposition—I am going to let you in on a little secret—has said:

See, one of the things that people haven’t quite twigged to is that carbon dioxide is invisible, it’s weightless and it’s odourless ….

It is weightless! The science is in: according to the opposition leader carbon dioxide is weightless and they are going to reduce its incidence in the atmosphere by 140 million tonnes! That is 140 million tonnes of weightless gas—go figure!

This guy has an economics degree at Sydney University and he is a Rhodes scholar and the coalition say that under their direct action central-planning scheme they will reduce the incidence of a weightless gas by 140 million tonnes. Even Senator Barnaby Joyce has said, 'I can't stand the stupidity any longer.' He put out a press release yesterday describing carbon dioxide as a 'colourless, odourless gas'. He has removed 'weightless'. Barnaby is on to it. Barnaby has worked out that a tonne of carbon dioxide weighs a tonne. Barnaby has broken ranks. There is already a rift in the coalition because Senator Barnaby Joyce has worked out that a tonne of carbon dioxide weighs one tonne. So, no longer is the National Party going to continue and persist with the pretence that a tonne of carbon dioxide weighs nothing.

We have come to this point—a vitally important point for the future of this country. The opposition leader has said: 'This time I'm telling the gospel truth. I will rescind the whole carbon pricing mechanism.' Who believes him? Who would believe the Leader of the Opposition when he says he is going to rescind this? If he were to rescind this it would mean increased taxes for the Australian people. He would reduce the age pension and all pension entitlements. What would he be saying to the Australian people? He would be saying, 'Trust me. The reason I'm doing this is because when I take the carbon price out electricity prices will fall.' That is his proposition. Who in the Australian community would believe an opposition leader who says, 'Trust me. I'm going to take the carbon price out. Yes, I'm going to cut the age pension; I'm going to increase your taxes; I'm going to take the tax free threshold from $18,000 back to $6,000, but you'll all be better off because the price of electricity will fall, under me.' That is what he is saying; that is his proposition.

The Australian people know that the Leader of the Opposition will never remove the carbon price. He has already foreshadowed that. In an opinion piece he wrote this:

Opposition, by contrast, tends to be a permanent debating society because even the most final decisions can sometimes be revisited in office.

You betcha! If the Leader of the Opposition were ever to become Prime Minister he would say, 'Look, I did tell the Australian people in this opinion piece that even the most final decisions can sometimes be revisited in office.' He would be saying that he would not rescind the carbon price. He would not do that.

There was an example, in recent political history, that did not work. That was the GST roll-back. I am being quite frank about this. The commitment that Labor made, in the lead-up to the 2001 election, to reduce the GST—or remove it from some items—was never believed by the Australian people. We lost that election and I remember the then Treasurer—the then member for Higgins—saying that Labor is committed to 'rrroll back' the GST. I tell you that roll-back did not work for Labor in opposition and it will not work for the coalition, because the public will just not believe it.

What the opposition is now saying is that it will not only roll back the carbon price; it will rescind the mining tax. That means that small businesses will be belted. It means that small businesses will pay higher taxes. Why should we be surprised? The highest taxing government in Australia's history is the coalition government. Year after year they had the gold medal hanging around their necks because they kept increasing taxes as a share of the economy. Taxes are now much lower as a share of the economy under the Labor government. That was typical of the reform commitment of the Hawke and Keating governments, when we reduced taxes on small businesses and made sure that small businesses could be competitive in an open, competitive economy.

Now you have their rank hypocrisy. The fact is that the coalition would not roll back the carbon price, because they have no interest in small business. Their only interest is in the opposition leader making the sneaky, easy transition to the Lodge. It will not happen. It will not happen, because today Labor has put in place a vitally important economic reform that will help lock in jobs for working Australians and profitability for small business, because—this is the truth—only Labor governments have the guts, the vision and the commitment to undertake economic reform in this country.

See this speech in context