Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Hansard source

More huff and puff from the Treasurer—it is good to have a summit forum, discussion group, working group, whatever it may be called—and they are celebrating the fact that there was lots of constructive discussion and no outcome. As the Treasurer leaves the chamber, so too has he left behind 200 people that assembled last fortnight, in Canberra, at a tax summit that was forced upon him by the member for Lyne. That was a great win for the member for Lyne. He got the government to hold a tax summit that did nothing. So let us just go back over the history of this, the government's process on tax reform.

It began with the 2020 summit. We all remember that. The then Prime Minister, the member for Griffith, was sitting on the floor taking copious notes, engaging people in discussions. One of the recommendations was to have a full review of the tax system. He said it was an 'exciting initiative aimed at harnessing the best ideas for building a modern Australia ready for the challenges of the 21st century'. The 2020 summit had over 1,000 delegates, received over 8,800 submissions, produced 962 ideas and nine were accepted—962 ideas and nine were accepted—and it cost $2 million to hold. So that was about $200,000 per idea adopted and, if I recollect correctly, one of the recommendations made was to hold the summit again in a few years time so really there were eight recommendations from the tax summit. One of them was to have a full review of the tax system, so the government then commissioned Dr Ken Henry to head a review of the tax system. As I have said previously, it is an error of judgment to have a public servant head an independent review because once that review is delivered the public servant, because they have obligations to serve the government of the day, cannot be advocate for the recommendations of that review. That is one of the reasons why the government was so comfortable in neglecting to implement most of the recommendations of Dr Henry, and I am sure Dr Henry would regret that he was the chairman of that review. It is because the government does not know how to govern. When we were in government, whether it be the Wallis review into banking or a range of other reviews, we had members of the private sector head those reviews so that they in turn would keep the government honest when it came to implementation.

This government commissioned the Henry tax review in its first budget back in 2008, the Henry tax review took two years to complete, cost over $10 million, received 1,500 submissions, had five panel experts, produced a report of 1,332 pages, came up with 138 recommendations and the government accepted 2½. The government accepted 2½ recommendations—that was their total response to Dr Henry. The government claims that it has now implemented 32 of the recommendations. We are struggling to find where those 32 recommendations have been accepted and fully implemented, but this is a government that is focused on spin.

The government had no intention at all of proceeding with anything other than a revenue-raising measure in relation to mining out of the Henry tax review, but the member for Lyne, to his great credit, forced the government into having a tax summit. The Treasurer, in his own befuddled mind, could not work out whether it was a summit or a forum. Whatever the case—whether it was a forum, a discussion, a working group, a summit or whatever you call it—it was about tax and he invited 200 delegates to come along. It illustrates the spin of the government that he did not ask us to come along. He did not ask us and, when he was embarrassed by the media about the fact that he asked everyone on earth except Her Majesty's opposition, he claimed that he invited us. That is just deceit from the Treasurer, nothing short of that. We open our mail on our side of the House and there was no invitation to this grand wedding. But that is their call and, of course, the member for Lyne did not say the opposition should be there—no, because, as we have just seen, the member for Lyne is party to so many of the tax increases and new taxes that this government is a proponent of.

So 200 delegates assembled here in Canberra, it cost a million dollars of taxpayers' money to hold with two days of talk on tax and what do we actually factually have to show for it? 'Good news! A working group is being established to report to the government this November with a final report in March next year. It is a working group—as if there have not been enough summits, there have not been enough reviews and there have not been enough panels of experts—'so good news, Australia: you're going to get a new working group.' Every one out in workerland must be cheering about that! But, wait, there's more: an announcement that the government would like to hear everyone's views on whether it should set up an advisory board to provide the Australian Taxation Office with an independent, external source of advice and counsel on organisational matters. So the government's great landmark tax reform is they want to hear the views of the public. Even after the 2020 summit, the Henry tax review and this new summit or forum, one of the key recommendations is to have a further consideration of public views.

There is the announcement of a million dollars in funding per year to create an independent tax studies institute, as if there is no-one in Australia that is a self-proclaimed expert on taxation and as if there is no university in Australia that has part of the department of commerce or department of economics in the university with tax experts in—'No, we'll spend another million dollars on a tax institute.' The piece de resistance, the one that was the greatest con of even some of the people at the summit and even some of the journalists outside of it, was that the government said some time in the future they have an intention when the fiscal position is right to increase the tax-free threshold to $21,000.

As soon as I heard that announcement as to a tax summit, I thought to myself I had heard that before. I went back to 2007 when Kevin Rudd, as opposition leader, said 'we have an intention to reduce the number of marginal tax rates from four to three and to have a top tax rate on of 40 per cent'. I thought, hang on, that was Kevin 07 and he was more likely to keep his word than Julia 2010—we know that. But, no, this is serious: 'We've got an intention when the fiscal position is right to increase the tax-free threshold to $21,000'. So let us set the record straight. This government has introduced or increased 19 taxes since it was elected. They cannot name one tax that they have abolished, not one. If there is a problem in any way in any place and they cannot regulate it, they tax it. There is a problem with teenage alcohol consumption, so there is an alcopops tax. There is a problem with people smoking too much, so there is a massive increase in the ciggies tax. There is a problem with the Australian motor vehicle industry, so they increase the taxes on motor vehicles—and, oh, what a mistake that was right before the financial crisis but, no, they did not back down. There is a problem with carbon dioxide emissions, so tax it—'That's what you should do: tax it!' There is a problem with miners earning too much money, so tax them—'Go for it!' And they wonder why they are sitting on a below 30 per cent primary vote. You do wonder, don't you. There is a flood in Queensland. Tax it; that is what you have to do! Tax everyone for the flood in Queensland, even though the $1.8 billion being raised by the flood levy is inconsequential compared to the $4½ billion hole on the carbon tax that the government does not want to talk about. But of course this is a government addicted to spin, the same spin that says, now that he has got his carbon tax through, how good it is to have budget neutrality on the carbon tax—a $4½ billion carbon hole. Crikey, what a joke this mob is.

I am disappointed that the member for Lyne and others have attached themselves to you, because quite frankly I think there is genuine desire in Australia to have tax reform. But do you know what tax reform is? Reducing the number of taxes. Do you know what tax reform is? Simplifying the taxation system. Do you know what tax reform is? Reducing the tax burden on everyday working Australians. That is what tax reform is. It is not about increasing taxes and it is not about introducing taxes—all of the lazy approaches that the Labor Party and some of the Independents choose to side with. That is bad governance. That is not smaller government. That is not reform. That is a government addicted to spending and a government that has no solution to the tax challenges of modern Australia.

See this speech in context