David Bradbury (Lindsay, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Treasurer ) Share this | Hansard source

Just a couple of quick points. The member opposite began by saying that he had concerns for Australian businesses and how these transparency measures would impact on them. But then in the course of his discussion he quickly moved on to saying that if larger multinational businesses felt that they were somehow being discriminated against then they would not invest in the country. I think he should work out his line: whether he is here protecting small Australian companies that might inadvertently get caught in this measure, as he was suggesting, or whether he is talking about larger multinational companies.

One reason why this is important—the member for North Sydney talks about regulatory impact and the disincentives for businesses to come and set up here in Australia. One way you can discourage businesses to set up is to slug them with a big tax, a $20 billion paid parental leave tax.

Mr Hockey interjecting—

It is relevant because one of the threshold tests for that tax is that you have to have a $5 million taxable income. As the member for North Sydney scurries out of the chamber, what he will not do is tell the Australian people who are the 3,000-plus companies that will be stuck paying that levy. In fact, he cannot tell the Australian people who they are because we do not actually know who they are. We do not know who the companies are that are going to be slugged with that tax. He came in here and said he is concerned about reputational damage to companies, yet he went through and named a handful of companies. If he is fair dinkum, his paid parental leave tax will slug businesses. We do not even know who is on that hit list. Who are those 3,000-plus companies? I tell you what: the Australian people deserve to know. They deserve to know when it comes to transparency.

See this speech in context