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

They come in and say that the Australian economy is doing it tough. They ignore all of the objective evidence. They have a look and they say, 'Well, we don't think the economy is doing all that well. We think that the economy is tanking.'

Mr Christensen interjecting—

I can understand why the member opposite does not want to talk about the economy. I will share with him some words of wisdom from someone who those opposite hail as being their great former leader, John Howard, the former member for Bennelong. John Howard does not have the same incentive to come up and mislead people in the way which those opposite do. In January this year he said:

When the Prime Minister and the Treasurer and others tell you that the Australian economy is doing better than most—they are right.

So if you are not prepared to believe the government when it comes to economic management credentials then I ask you to have a look at some objective indicators. Have a look at the AAA credit rating from all three major ratings agencies: it was never delivered when the coalition were in office. Have a look at what the former Liberal Prime Minister, John Howard, had to say. He said:

We are still fortunate that we have an unemployment rate with a five in front of it. I wouldn't have thought that was going to be possible a few years ago, and I don't think many people would.

When the member for North Sydney finished off his contribution by saying, 'All those opposite are interested in is their own jobs,' he should have acknowledged the point that his former leader acknowledged: that the jobs of hundreds and thousands of Australians have been secured and protected because of the action of this government. The member for North Sydney used the expression 'spiralling government debt'. What did the former Liberal Prime Minister John Howard have to say about this so-called spiralling government debt? He said:

And our debt to GDP ratio, the amount of money we owe to the strength of our economy, is still a lot better than most other countries.

I could rest my case on the words of John Howard. I could do that, but there are a couple of other important points I want to make. One is that those opposite talk about high-taxing governments. What they do not acknowledge is that the tax-to-GDP ratio under this government—that is, the amount of tax you collect as a proportion of the economy—is considerably lower today than it was when we came into office. It was 23.7 per cent when they left office. Today it is 21.5 per cent. To put that in context, one percentage point is equivalent to $15 billion a year. That means that, had we been taxing Australians at the same level as they were being taxed when we came into office, the budget would be in surplus today.

A question that those opposite might want to answer at some point is: do they give a commitment to keep the tax-to-GDP ratio at the level that it is at? If that is the case, then they have got some work to do because of the very few policies they have been prepared to share with us. The first one is their $20 billion paid parental leave tax, which will slug 3,000 of the most successful businesses operating in this country. They will do that—

Mr Robb interjecting—

and I do not think the member for Goldstein believes in the paid parental leave tax, either. I think he was a dissenting voice in the shadow cabinet. Sorry, I forgot: this matter did not go to the shadow cabinet. This was one of those unilateral signature policies that the Leader of the Opposition decided he would implement. Then, if I recall correctly, when he took it to the party room he said, 'Sometimes it's better to ask for forgiveness than permission.' This is one occasion when he was asking for forgiveness. But I tell you: it is not the member for Goldstein he needs to forgive or needs to seek forgiveness from. He needs to seek forgiveness not just from the 3,000 successful Australian businesses that will be slugged with this tax but from the Australian people, who will face an increase in the cost of their goods and services when they go to the grocery store and in their mortgages. The banks have already indicated that they would need to increase mortgage rates to fund this paid parental leave tax. People will pay for it at the bowser, as the price of petrol goes up when petrol companies are slugged with this tax. And this will be a tax on miners as well, as much as the coalition might like to tell their friends in the mining sector that they will be a protected species under them.

The point is that, as a government, we have delivered sensible tax reforms that have delivered tax cuts to an overwhelming majority of Australians while, at the same time, we have committed to shoring up the tax base. Members would be aware that I have been talking a lot over time about the need to crack down on multinational taxation loopholes. Those opposite have voted against every measure we have put in place. Last night they did it again, with the changes to part IVA, the general anti-avoidance and transfer pricing provisions. They voted against it in the Senate. What I found extraordinary was that, at the very same time, the member for North Sydney was out there finally acknowledging what we have been saying, that there are problems with corporate tax loopholes:

The problem is that national taxation laws were essentially designed to cover domestically operating entities and while there have been amendments to account for cross-border activity, these additions have not been able to fully keep up.

He said we need to bring global tax rules into the 21st century. If he is fair dinkum then, when we bring in a proposal to do that, you should support it. That is not what you have been prepared to do, because you always stand up for lurks for corporate tax. (Time expired)

See this speech in context