Nick Champion (Wakefield, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Thank you, Deputy Speaker Mitchell. It is great to be in the House with you. I know we both had tough re-election campaigns. I think yours was a little tougher than mine. But it is good to have you back here; now there is at least one other car enthusiast in the House of Representatives.

This bill demonstrates and illustrates the nature of this government. It is a government of reaction and reactionary politics; not of caution, not of considered thinking, not of liberal thinking, not even of Conservative thinking. This is the party and the government of reactionary politics and it is led by a man who is this perfect political blend of Malcolm Fraser, Richard Nixon and BA Santamaria. That is the nature of this government. It must absolutely gall the two characters down here on the government benches that such a man leads the Liberal Party, because of his nature and because of the damage we see this bill will do to this country. This bill will reduce the taxation of big miners, of capital. It is a rich gift to powerful interests but it is a hit, a slug on battlers and on self-reliant entrepreneurs. It is an assault on family budgets and it is an assault on all of those outside of the metropolitan mainstream, those in regional Australia.

The nature of this bill and of this economic construct reveals the essential character of this government. It is a very early sign that this government simply believes their return to the Treasury benches and the return to conservative rule will lead to some sort of economic confidence and that a tax cut for those who are already, let us face it, obscenely wealthy will lead to economic growth. Time will tell whether these naive beliefs will collide with economic reality.

This bill tells you a lot about the contrast between the Abbott government's character and the Australian character. The government's character is to back the big guy at the expense of the little fella. The Australian character is the complete antithesis of that. This is a party and a government of reaction that given the choice between the boardroom or the shopping mall will pick the narrow interests of boardrooms every time. And that will not do our nation a lick of good.

Early on, we can see the contents of this bill, beginning with superannuation, will affect battlers. We know that superannuation is not just an important mechanism for workers' retirement incomes but, as I said in previous speeches, it is an important mechanism to redistribute wealth at a time in workers' lives when they need it the most: in their retirement years. That is a critical aspect of the superannuation system. The other thing it does is add to our national savings.

So what does this bill do? It removes the low-income superannuation contribution, it increases taxes on one in three of Australia's lowest-paid workers and it cuts the super of millions of Australians earning up to $37,000 a year while boosting the super of those 16,000 people who have more than $2 million in their super balance. It in effect scraps the low-income superannuation contribution—up to $500 for those earning under $37,000 a year—that is currently paid into the accounts of taxpayers. That is a massive hit on Australian workers. It is a massive hit in particular on women. There will be 2.1 million women affected, most of those working part-time in industries like retail and hospitality.

This bill is a massive attack on battlers' incomes. They will not see it today or tomorrow. They will not even see it next week but it they will feel it decades from now, as our nation will feel it decades from now, when we see the combined effects of the abolition of the low-income superannuation contribution and the delay in increasing the super guarantee to 12 per cent, which will reduce our national savings by $53 billion by 2021-22. That will have a massive impact on our nation's economic wellbeing, on our ability to invest in our own country, on our ability to invest overseas and on our ability in particular to invest in infrastructure. On current projections, it will cost some $5 billion in infrastructure spending. So it will have a massive impact on battlers in the future; it is a king hit on their retirement incomes.

The Schoolkids bonus is very important to family budgets. It is a payment of $410 per primary school student and $820 per high school student which is paid to 1.3 million Australian families starting from January next year. They would get this bonus but they will not get it because of this government's character, because of its priorities. Its priority is to give a tax cut to the top end of town while removing superannuation benefits and the Schoolkids bonus for battlers.

Finally, we see the government's character in relation to the income support bonus. The income support bonus is a tax-free payment for over 50s on newstart allowance. Anybody who has been out there doorknocking or talking to people knows that if you get made redundant or if you suffer unemployment in your 50s, it is extraordinarily hard to get back into the job market. I have met many people who have put out literally hundreds of applications only to be knocked back. It is not their skills or their work ethic or their fundamental decency; it is simply their age. That is a great blind spot, I think, with Australian employers. They are wasting a huge amount of economic and social capital. Often these workers are very good workers so it is a terrible thing to get rid of that income support bonus. We all know that the rate of newstart is far too low and we all know that causes massive poverty. To deny people, who have often worked all their lives and who have not made much of a call on the welfare system, this payment is an act of nastiness that reveals something about the character of this government.

We now come to the government's assault on entrepreneurs, on small business. We hear so much about small business from those opposite. They all have a business story way back when in the family. I know the next speaker probably came from small business stock. Indeed, my grandfather was a small businessmen so I know something about his battles with the bank during the recession of the 1960s caused by the Menzies government. We know that being in business is tough, so why would you make it any tougher? This bill does. This bill increases taxes on 2.7 million small businesses. They are going to get a nasty surprise, because they thought it was all going to be Shangri-la when this government came to power. A lot of them have very, very high expectations of you and when they find out that the taxes are being increased, that the loss carry-back scheme is being closed and that 110,000 businesses across the country are going to lose a tax break, they are going to be very, very disappointed indeed. Their expectations will be dashed and they will find their lives harder and that will have an impact on economic confidence, because we know small businesses are extraordinarily important, particularly in terms of employment.

We have got both the Ai Group and COSBOA against this. We have got the Ai Group saying it will add to complexity and compliance costs for small businesses. It is extraordinary supposedly from a government that prides itself on helping small business. It tells us every day it is going to help small business, and here we find them assaulting their interests.

Lastly, we see them making life harder for those outside the metropolitan mainstream. I have an electorate which is the outer suburbs of Adelaide and country towns—one of which I grew up in—and I know how extraordinarily tough it is. You suffer the tyranny of distance. You feel it in just about every way, and the people out there are very self-reliant. They have to be. Those towns have to be, and we know that they do so much to add to the wealth of our country. So why would you make their lives harder?

Flagged in this bill and in the government's plans is the discontinuation of the Regional Infrastructure Fund and the RDA Fund. These funds were very important, particularly to electorates like mine. They helped fund the Balaklava water pipeline, which is going to trigger economic growth in that region; and fund the Barossa Bike Path, triggering that synergy between lifestyle, small business, tourism and the wine industry. We are seeing that terrible assault on regional Australia, and these are all traditional constituencies of this government. To take the bat to regional Australia, to take the bat to small business, is just extraordinary, particularly at a time when their expectations of this government are so high. We know they were never particularly forthright about their plans when they were in opposition.

Inherent in this bill is this idea that we can return to privilege, to genuflecting to the mining squattocracy who are sitting on the nation's wealth, monopolising its opportunities, celebrating themselves and giving each other golfer's claps about any sort of contribution that they might make. That is what we are going to go back to: the golfer's clap. I know the member for Higgins—she is part of the cheer squad; don't worry about that—is very, very against giving the car industry anything but she does not mind giving fairly big tax breaks to the miners. We will see that in her speech today and we will hear about how not much revenue has been raised—just $3 billion over the forward estimates; small change to those opposite. They do not care. What is it likely to be in the long term once commodity prices lift?

When you get right down to it, this is why this is a government of reaction. It is like the Fraser government; it is not like the Howard government. It is not like reforming governments, because what they are going to do is lower revenue and open up a tax loophole for those who are already deriving massive wealth and are not particularly good at distributing that wealth, sharing it or creating other opportunities in the economy.

It is a massive hit on our national savings, on super, and this is our only chance. We hear a lot about foreign ownership in this building but the only way to prevent foreign ownership, the only way to buy back your farm, is to have national savings and that is what superannuation does.

We have got a government that is essentially reactionary in its character and they insist on siding with those who have economic privilege at the moment over people who battle, who work. It does not matter whether they are small businessmen, wage earners or people out there in the regions. They are on the side of the boardroom. It tells you so much about this government. As I said, it is a strange combination of spin and market tested lines—and we know where they come from: out of the focus groups.

You see all this stuff but, deep in its heart, it is led by a man who combines the politics of Malcolm Fraser, Richard Nixon and BA Santamaria. It is a pretty toxic mix in my opinion. In that sense, it is a government that is destined to disappoint, and this bill is essentially the beginning of that process. Once the rubber hits the road, those opposite will not be nearly so arrogant. Once the schoolkids bonus goes, those opposite will not be nearly so arrogant. Once small businesses lose their tax breaks, this government will not be nearly so cocksure. I think we will be able to mark the decline of the policy and political integrity of this government with this bill.

See this speech in context