Andrew Leigh (Fraser, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Hansard source

As the clock ticked down during the member for Mitchell's speech and, with 20 seconds to go, he told us they had plan, I was reminded of that great mathematical proof: 'I have discovered a solution but the margin is too small to contain it.' 'We have a plan but the time does just does not let me explain it.'

We are in an Australia where inequality is at a 75-year high. Inequality is one of the signal issues of our age. President Obama, speaking at Osawatomie, has channelled Teddy Roosevelt in talking about the need to tackle excessive inequality. In Evangelii Gaudium, Pope Francis has spoken about inequality as a central challenge of our age. Thomas Piketty's 700-page economics book has given heart to wonks and social justice activists everywhere. It is not just the Pope, the President and Piketty. It is also the many Australians who are concerned about the rise in inequality and about the gender impacts of that rise, with a widening gap between rich and poor—a central factor behind the fact that the gender pay gap is now at a 20-year high.

When Labor were last in office we increased the pension, bringing a million Australians out of poverty. We put in place the National Disability Insurance Scheme for some of the most vulnerable Australians. We raised the super contribution rate. We put in place dental care for children. We made a record investment in homelessness. But since they came to office the Abbott-Turnbull government have taken Australian in the opposite direction. They are looking to cut penalty rates, which is disproportionately paid to low-paid workers, and to raise the GST, which disproportionately hurts those at the bottom of the distribution. They are getting rid of the low-income super contribution, a measure designed to redress the super gap between men and women and between low-paid and high-paid workers. They are opposing Labor's sensible multinational tax changes, which tackle the debt deduction loopholes and add $7 billion to the budget bottom line over the course of the next decade, and they are opposing our sensible superannuation changes, which add $14 billion to the budget bottom line over the next decade.

Those opposite like to say they like super, but let us go through the record. When it was introduced they voted against universal super in 1992. They froze contributions in 1996. They froze them again in 2014. In fact, I am struggling to think of a moment when any one of those opposite might have voted in favour of a superannuation measure that benefits ordinary workers. Put your hand up if you are someone opposite who has ever voted for super to benefit low-income workers. No; I did not think so. And that is the story, because superannuation is fundamentally about looking after the most vulnerable.

Labor is concerned about making our superannuation system better, and reducing the fees is at the heart of that. That is why we put in place the MySuper reforms and that is why we are opposing the coalition's ideologically driven changes for more independent directors. A report brought forward by the UNSW's Monica Tan and Marie-Anne Cam finds that as you increase the number of independent directors the fees go up. We know we needed 295 more directors, which would add $168 million more to the cost of superannuation funds. When we look at how they have performed over the last decade, not a single retail fund makes the top 10, which is composed entirely of industry funds. In fact, if a typical investor had been in an industry fund rather than a retail fund, their superannuation account would be $16,000 better off. And at the same time as fighting against good superannuation and making the superannuation system cost more for low-wage workers, this government is trying to make things tougher to find out the tax affairs of large companies. They have just passed through the Senate a measure which winds back Labor's tax transparency laws, despite the fact that when we asked them if they had received a single bit of correspondence calling for this wind-back of tax transparency they said there had not been a skerrick. The Prime Minister in question time today said that they had to wind back tax transparency in order to protect firms who were negotiating with suppliers. He has obviously never heard of IBISWorld, on which you can get a range of information on private corporations, nor has he thought for a moment about how you would go back from tax paid to work out exactly how profitable a firm is. The fact is that we are not seeing serious tax reform from this government, because the Abbott-Turnbull government are on their second Treasurer and their third Assistant Treasurer. They have dropped the ball on good tax reform.

See this speech in context