House debates
Thursday, 17 March 2016
Questions without Notice
Taxation
3:01 pm
Scott Morrison (Cook, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Hansard source
On this side of the House we are interested in making superannuation have more choice, be more flexible, be more fit for purpose for the working patterns of the 21st century, be fairer, be more targeted—and that is what we are working on. What we would like to see is a superannuation system where all workers can decide where their money goes and where it is saved. What we would like to see is a superannuation system where there are independent directors that sit on boards and oversight the money of those workers. But those opposite do not believe in this. When they look at superannuation they do not want to make it better; they just want to tax it more. That is all they want to do. The only thing they want to do when it comes to superannuation is tax it more.
You may ask yourself: why do they want to tax superannuation more? Because they just want to spend more. They just want to spend more and more and more. They have learnt nothing in their time in opposition that would give anybody any reason to think that they have earned the right to even put forward a proposition that would have them return to these benches. They have learnt nothing about their high levels of spending. In fact, they would propose $60 billion of additional expenditure over and above what is currently in the budget and forward estimates—and to pay for that they propose just $1 billion in savings and $7 billion in extra taxes.
How many more taxes will those opposite have to put on to keep pace with their addiction to spending? Taxing and spending is not a plan for jobs and growth. It is a threat to the transitioning economy that is going to underpin growth in jobs in this economy. That is why they cannot be trusted to manage the successful transition of the Australian economy.
Tibor Majlath
Posted on 21 Mar 2016 11:21 am
The Treasurer wants "superannuation (to) have more choice, be more flexible, be more fit for purpose for the working patterns of the 21st century, be fairer, be more targeted". Heard that before. Politicians can't help fiddling with your money. There is no agreement what super is for, hence the constant changes to super legislation. Sick of hearing about 'more choice' - this just highlights the lack of agreement on its purpose. You could have used it to buy shares or a house instead of using the money in retirement. More flexible, more targeted means what?
The word 'reform' must be the most abused. It means to make things better, but it is always better for only a few vested interests.
The Treasurer talks about taxing and addiction to spending. Just which party is the highest taxing/spending party as a proportion of GDP in recent times? The obvious conclusion according to the Coalition is that it is the Labor party. Mais Oui. But of course. However, if one looks at the recent MYEFO it is surprising to see that the Coalition has much the same track record as the Labor party.
Hawke/Keating 1983-1996 averaged 24% Taxation/GDP and 25.7% Spending/GDP
Howard 1996-2007 averaged 25.15% Taxation/GDP and 24.15% Spending/GDP. With all that revenue flowing in from the mining boom and China's growth he was able to give massive tax cuts over 10 budgets - count them - all the while being the highest taxing government in recent times. It wasn't good economic management just dumb luck as future governments have to maintain and are paying for those tax cuts in poorer times.
Rudd/Gillard 2007-2013 averaged 22.85% Taxation/GDP and 24.63% Spending/GDP. Labor wasn't such a high taxing government as the Coalition under Howard but it was spending more than it collected. It was also paying for Howard's squandered taxes. Revenue was down due the GFC and the slow down in the mining sector. Rightly or wrongly Labor kept spending.
The Abbott/Turnbull government managed in 2013-14, 22.8% Taxation/GDP 25.7% Spending/GDP. These are projected to rise over the forward estimates. I know - it's always Labor's fault.
Spending is a problem and both parties are equally to blame. But the Coalition is misleading in claiming that revenue is not the problem. Past tax cuts together with spending by all parties have loosened fiscal policy. Cutting tax costs money. Where does that money come from? The money must be found somewhere to pay for them. Tax cuts are the biggest form of spending.