Angus Taylor (Hume, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Cities and Digital Transformation) Share this | Hansard source

I am delighted to have the opportunity here to talk about leadership. But I am somewhat surprised that those opposite want to focus on leadership. In fact, I could spend some time talking about the 10 minutes of whingeing we just heard and how that might equate to leadership—and clearly it does not. When I think of leadership, I go to the facts. The first set of facts we should look at is how those opposite governed prior to 2013: prior to the time we came into government. Those opposite do not like talking about that—they have got selective amnesia for anything prior to the last couple of years—but I think it is an important starting point as we talk about leadership. And, of course, what we saw there was their definition of leadership, which was a surplus converted to a totally unprecedented deficit; and they call that leadership. We saw 1,200 deaths at sea; and they call that leadership. We saw endless program failures with pink batts and school halls; and they call that leadership.

We could focus on that history for the next 10 minutes, but I will not, because I will focus on the more recent failures of leadership we are seeing from those opposite. The first of those is that we saw them commit to $6 billion of savings, which they are unprepared to commit to now that the election is over. They pretended, as they always do, to be fiscal conservatives. But where is the fiscal conservatism now? It has disappeared. It has disappeared now that the Australian people are not about to vote.

The second failure of leadership is around superannuation. We saw those opposite bank the savings that we committed on superannuation. Where is the policy? We have not seen the policy. Again, no policy—the fiscal conservatives without fiscally conservative policies. Third, they pretended, again, to be conservatives on border protection. They were going to lead on border protection, but 30 of them—many of them here; put your hands up if you like—refused to support their policy for offshore detention centres. Again, a failure of leadership.

Finally, they pretended that they wanted to lead on gay marriage. But when it came to the opportunity to have a plebiscite to resolve this issue, again, they were unprepared to support a very clear measure for which we have a mandate from the most recent election.

Now, in contrast, the Turnbull government will be defined by delivery through collaboration. It is the absolute heart of our Australian democracy that we negotiate better outcomes for all Australians. Australians are looking for leadership for the people. To that end, I am firmly convinced that the Senate will be a better one than the last one: not leadership driven by the partisan politics of those opposite.

Now, let me focus for a few minutes on the economy—this is where we need leadership and we are seeing leadership from this side of the House. We know the Australian economy is growing at about three per cent a year—that is a striking number; that is a good number, by world standards, amongst developed countries. Business conditions and consumer confidence are well above their long-term average and we need to ensure that the right foundations for a strong economy remain in the years ahead.

We are focused on a lower taxing, lower spending government. There is no equivalence between raising taxes and reducing spending. They are not the same thing. You cannot call a tax increase a save. But those opposite want to do it. Do you know the reason? It is very simple. When you raise taxes you slow the economy. Any economist will tell you that. Those opposite wanted taxes on housing. They wanted taxes on investment, on capital gains. As we have just heard about, they wanted taxes on electricity. All of this will slow the economy and it is not the sort of economic leadership Australia needs to be prosperous in the years to come.

This morning the Turnbull government introduced the Budget Savings (Omnibus) Bill into the parliament to give effect to $6 billion in budget savings—

See this speech in context