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

I move:

That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: "whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House:

(1)   notes the Treasurer's Budget Night promise of tax cuts from 'July 1 this year' and the Prime Minister's assurance they would be delivered 'administratively';

(2)   notes the Pre-election Economic and Fiscal Outlook later confirmed the tax cuts would not be implemented on July 1; and

(3)   calls on the Government to explain whether, if it cannot do something as simple as enacting a bipartisan tax cut, it is really up to running the nation."

This is a story about a Treasurer who boasted he would deliver an income tax cut to Australians, who are now discovering that they are not going to get it for three extra months. On budget night the Treasurer stood at the dispatch box opposite and said:

From 1 July this year, we will increase the upper limit for the middle-income tax bracket from $80,000 to $87,000 per year.

But the Treasurer has been unable to deliver on that categorical promise—yet another promise made and broken by this Abbott-Turnbull government. Even after the budget had been brought down the Prime Minister was on ABC radio saying:

That is really up to the Labor Party whether it's legislated, but certainly it will be covered administratively after the election, we expect the Parliament to come back and ensure that all of the legislation supporting the Budget measures is passed.

The tax cut enjoys bipartisan support, but this government is so inept and so incompetent that it has been unable to deliver to the Australian people a bipartisan middle-income tax cut on time. As the tax commissioner confirmed in the Pre-election Economic and Fiscal Outlook, the tax cuts would not be flowing from 1 July, as promised by the Treasurer, but instead will only take effect when the legislation passes the parliament. The Pre-election Economic and Fiscal Outlook, as members will know, is prepared by the secretaries of the departments of Treasury and Finance. It says on page 40:

There are a number of tax measures included in the 2016-17 Budget that take effect on or before 1 July 2016. Many of these measures can be legislated at a later time within 2016-17 without materially affecting the estimates. However, the Commissioner has indicated that the Ten Year Enterprise Tax Plan—targeted personal income tax relief measure requires the relevant legislation to be passed before the change will be incorporated into the income tax withholding schedules. As the timing of this is uncertain, there is a risk that some of the revenue cost of this measure will slip from 2016-17 into 2017-18 (improving the 2016-17 bottom line with a commensurate worsening in 2017-18).

These promises made by the Treasurer on budget night have turned out to be false. We do not know whether the Treasurer was deliberately misleading the House, but certainly the effect of the Treasurer's statements were to mislead the Australian people. We are asking the Treasurer to reveal whether or not advice was sought from the tax office before these statements were given. We are calling on the Prime Minister to release any evidence which was given to him before his statements on ABC radio.

Mr Frydenberg interjecting—

The member for Kooyong is crying about this, because what the member for Kooyong knows is that the top income tax cut will come in on time. Oh, yes, when this mob opposite have to deliver a tax cut to the top one per cent—and, let's face it, that is what the tax cut that removes the temporary budget deficit repair levy will do—then that comes on time, but a tax cut which comes to middle-income Australians, a tax cut which comes to those earning over $80,000 a year, they cannot get that one right. With the tax cut for the very top—and we have done some numbers on this tax cut that will flow from 1 July next year—94 per cent of the benefits of that tax cut will go to the top one per cent of Australians.

It has been a pretty good couple of decades for the top one per cent. The top one per cent have doubled their share of national income. The share of national income held by the top one per cent is now getting up towards levels not seen in three-quarters of a century. Yet, when it comes to deciding tax policy, this government's priority is not to look after middle-income Australia, not to show a sense of love for middle-income Australia but to show a sense of love towards the top one per cent. That is their way of conducting public policy. Australians will make their judgement as to what side this government is on. Are they on the side of middle Australia, whose tax cut has been kicked off through the incompetence of the government, or are they on the side of the top one per cent, who get their tax cut square and on time?

See this speech in context