Chris Bowen (McMahon, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I would encourage you and all honourable members to turn your minds back to just before the last budget, the 2016 budget. The then new Treasurer—never one to undersell his own abilities, in fairness—breathlessly told the Australian people that this was not just another budget. He said it was an economic plan, completely different to previous budgets, completely different to anything that, say, Paul Keating or Peter Costello might have brought down in their budgets. He was much better than them, he told the Australian people. He actually had an economic plan. It was an economic plan which the Prime Minister and Treasurer then took to the election.

What was that plan? What was the innovative plan that they came up with? What was the big idea that they had to put to the Australian people? It was a $50 billion tax cut for big business in Australia. That was the best they could come up with. They defined small business as anything with a turnover of less than $1 billion—that was one part of their plan—and they told the Australian people: 'We need to return to budget surplus. We need to make tough decisions. We need to get the budget under control. And, by the way, let's give $50 billion away to business.' They told the Australian people that we needed to protect the AAA credit rating but 'let's give $50 billion away to business'. That was the biggest ram raid on the budget presented during the election and of course it was entirely unfunded.

Talking of Peter Costello, I see that the former Treasurer has had something to say about that today. He said:

I'm not really sure that the BCA—

the Business Council—

had a good tax policy.

Fair enough! The trouble is, the BCA's tax policy was the government's tax policy. He is a polite man, Peter Costello. He has decided not to directly poor scorn on the government but to do it indirectly. He went on to say:

This has got to be funded.

Of course, this Prime Minister and this Treasurer took a policy to the election which was not funded. But they said: 'That's okay. It's all about growth. It's going to promote growth,' they told us. There would be jobs and growth, they said, all because of their economic plan. The Treasury released analysis which went to that claim and, yes, it is true. The Treasury said that the government's plan would boost the Australian economy. They said it would make the economy one per cent bigger. You might think, 'That is material; that is a reasonable amount, one per cent bigger.' But that was one per cent over a decade, and that decade would begin when the tax cuts were fully implemented—that is, in a decade's time. In 20 years they are going to increase the size of the economy by one per cent, or 0.05 per cent a year. Well done! That is the plan. That is the great dividend of the Liberal plan when it comes to the economy.

The Grattan Institute said that that was very optimistic. They said it would not be one per cent; it would be 0.6 per cent. But let's give the government the benefit of the doubt. Let's accept their figures and say it is one per cent. That is the entire dividend from the Turnbull-Morrison plan. That is not jobs and growth. That is not even a rounding error when it comes to economic growth over 20 years. You would need a microscope to see the dividend from the Morrison plan for the Australian economy.

So the plan delivers nothing. But the plan that delivers nothing has come to nothing, because today we have seen the final confirmation that this plan will not pass the parliament. It is dead in the water. The Morrison agenda is in tatters. At best, the government will be able to pass a tax cut for businesses with a threshold of less than $10 million. Our position is $2 million, but at best—let's give them the benefit of the doubt—they will get through a tax cut for businesses with a turnover of less than $10 million. If the entire package delivered 0.05 per cent a year, I wonder what this tax cut of under $10 million delivers. You would have to get the super powerful microscope out now to see the dividend from the government's plan.

If you imagine that the growth dividend is miniscule then all this begs the question: what is the point of the Turnbull government? Why are these people still here? Their agenda lies in tatters. They go to an election with a plan; the plan will not pass the parliament. We asked them in question time—and thankfully we got only three minutes of waffle, not 47 minutes of waffle, because of the time limits—but they do not have an economic agenda. You might remember that the Prime Minister was asked, 'What is the great achievement of the Turnbull government?' He had a cracker of an answer. He said, 'Well, of course you saw it in the budget reforms to superannuation and the reforms to business tax.' How is that working out? Both of them have had to be changed. Both of them are dead in the water. Both mean that the Turnbull government have at this point amounted to absolutely nothing, because at their heart they had a slogan, not a plan. They had a motto and not a program for Australia. They had an election slogan and not a plan for the nation. And they had a reckless, unfunded corporate tax cut, and even that they will fail to deliver. That was at the expense of a real plan to properly fund Australian schools and give young Australians the best possible start in life regardless of their background, their parents' wealth or where they live. That is a real plan for Australia's future. That is what this side of the House would deliver. All the other side of the House could deliver was a slogan which will come to nothing.

All this happens at a time when the economy is going through a difficult period. It is 100 days since the election and we have heard nothing from the Prime Minister and the Treasurer about their plan for the Australian economy. What are the results of the Turnbull government so far? We see 50,000 fewer full-time jobs than there were at the end of last year under the Turnbull government. And we saw confirmation in Senate estimates today that underemployment, at 8.7 per cent, is the highest since the series began in 1978. Let's just consider that. We got through the 1981-1982 recession under Treasurer John Howard, we got through the 1990s and we got through the global financial crisis with underemployment below what it is today, and the great contribution of the Prime Minister and the Treasurer is to deliver us the highest underemployment on record. That is their contribution to the Australian economy. That is not jobs and that is not growth. That is failure. That is a sign of failure and the sign of a lack of a plan.

What we know is also that the participation rate has been falling. That means that people are leaving the labour force because they know that they can look for as many jobs as they like, they can go to as many interviews as they can, they can go up and down the nation looking for work, and they will not get it. We know that if it was not for that fall in participation the unemployment rate would be closer to 6.3 per cent.

And what is the government's response to this? It is to say, 'Well, we've still got the plan.' It is the same old one. It is all they have got, despite the fact it would generate miniscule economic growth, despite the fact it would not generate jobs, despite the fact above all that they cannot deliver it. This is a Treasurer who could not deliver a pizza, let alone an economic plan. This is a Treasurer who is just not up to the job. This is a Treasurer who just is not capable of delivering on his commitments to the Australian people. And it is a Prime Minister who is too weak to deal with it. It is a Prime Minister who does not have the authority within his government to take charge of the economic agenda or to replace a Treasurer who is failing daily, to replace a Treasurer who does not have a plan for the Australian economy or for the Australian people.

This is a government with no understanding of the challenges in the Australian economy. They have no understanding that, actually, if we are going to keep our quarter of a century of economic growth going—which came about because of difficult decisions and reforms by Labor governments in the 1980s and 90s, Labor governments delivering the sorts of decisions and sorts of plans that this government could only dream about—this government would not have the wit and imagination to come up with. This Treasurer would not have the ability to think about those things. That is what delivered a quarter of a century of economic growth for our country.

This government is failing the Australian people, because this Treasurer and this Prime Minister do not understand what brings about economic growth, and what brings about economic growth in terms of productivity and investments in things like the NBN. This government does not understand what brings about economic growth through investment in our people, our most important resource—investment in young Australians so they get the best start in life. All they have got is a slogan, and an empty one at that and one that they cannot deliver.

The task is urgent. Unemployment and underemployment are at high levels. We are doing worse than we did in the worst economic and financial crisis in 80 years, on this Prime Minister's watch, on this Treasurer's watch. At the end of the day, we have a Prime Minister and a Treasurer with no understanding, no ideas and, above all, no plan for Australia's future.

See this speech in context