Jason Falinski (Mackellar, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

There is no-one in this House that does not believe that inequality is an important issue that needs to be resolved.

Mr Swan interjecting—

The member for Lilley can carry on as much as he likes, but under his tenure as Treasurer more was done to create inequality than under any other Treasurer in the history of this federation. The fact of the matter is—

Honourable members interjecting—

Yes, I can read IMF reports—some of you should try it every once in a while. What we disagree with are the sources of that inequality. We believe that what really matters is whether a community creates or provides the opportunity for any person, no matter what circumstances they are born into, to go wherever they want to. Mobility is more critical than inequality because no person's potential should be limited by what circumstances they are born into. There is no disagreement that inequality is undesirable.

What we argue about are the sources of that inequality. Therefore, is it any surprise that we disagree as to what those solutions should be? But, honestly, I have to say that the evidence is so overwhelming that the solutions advocated by those opposite do not work that they must actually have been proposed by people who believe the moon landing was faked or that the Berlin Wall came crashing down because people were trying to get in, not out. Let us take some examples of their reasons for inequality—for example, the Panama Papers. Apparently it is part of some worldwide conspiracy to hide tax income in Panama! The way the member for Lilley speaks, there is actually a giant volcano in Panama and, if you just open the top, there is a lair of people sitting inside advocating the downfall of Western society. Then you get the dark and evil forces gathered around the boardrooms of Australia's corporations, where they are just plotting to make things worse. Or, apparently, it is because we on this side have been undermining the union movement—like they were not doing a good enough job on their own! But, of course, we also have: 'We just need more money going into the welfare system,' 'We just need to distribute more money to people,' and 'We need a tax system that is more distributive.'

Why don't we take each of these issues one by one? According to the ATO and the ABS, multinational tax evasion is in the shadows of the cash economy and represents about two per cent of GDP. The Heydon royal commission, beyond anything else that this parliament has ever seen, showed that the union movement and its leaders are more interested in self-enrichment than they are in helping the workers they pretend to represent. We had hardworking Australians paying union dues so that that money could be spent on holidays, holiday homes, private school fees, tattoos and prostitutes.

We spend $154 billion a year on welfare, and the sad fact of the matter is that we have not shifted the needle one iota—and, according to those opposite, it has got worse. If you are in Australia's welfare system or you are predominantly reliant on Australia's welfare system, you will have lower health outcomes, you will have lower education outcomes, you will not live as long, you will have a higher incidence of crime—

Mr Swan interjecting—

The member for Lilley thinks that is okay. And you will have a higher probability of passing those outcomes on to your children. When we look at the tax system in Australia, we see that it is 19 times more distributive than the OECD average, and transfer payments are 12 times higher than in France. For every dollar those in the top quintile of income earners in Australia pay, they get 30c back in government services. If you are unlucky enough to be in the lowest quintile, for every dollar you pay, you receive $324 in government services. In other words, you are 1,000 times more distributive.

It is long past time that Labor stopped posturing about caring, because they do not. If you care about mobility and reducing inequality then support microeconomic reform; if you care about decimating inequality then support tax reform; and, if you care about saving lives, support welfare reform.

See this speech in context