Pat Conroy (Shortland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker, when the government have to put out the Minister for Small Business to defend a policy, you know they are in trouble. His greatest claim to fame when he retires and hangs up his boots will be stuffing up the ABS census. You know they are in trouble. This debate is about the eighties. The eighties are back, and you only have to look at this debate to understand it. When people say that the eighties are back, you can imagine the member for Riverina with a Flock of Seagulls haircut; you can imagine, maybe, the member for Gippsland with a Hypercolor T-shirt and cut-off jeans shorts. That would be a good revival of the eighties. But instead we have a sad and tragic revival of the Laffer curve and trickle-down economics, because this entire policy debate is based on these discredited economic policies.

The Laffer curve, the great brainchild of Ronald Reagan's economic guru, and trickle-down economics are two policies discredited in the 1980s and revived by this hopeless government, a government whose economic credentials are in tatters, with $500 billion in debt, triple the deficit, flat wage growth and a 75-year-high inequality rate. This is its economic legacy, which will be worsened even more by this embrace of the Laffer curve, which says that, if you cut taxes, you will see a rise in revenue. That was discredited in the eighties, and this policy will be discredited again.

The shadow Treasurer has put on record again that this policy not only will cost $48 billion but, by the peak, will cost the government budget bottom line $14 billion per annum. Goldman Sachs, the Prime Minister's own favourite merchant bank, has found that 60 per cent of the benefit will go to foreigners. In fact, the US Internal Revenue Service will be the greatest beneficiary. They will get $8 billion of the $48 billion. And who is the greatest beneficiary in Australia? The banks. The big four banks will get $7 billion of this $48 billion. What is the pay-off? What is the pay-off for this?

We had this rant from the Minister for Small Business: 'It's all about jobs. It's all about jobs.' He says we are betraying Australians because we are not talking about jobs enough. Their own modelling—their own highly optimistic modelling—finds, in 20 years time, a 0.1 per cent increase in employment. That is not per annum; it is overall: a 0.1 per cent increase in jobs. That is incredible. That is a rounding error.

See this speech in context