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

The minister now asks me to name one area where the Labor Party stands for low taxes. We stand for lower taxes on low-income earners, and you stand for higher taxes. You want to increase taxes on every working Australian. That's what this government wants to do. Minister, go out to the Australian people, go out to your electors and explain why you want to increase the taxes on people who earn more than $21,000. That's what you want to do. You stand for higher taxes. The government stands for higher taxes on working Australians. This minister at the table is proud of it. He supports higher taxes on working Australians because he supports an increase in their personal tax rate which this side of the House will oppose and stand against in this chamber and in the other chamber.

We will say that those Australians who are dealing with low wages growth and negative real wages growth, who are dealing with the loss of their penalty rates and who are dealing with electricity prices going through the roof on this government's watch as a direct result of the policy uncertainty that this government is delivering, that what this government is doing is increasing their tax rates. This side of the House will stand against that. This side of the House will stand against their proposals to reduce corporate tax because they are a hit on the budget. They are a hit on the budget which will make budget repair impossible.

This nation and the governments of the day have a choice: you can have budget repair and a return to budget balance or you can have a corporate tax cut, but you cannot have both. This government has chosen corporate tax over budget repair. I say to the government: go out and say so. Fess up! Why don't you just be honest with the Australian people and say you've given up on budget repair? You no longer think it's necessary. You no longer think it's important to return to budget balance. The government thinks: 'Actually, we thought it was important, but now it's no longer important. We actually now think a corporate tax cut is more important.' Fair enough. If that's your argument, make it.

The government won't admit that they can't deliver a balanced budget and they can't deliver budget repair because they are prioritising the corporate tax cut. You simply can't have the situation where you believe in budget repair and you believe in returning the budget to balance, but at the same time you can just give away $65 billion in a corporate tax cut, which is unaffordable and unfunded. And so it is appropriate that the House expresses its view to the government by carrying a second reading amendment. I move:

That all the words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:

"the House declines to give this bill a second reading as:

(1) this significant structural deterioration in the Budget is unaffordable;

(2) the Government has prioritised giving millionaires and big business tax cuts, and raising income taxes on workers earning above $21,000, over saving penalty rates; and

(3) the Government has failed to deliver any economic leadership".

The economic leadership point is an important one, because there is a very important anniversary later in the week. There are a couple, actually. The House will be interested to know—the member for Werriwa I notice is taking a keen interest—there are a couple of milestones for the Prime Minister later in the week. First, he will overtake Tony Abbott's record as Prime Minister. He will have been Prime Minister for longer than Tony Abbott. He's managed to hold on longer, by his fingernails, in the party room.

Opposition members interjecting—

That's right: I am making a supposition that he lasts until Thursday, but I think I'm on reasonable grounds. Next week I couldn't be so sure, but I think this week he's going to make it. And then, later in the week, he will have been Prime Minister for two years. Remember he promised two things. The first was to turn around Newspoll. I make no comment on Newspoll; that's for others to judge. He pointed out that there were 30 negative Newspolls and he said he would turn that around, but that's for others to judge. He also promised new economic leadership. Now, the new economic leadership that he is proposing for the Australian people is a tax rise for those who earn more than $21,000, taking away the penalty rates for Australians who commit no crime other than working on a weekend, and increased electricity prices as a result of the policy uncertainty and instability at the heart of this government.

This is a government that commissioned a report by the Chief Scientist. The Chief Scientist has told it that the best way you can put downward pressure on electricity prices is a clean energy target. We on this side of House have said, 'Well, okay, that's not our preferred policy option, but we'll go with it if that puts downward pressure on prices and delivers that policy certainty and stability.' But there is a government here that cannot deliver its own policy. It commissioned a report and now its members are at war with each other about whether it should be adopted or not. Well, this side of the House is here to help. It's extended a hand of bipartisanship, but there's no hand on the other side!

This 'new economic leadership' goes to all the wrong priorities incompetently delivered, and that is not new economic leadership; that is a shame for the Australian people. We have had to put up with these two years of false starts, wrong priorities and a government that told us that they wanted to give income tax powers to the states, for example, and reduce all federal funding from education. That was 'new economic leadership'. They are a government that told us that they'd have an increase in the GST and then they wouldn't have an increase in the GST. They are a government that told us they would have big personal income tax cuts and are increasing tax through the Medicare levy. They are a government that told us they would have a corporate tax cut, which is entirely unfunded and is a massive hit to the budget bottom line over the next decade. They are a government which told us they understood the cost-of-living pressures on the Australian people but are reducing penalty rates for those who work on weekends. And they are a government that, of course, have seen the debt blow out on their watch. They are a government that told us there was a debt and deficit disaster, but they have added more debt onto the national accounts or onto the government's figures than was added under the previous Labor government. In their time in office, in their fifth year in office, they've added more debt than was added under the previous Labor administration.

This is the lack of leadership we see from the government. We see an approach that is fundamentally out of keeping with the priorities that the Australian people so desperately want to see from their government. However, the opposition has taken the opportunity to lead the economic debate and will continue to do so. And, when we contest the next election, we'll seek a mandate to do those big and important things, which this government has so blatantly failed to do.

See this speech in context