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

As the government continues its obsession with witch-hunts and with taxpayer-funded smear campaigns, there are big issues that the government should be addressing in this House and should be addressing when it comes to policy. Economic growth is very important amongst them. We've had 26 years of uninterrupted economic growth, which is a great achievement for Australia. We on this side of the House know that this economic growth has lifted people out of poverty and turned aspiration into reality, and driving economic growth is part of our mission in public life, because we want to see people move from poverty into better circumstances and we want to see aspiration return to reality. That's why this side of the House, the Labor Party, engaged in those reforms of the 1980s and 1990s to see those 26 years of uninterrupted economic growth. That's why this side of the House kept Australia out of recession in the face of the most difficult economic circumstances that had been faced in 70 years, under the treasurership of the member for Lilley. That's what we believe in: economic growth. That's what drives our economic policy.

We know also that that growth needs to be inclusive, and I was glad to see the Productivity Commission this week agree. The Productivity Commission said in their report on economic growth:

A key issue will be to ensure that future economic, social and environmental policies sustain inclusive growth …

Opposition members: Hear, hear!

'Hear, hear,' this side of the House said. That sits well with this side of the House. It doesn't sit so well with those opposite, because they don't know what it means. When we say they don't know what it means, we mean it, because they say they don't know what it means. Just last week, the member for Jagajaga was talking about inclusive growth and she said:

We need social investment in our people and in health and education, inclusive growth …

Did the other side say, 'Hear, hear'? No. The member for Mitchell said, 'What does that even mean?' He didn't know what inclusive growth meant. For the benefit of the House, we'll explain it. Inclusive growth means ensuring that every Australian, regardless of their background, regardless of their educational experience and regardless of their parents' wealth, is able to contribute to that growth, is invested in to grow to their full potential and is included in the benefits of that growth. To spell it out, that's what inclusive growth means.

We on this side of the House have understood that. We've understood that for a long time. In 2008, the Labor government ensured that investment in our people, human capital, was at the centre of the COAG Reform Agenda. We wrote it in. We got the agreement of the states. The other side of the House came to office and ripped that up in that document which is known as the 2014 budget. They ripped into health, ripped into education and ripped into investments in our people. That's what that side of the House believe in. What we had is five wasted years when it comes to growth which includes all Australians.

We've seen this week the Productivity Commission report. It's a lengthy report, a substantial report. It was best summed up, perhaps, by Phil Coorey on the front page of the Financial Review this week. He said:

The report and speech will more closely mimic Labor's inclusive growth strategy, which is based on a smarter, healthier population.

We're happy to lead the debate. We're happy to set the agenda. We thought, 'Well, maybe this is an opportunity for the government to finally get it, to get the message and to understand what inclusive growth looks like.' I listened to what the Treasurer had to say in response to the Productivity Commission inquiry. He went out and he made a speech, and what was his big message out of the Productivity Commission inquiry? What was the big message that he took away that was going to influence government policy?

He said, 'This makes us even more determined to pass our corporate tax cuts'—inclusive trickle-down from the Treasurer! I thought: 'Maybe I've missed something. I'll go and double-check the report to find where the report recommends $65 billion be spent on corporate tax cuts.' Well, they go to tax. They talk about land tax. They talk about stamp duty. They talk about alcohol tax. There are 28 recommendations, but not one of them says to cut corporate tax. Not one of them in this Productivity Commission review says we should cut corporate tax.

What we know from the government and their plans is that they intend to have a $65 billion hit to the budget bottom line over the next decade. That is their one trick. That $65 billion is the one bullet they have in their locker. It's not even as if the government actually believe in lower tax. No, they don't believe in lower tax; they believe in different tax. They don't believe in shrinking tax; they believe in changing tax. To give them their credit, they're very happy on the government benches today because they just passed through this House a $44 billion tax rise on working Australians. They are very pleased. Who's paying that tax rise? Every Australian who earns more than the princely sum of $21,000 a year. They're the people who will pay more tax as the government reduce corporate tax. They are shifting the burden onto every Australian.

This comes at a time when many of those same Australians who are earning low and middle incomes are getting a cut to their wages because they work on the weekend. It comes at the same time as they are dealing with record-low wages growth. It comes at the same time as they're dealing with a massive increase in electricity prices as confirmed today in the inflation figures. And the government say, 'You should be grateful because we're going to get you a 50c-a-week saving.' That's what they get at the same time as people will pay more through the increase in tax. A person on $55,000 a year will pay an extra $275 in tax. A person on $80,000 will pay $400 a year. The Treasurer likes to boast about the tax cuts he introduced last year. Somebody on $85,000 would have been better off if he did absolutely nothing. This is their idea of inclusive growth.

And all this means that their big plan, paid for by Australian workers—well, almost paid for, because the tax cut costs $65 billion and the Medicare levy raises $44 billion, so they've still got a gap—is shifting the tax burden all for the sake of growing our economy by one per cent in 20 years time. That's their big plan. The same plan will increase wages by $2 a day in 20 years time. That's what they've got.

There's a better way: investing in schools and investing in vocational education and training, which was the centrepiece of the Leader of the Opposition's budget reply. And we see this in this Productivity Commission report. You look through this report, and you see recommendations which go to health and education. You see the Productivity Commission say:

Health inequalities and educational underperformance present big opportunities for Australia.

We get it. We know that, if you have a better and fairer school-funding model, you're actually investing in Australians regardless of where they live, regardless of how wealthy their parents are, and we want them included. We want them included in contributing to the growth. We want them included in benefiting from the growth. We want their contribution, and we want them to benefit from our economic growth going forward. You don't get that from a $65 billion trickle-down tax cut. You get that from investing in people. You get that from investing in vocational education and training, lifelong learning, helping Australians build their skills and adapt to the changing workforce. That is the first priority when it comes to vocational education and training.

The economy is changing and changing rapidly. We want to give Australians the skills they need to prosper, not to suffer, in that changing economy. In regional economies in Central and North Queensland, in South Australia and Tasmania, we want them benefiting from that economic growth. We want them contributing to it and benefiting from it. Does the government $65 billion tax cut do that? No, and neither does the Medicare levy increase do that. Neither of those plans involves inclusive growth. You can't deliver inclusive growth if you don't know what it is, if you don't understand what it means, if you just don't get it as a concept, as a principle. I feel sorry for some members of the government; they don't understand what inclusive growth is. Well, I'll tell you what inclusive growth looks like: it looks like growth delivered by a reforming Labor government, a government which is actually prepared to make difficult decisions and lead the reform debate from opposition and then from government. We have a government that is out of touch and out of puff, a government that is born to rule, a government that doesn't believe in inclusive growth, a government that will be replaced at the next election.

See this speech in context