Craig Kelly (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Firstly, on the point of order, if I may: this bill is about tax. It involves the corporate rate of tax in Australia. It involves the Corporations Act. It is a very-wide-ranging bill and, when it comes to whistleblower protection, whether the taxation system is fair, whether it is discriminatory or whether it is regressive plays a great part in the legislation requirements of whistleblower protection. So I was getting back to the provisions of the bill and also of our taxation system.

To have whistleblower protection and to have a fair and adequate tax system, it must be fair and transparent to all. That is a fundamental point of not only this piece of legislation but the entire principles of our tax system. If we're going to have a tax system where one class of Australians is discriminated against and pays different rates of tax on their income that they earn, this is unfair! This is discriminatory. This is regressive. And it is entirely contrary to the principles of this legislation. So, it doesn't surprise me that the shadow Treasurer jumped up to the despatch box and tried to shut down debate on this because—I apologise. I withdraw. He's not the shadow Treasurer. He got demoted. My apologies to the member for Fenner. No wonder he wants to get to the dispatch box and try to shut down debate on this issue. I believe in heart of heart that the member for Fenner knows that the proposed changes are unfair, he knows that they are discriminatory and, most of all, being a good Labor man, he knows that they are regressive. And yet he would prefer to have the debate entirely shut down. I would hope that a few members like the member for Fenner and others on the other side of the chamber gain their voices and speak up. Speak up for the low-income earners of this mission. You want to speak up for whistleblowers? That's fine. Also speak up for the low-income earners of this nation. If you're elected to government, you want to put in a policy that will reduce their incomes by up to 25 per cent. You are coming after people on incomes of less than $25,000—

See this speech in context