Angus Taylor (Hume, Liberal Party, Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Hansard source

The member opposite should have a read of it. Work expenses—there is $9.9 billion in work expenses. They're coming after the work expenses. We will see what they say in the coming weeks and months. They don't think Australians should be able to claim work expenses. There we are. It was released last week. It found that the biggest beneficiaries of franking credits are Australians over 75. What have those opposite got against Australians over the age of 75? But that's who they're going after. That's who's at the top of the list—and that list is one that every Australian should be deeply concerned about.

Now, the budget acknowledged that a substantial portion of the revenue from this measure will fall on Australians' superannuation, because it's very clear that the Labor Party doesn't think superannuation is the money of Australians; they think it's the party's money to be taxed by them and, worse, as we've seen in recent months, to be spent by them. Every minister wants every pet project to be funded by the government. There's not enough money to go around even if they tax Australians with that whole list. They will still need more. No doubt we will see pet projects that the Labor Party wants to get up for which it asks for Australian superannuation money to go in. They will not only be taxing more; they will be directing where it will be spent.

We know that the impact of this will extend beyond taking money from older Australians—in particular, those over the age of 75. It's just extraordinary that this government thinks that that's okay. We also know it will have a much broader economic impact, and this is something Labor never understands about tax. There are flow-on consequences to our economy. If you want an economy that's strong and delivering higher real wages for the Australian people, you need to have an economy where people are willing to invest and willing to employ, where businesses want to get out there and do things. We know and we've heard, even in the few hours since it became clear that the debate was going to proceed on this legislation today, eminent fund managers say that Labor's legislation would destroy the ability of small companies to raise capital and pay fully franked dividends:

It will significantly inhibit their ability to grow and survival prospects as the Australian economy slows.

The broader flow-on economic impacts of taxes like this are never considered by the Labor Party, because, when it comes to superannuation, as far as Labor's concerned, it's not the money of Australians; it's their money.

We are at a time of soaring cost-of-living pressures. We know that is the No. 1 issue on the minds of Australian households, hardworking Australians making ends meet, Australian businesses struggling with trying to find the people to put on in their businesses to meet the demands of their customers. With those soaring cost-of-living and cost-of-doing-business pressures, Labor's only answer is to raise taxes. Sadly, the expectation is there is going to be another interest rate rise today and more into the future—multiple interest rate rises, according to the Reserve Bank governor when he spoke a couple of weeks ago, are on the way—and at this time the Labor Party's only answer is to impose tax. Worse: they promised before the last election that they wouldn't do it.

Labor promised that they wouldn't make changes to franking credits before the election. They didn't promise it once; they promised it time and time again, as I've documented, and that promise is broken with the legislation before us in this House. They promised they wouldn't change superannuation taxes, and now they have, and no doubt there's more to come, because, whatever Labor promised, it's clear now that they feel no need to stick to those promises. How can Australians trust Labor when they say one thing before an election and do something completely different afterwards? Australians are right to be wondering what Labor will tax next.

Debate adjourned.

See this speech in context