Chris Bowen (Prospect, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On the weekend, the Treasurer announced that he was appointing a review of the Australian taxation system which would be charged with the responsibility of benchmarking Australia’s tax system and comparing it with international best practice. This review is a joke. It is the most blatant public relations exercise we have seen for some time. It is all about the Treasurer regaining the political momentum on the tax debate—which he lost last year to the member for Wentworth—and the government’s so-called tax ginger group.

There are a few pointers which bell the cat and show what a ridiculous public relations stunt this really is. This review will have a short time to do its work. We are now about to go into March; it will report in April. The review consists of Mr Dick Warburton and Mr Peter Hendy. Mr Hendy was Chief of Staff to former Minister Reith from 1998 to 2002. I do not have anything against former chiefs of staff. I am a former chief of staff, but I do not pretend to be independent.

If the New South Wales government, in which I was a chief of staff, asked me to conduct an independent review into a matter I would tell them they were dreaming. I would tell them, ‘I’m not independent, and I can’t be independent after being a chief of staff in your government for four years.’ The member for Perth, who is in the chamber, was a chief of staff in the Western Australian government. If he were asked to be part of a review by the Western Australian government, I do not think he would claim to be an independent umpire in a review.  But, of course, the Treasurer does not want an independent review. He has chosen Mr Hendy because his views are well known.

Mr Hendy was Chief of Staff to former Minister Reith during the Patrick dispute, one of the most outrageous episodes in Australian history—an episode where the government of this nation was a lead conspirator in a scheme to break a trade union and drive down wages. Mr Hendy is a lead warrior in the Liberal Party’s partisan battles. That is his right; he is not independent. He regularly comes out as an independent third party to support government policies, but he is not independent. So I would suggest that we do not need to die wondering what Mr Hendy’s views are about the needs of working Australians and where the priorities for tax reform should lie. Of course, if we need more evidence, we have it.

Mr Hendy is now Chief Executive of the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry. ACCI is entitled to its views, as is Mr Hendy. But even ACCI and Mr Hendy do not pretend to have an independent role. In November 2004, ACCI released a taxation reform blueprint. In the introduction to the blueprint, ACCI writes:

The role of ACCI is to represent the interests of business at a national level as well as internationally.

It goes on to say:

ACCI operates at a national and international level, making sure the concerns of business are represented to government at the federal level, and to the community at large.

Finally, ACCI describes its activities as including:

… representation and advocacy to governments, parliaments and policy makers both domestically and internationally—

All this comes as no surprise. Of course ACCI represents the needs of business. That is their job. They do it quite well. That is why in the tax reform blueprint, for example, they call for the fringe benefits tax to be transferred from employers to employees. If this government wants to conduct an inquiry into the tax system, it has a choice. It can appoint an independent review: for example, a review of academics or commentators—people who do not have a particular barrel to push.

Does the Treasurer really expect us to believe that there is no independent commentator suitably qualified to conduct this review and that he must rely on a Liberal Party partisan and representative of big business to tell him what needs to happen to the taxation system? But if the Treasurer does want to have a review by a group of individuals who represent certain segments of society and the economy then a wide range of views must be represented. Where is the representation from small business? ACCI primarily represents big business. Small business should have a say at the table. The government claims to be a friend of small business, but small business has no say in this review.

Where are the representatives of PAYE taxpayers? They have no voice at the table. There is no voice for the community sector and no voice for those who could give some advice on the simplification of the tax system—tax professionals and accountants. There is no voice for pensioners or superannuants and no voice for the community generally. The only voice to be heard at this review is a Liberal Party partisan. Mr Hendy does his job very well. I am sure he is a very good chief executive of ACCI, but he is not independent. He should not be called upon to give this government taxation advice which affects every working Australian.

It astounds me that, after 10 years in office, this government needs to appoint a review to tell it what needs to happen to the tax system. But it outrages me that it has appointed to conduct that review a former chief of staff, Liberal Party partisan and representative of big business—a small segment of society—and there is no representation for small business, PAYE taxpayers and others in the community. (Time expired)