Jamie Briggs (Mayo, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. I refer the Prime Minister to this letter from Mr Paul Pike, the Managing Director of Mulgundawa Salt mine, who wrote to the Treasurer last Friday in relation to the government’s great big new tax on mining. He said:

This threatens the viability of the business, the employment of 18 people and would impact on regional suppliers and contractors who support our business.

Can the Prime Minister guarantee that businesses like Mr Pike’s will not close down as a consequence of his great big new tax on mining?

Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Mayo for his question because, when it comes to all businesses, what this government stands for is lower tax as opposed to higher tax. We are bringing the company tax rate down two per cent. You are taking it up two per cent. That is what you are doing by virtue of Mr Abbott’s great big new tax on everything. On the matter that the member for Mayo raises, I simply say to him that companies from various sectors of the economy are currently consulting the Treasury panel on the impact of the proposed RSPT on them and, as far as his constituents are concerned, I strongly encourage them to do so, as many others are across the country—more than 80 companies altogether.

The third point I would make in response to the member for Mayo, and more broadly in this debate on tax, is that this is about how we reform the country for the future. This is about how we set Australia up for the next level of economic growth. This is how we take the benefits from the mining boom and invest them in Australia’s productive potential in the future. This is a serious program of economic reform.

What we have seen today is a stark contrast between what we stand for on a reform proposal and what they stand for in terms of simple scare campaigning on the basis of lowest common denominator politics. It is writ large right across the board. We stand for better super; they stand for less super. We stand for less tax on business; you stand for more tax on business. We stand for less tax on small business; you stand for more tax on small business. We stand for investing in health; as the Minister for Health and Ageing has just said, you stand for health cuts. We stand for investments in education; you stand for cuts to education. We stand for investments in renewable energy; you stand for cuts to renewable energy. We stand for investing in infrastructure; you stand for cutting infrastructure.

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The Prime Minister will refer his remarks through the chair.

Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I say to those opposite as they engage in the politics of the lowest common denominator: have a very clear eye upon where this debate goes for our future productive potential as an economy. We stand for boosting Australia’s long-term productivity and our global economic competitiveness. I say to the member for Mayo, as a person who I thought was literate on questions of policy, that he should engage in the detail of this debate rather than simply take the script delivered to him by the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Sturt.

We will deal with each business on its merits, with each sector that they are engaged in. They are currently discussing these matters with the Treasury panel. This is a fundamental exercise in long-term economic reform, to which this government is committed.

Jamie Briggs (Mayo, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I seek leave to table the letter from the salt company to the Treasurer last Friday, which they have not had a response to yet.

Leave not granted.