Joel Fitzgibbon (Hunter, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport. I ask him: now that the government has secured passage of its mining tax, what will the revenue mean for economic infrastructure in mining and regional communities, including of course the Hunter region, and how has the government addressed the challenges involved in delivering this infrastructure funding?

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Hunter for his question and acknowledge that he moved a motion in the House just yesterday recognising the importance of the MRRT, because he understands the need to provide critical infrastructure in capacity constrained mining regions, including in the Hunter Valley of New South Wales. That is exactly what the Regional Infrastructure Fund under the MRRT is about: giving back to the communities that are impacted by the consequences that have occurred as a result of the mining boom.

When you travel to many of the mining communities you are struck by the fact that, whilst there is enormous wealth being generated, there are also massive shortages of critical infrastructure, a lack of planning, a lack of foresight and pressure on those communities. It is not just me who says that, because another member of this place said this:

I share the disappointment about how few mining companies contribute to the areas they invade and how little state governments return of the massive royalty incomes they receive to the communities.

That was the Leader of the National Party, speaking about the invasion of these companies into these communities—but, of course, opposing infrastructure development in these communities.

That is what they did when they said no to the MRRT in this place and in the other place last night. They said no to the Scone level crossing study in the member for Hunter's electorate; no to the Gladstone Port Access Road, $50 million, in the electorate of Flynn; no to the Blacksoil Interchange project, $54 million, in the electorate of Blair; no to the Townsville Ring Road project, $160 million, in Herbert; no to the Peak Downs Highway project, $120 million, in Capricornia; no to the upgrade of the intersection of the Bruce and Capricornia highways, another $40 million; and no to the Mackay Ring Road Study.

Mr Christensen interjecting—

Those opposite just say no, no, no, including to regional infrastructure in their communities.

The SPEAKER: The honourable minister will pause, and during that pause the honourable member for Dawson will remove himself from the chamber under the provisions of standing order 94(a).

The member for Dawson then left the chamber.

He should be embarrassed by opposing this infrastructure in his own electorate. But it is not just here, because Campbell Newman has been on the Queensland campaign trail promising funds from the minerals resource rent tax for projects such as the Toowoomba Bypass because it does not fit in with his funding model. It is absurd. You cannot have the benefits without having the revenue stream, and that is what this government understands. That is why we have put in place a fair system to spread the benefits of the mining boom to the many—not just their few mates. (Time expired)

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. I refer the Treasurer to his statement on ABC Radio National this morning that the $60 billion difference between the original mining tax and the new mining tax is 'grossly inaccurate'. He added, 'We do not do those 10-year estimates.' How does the Treasurer reconcile that spin with this Treasury document which shows a 10-year estimate for the mining tax with a $60 billion hole?

Wayne Swan (Lilley, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Very simply, the former Secretary to the Treasury has made it very clear that Treasury regards those 10-year estimates as being completely unreliable.

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Wayne Swan (Lilley, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They can protest all they like but they know this because it was a statement made in Senate estimates. The member for North Sydney likes to ignore it, but he has a lot of hide to come in here opposing a resource rent tax—absolutely opposing it, lock, stock and barrel—and then to make all sorts of wild and exaggerated claims about revenue streams. The facts are these—

The SPEAKER: There is no need for the honourable member for North Sydney to come to the dispatch box, as I suspect he is taking a point of order on direct relevance—I am intuitive. The Treasurer will become directly relevant.

The shadow Treasurer is asserting that we should have a bigger MRRT after coming into the House and opposing its passage. How hypocritical can you get? The fact is that the former Secretary to the Treasury has made it very clear he does not regard those results as being—

The SPEAKER: Order! I require the term 'hypocritical' to be withdrawn as I am endeavouring to bring about a new tone of civility in the chamber. The Treasurer will withdraw that term.

Mr Speaker, I withdraw.

Mr Hockey interjecting—

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On a point of order, Mr Speaker: I ask the member for North Sydney to withdraw.

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I withdraw calling him a liar.

The SPEAKER: Do you withdraw unconditionally?

I do.

The SPEAKER: I thank the honourable member. He will resume his seat. I am listening to the member for North Sydney but I am not sure on what basis.

I seek leave to table the 10-year table from Treasury which the Treasurer, on this morning's radio, said does not exist.

Leave not granted.

Amanda Rishworth (Kingston, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Assistant Treasurer and Minister Assisting for Deregulation. Will the Assistant Treasurer tell the House how getting the minerals resource rent tax done will spread the benefits of the mining boom to all Australian businesses and to working people? What would be the impact of not delivering these benefits?

David Bradbury (Lindsay, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Treasurer ) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Kingston for her question. I know she is a very passionate advocate for all members of her local community and that, in particular, she is a passionate advocate for small business. She has 13,500 thriving small businesses in her electorate. That is why she is very pleased to have supported the government's legislation to introduce a mining tax to spread the benefits of the mining boom.

This government is determined to manage the economy in the interests of working people. That is why we have introduced a mining tax, which will ensure that the benefits of the mining boom can be spread to all corners of this country. As a result of this initiative and the support this government has provided both for working people and for small businesses, many millions of small businesses and many millions of working people will soon receive the benefits of the mining boom. Some 2.7 million small businesses will receive the benefit of the instant asset write-off, which will allow them to invest in the productive capacity of their businesses and make sure they can continue to employ people and generate wealth. This is what people in this place should be doing to support small business.

In addition to supporting small business, we have supported the millions of Australian workers who deserve an increase in their superannuation. By increasing the superannuation guarantee charge we can increase the superannuation savings and benefits that Australians retire on. We have also targeted some of these initiatives at low-income earners to ensure that they get the benefits of the mining boom.

Those on the other side have been determined to oppose these measures. They voted against these measures in the House and the Senate and they have foreshadowed that when the company tax cuts come forward they will vote against them as well. It is more than just a little ironic to see those on the other side prepared to come into this place and vote against the interests of small businesses. The member for Swan is prepared to come into this place and vote against the interests of the 19,200 small businesses in his electorate. The member for Cowan is prepared to come into this place and vote against the interests of the 16,400 small businesses in his electorate. I am asked about the impacts of not spreading the benefits of the mining boom—

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On a point of order on relevance, Mr Speaker: the member wrote the question and now he is answering it, but he is still not being relevant.

The SPEAKER: I have always believed that dorothy dixers are regrettable. The Assistant Treasurer has the call and he will be directly relevant.

David Bradbury (Lindsay, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Treasurer ) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am asked about the impact of not spreading the benefits of the boom. We know that we can deliver a mining tax to keep the resources sector strong and spread the benefits to all Australians. It was not that long ago that those on the other side said that this tax—

The SPEAKER: Order!

would kill the goose that lays the golden egg. There are millions of Australian businesses and workers and the only goose they have to worry about—

The SPEAKER: The Assistant Treasurer's time has expired and he will sit down as he no longer has the call. The Assistant Treasurer will be removed from the chamber if he defies the chair and continues to talk after his time has expired. That goes also for others.