Chris Bowen (McMahon, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. I refer to reports today that there is 'a tidal wave of concern' amongst his own MPs about his plan to increase the GST.

Government Members:

Government members interjecting—

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for McMahon will resume his seat. Members on my right, particularly the minister for agriculture, will cease interjecting. I need to be able to hear the question. The member for McMahon can begin his question again.

Chris Bowen (McMahon, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr Speaker. My question is to the Treasurer. I refer to reports today that there is 'a tidal wave of concern' amongst his own MPs about his plan to increase the GST. Why are government members more concerned about their own jobs at the next election rather than the household budgets of ordinary Australians? Will the Treasurer finally rule out increasing the price of everything by increasing the GST to 15 per cent?

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Just before I call the Treasurer: the Treasurer can answer the last part of the question. He cannot be expected to answer on behalf of other people with respect to the first part of the question.

Scott Morrison (Cook, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Every single member on this side of the House is committed to ensuring that Australia's transition in the economy we experience is done successfully and supports jobs and growth. Every single member on this side of the House knows that we need to ensure that expenditure is under control and taxes are kept as low as possible. And every single member on this side of the House knows that the best way to keep taxes low is to keep expenditure low. That is what this side of the House believes.

What this side of the House believes and has shown season in, season out is that we are committed to the jobs that are in the economy and the growth of those jobs and the growth of our economy. Because when you have a growing economy, when people are going out there and they are working and they are saving and investing—when they are putting their back into it, when they are making the sacrifices and they are trying to improve their own circumstances—we on this side of the House know that we want to back them. We do not want to see them having to pay more and more and more tax on what they are earning, what they are going out there and seeking to earn every day. We need to try and find ways that we can address that.

As I said before, there are three ways you can do it. You can fund it from a surplus, which was not bequeathed to us as it was bequeathed to the previous government by the Howard and Costello government. You can do it that way. You can do it when there are high rates of nominal GDP growth. We know that because of the global circumstances that is not something that is available. Or you could do it by changing the tax mix—but that is not an easy thing to do and there are issues associated with that. So as a sensible, mature, responsible government, we are actively discussing those issues to find out the best way to support jobs and growth and to put it to the Australian people. While we do that, we will keep on with the job of cutting expenditure as a percentage of the economy so we can make room for the private sector businesses to go and innovate and to have the encouragement they have had from the leadership of the Prime Minister and the minister for innovation and the whole team. That is what is giving the Australian people confidence about the future of our economy, particularly at a time when there is such volatility, when there is such uncertainty. And those opposite? Their plan is just to go back to the same old failed way. They saw it fail over those six years, as they pushed the budget over a cliff and sank us into debt and deficit for a generation, it may be, in terms of debt. But we will get about the job as we have. Expenditure as a share of GDP is coming down, and we will continue to pursue that. If those opposite got their chance, they would tax as high as they could so they could spend as high as they could—and it would not even cover it, and so then they would just cover the rest with more and more debt.