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

My question is to the Treasurer. I refer to the Treasurer's previous positions on tax and their current status: increase the GST—shelved; never increase tobacco excise—gone; deal with the excesses in negative gearing—dead; never increase super tax—buried; cut personal income taxes—cremated. Isn't it the case that the only policies that this government really believes in are the extreme cuts, including those in the 2014 budget?

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

I thank the member for his question. He raised many particular issues. One of those he raised was on superannuation. I note that in July 2013—this is when the member was in government—he said this:

The Rudd Labor Government—

That is what it was at the time—

will make no major changes to superannuation tax policy for five-year periods, promoting confidence and stability in the superannuation system.

I remind the member that it is not five years since he made that statement. But if he wants to make points about changes of position, or things of this nature—when he was on these benches, he said that he would not change superannuation for five years. That is what he said.

Now there are legitimate issues that the government is looking at. Six months ago the Prime Minister had us look at these matters, and that is what we have been doing. But I tell you the difference between what this side of the House does when we look at things like superannuation and what those on that side of the House do.

Mr Dreyfus interjecting—

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

The member for Isaacs is warned.

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

On this side of the House we are interested in making superannuation have more choice, be more flexible, be more fit for purpose for the working patterns of the 21st century, be fairer, be more targeted—and that is what we are working on. What we would like to see is a superannuation system where all workers can decide where their money goes and where it is saved. What we would like to see is a superannuation system where there are independent directors that sit on boards and oversight the money of those workers. But those opposite do not believe in this. When they look at superannuation they do not want to make it better; they just want to tax it more. That is all they want to do. The only thing they want to do when it comes to superannuation is tax it more.

You may ask yourself: why do they want to tax superannuation more? Because they just want to spend more. They just want to spend more and more and more. They have learnt nothing in their time in opposition that would give anybody any reason to think that they have earned the right to even put forward a proposition that would have them return to these benches. They have learnt nothing about their high levels of spending. In fact, they would propose $60 billion of additional expenditure over and above what is currently in the budget and forward estimates—and to pay for that they propose just $1 billion in savings and $7 billion in extra taxes.

How many more taxes will those opposite have to put on to keep pace with their addiction to spending? Taxing and spending is not a plan for jobs and growth. It is a threat to the transitioning economy that is going to underpin growth in jobs in this economy. That is why they cannot be trusted to manage the successful transition of the Australian economy.

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

Before I call the member for Herbert, if members could just pause for a second, I want to address some remarks to the member for Griffith. During the minister for immigration's answer it was very loud in the chamber, and I was attempting to listen to some interjections. I have consulted with the Clerk and I want to say to the member for Griffith—and I do not want her to be shocked—that I think she had a valid point of order, and ministers will direct their remarks through the chair.