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

My question is to the Treasurer. The Treasurer claimed that this year's budget was 'an economic plan, not just another budget'. Given the centrepiece of the Treasurer's so-called plan, a $50 billion tax cut for big business, is now dead in the water and will not pass the parliament, Treasurer, what is plan B? Or will it just be more budget chaos?

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

I thank the member for his question. It is true, at the last election and in the last budget, we outlined a national economic plan to drive jobs and growth in this country. Already in this parliament we have introduced income tax cuts which have passed this parliament. We have been successful in taking through savings to the budget which boost the resilience of the Australian economy and our finances. And we continue to stand absolutely by our commitment to ensure that we can attract investment to this country by ensuring particularly small- and medium-sized businesses, in the short term but over the longer term, have a tax system which attracts investment into this country.

What those opposite do not seem to understand is that what we need in this country is more investment, and we need businesses to be reinvesting in their business. What I cannot understand is why the member opposite, in all of his treatises, and all of his mentors have said that actually reducing company tax is good for investment, is good for growth and is good for jobs but, when it comes to actually voting for it in the parliament, he runs a million miles away. Perhaps that is why before last election, instead of actually taking to the election an economic plan, what he took to the election was a $16½ billion increase in the deficit. His plan at the last election was to increase the deficit, increase taxes, increase spending and increase debt. That is what the opposition put to the last election. Is it any wonder that the Australian people said, 'No. Won't have a bar of that.' We are not going to go back to the economic management of the Labor Party, which left our finances in such a disaster and which ensured that debt was rising at $3 billion a week when they left office—debt was rising $3 billion a week under those opposite when they sat on these benches. That has been cut by more than half by this government since we were first elected in 2013.

So we have plan to arrest the debt. We have a plan to continue to reduce and get expenditure under control to bring the budget back to balance. We have a plan to grow investment, whether it is through our enterprise tax plan, which starts with businesses who those opposite think are multinationals but employ on average just 22 people. Those opposite think that these businesses are the Microsofts and Googles, but they are just small- and medium-sized businesses who want to reinvest into their businesses, create jobs and lift wages. And those opposite say 'no'. So is it any wonder that, at the last election, the shadow minister had to say, 'We don't have a plan;100 days after we're elected we'll have a crack at one.' But they had no plan. The only plan they had was to increase debt, increase the deficit, increase taxes and increase spending. Is it any wonder why that plan was rejected.