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

I have received a letter from the honourable member for McMahon proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely:

The collapse of the government's economic plan.

I call upon those honourable members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places.

More than the number of members required by the standing orders having risen in their places—

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

Mr Speaker, I would encourage you and all honourable members to turn your minds back to just before the last budget, the 2016 budget. The then new Treasurer—never one to undersell his own abilities, in fairness—breathlessly told the Australian people that this was not just another budget. He said it was an economic plan, completely different to previous budgets, completely different to anything that, say, Paul Keating or Peter Costello might have brought down in their budgets. He was much better than them, he told the Australian people. He actually had an economic plan. It was an economic plan which the Prime Minister and Treasurer then took to the election.

What was that plan? What was the innovative plan that they came up with? What was the big idea that they had to put to the Australian people? It was a $50 billion tax cut for big business in Australia. That was the best they could come up with. They defined small business as anything with a turnover of less than $1 billion—that was one part of their plan—and they told the Australian people: 'We need to return to budget surplus. We need to make tough decisions. We need to get the budget under control. And, by the way, let's give $50 billion away to business.' They told the Australian people that we needed to protect the AAA credit rating but 'let's give $50 billion away to business'. That was the biggest ram raid on the budget presented during the election and of course it was entirely unfunded.

Talking of Peter Costello, I see that the former Treasurer has had something to say about that today. He said:

I'm not really sure that the BCA—

the Business Council—

had a good tax policy.

Fair enough! The trouble is, the BCA's tax policy was the government's tax policy. He is a polite man, Peter Costello. He has decided not to directly poor scorn on the government but to do it indirectly. He went on to say:

This has got to be funded.

Of course, this Prime Minister and this Treasurer took a policy to the election which was not funded. But they said: 'That's okay. It's all about growth. It's going to promote growth,' they told us. There would be jobs and growth, they said, all because of their economic plan. The Treasury released analysis which went to that claim and, yes, it is true. The Treasury said that the government's plan would boost the Australian economy. They said it would make the economy one per cent bigger. You might think, 'That is material; that is a reasonable amount, one per cent bigger.' But that was one per cent over a decade, and that decade would begin when the tax cuts were fully implemented—that is, in a decade's time. In 20 years they are going to increase the size of the economy by one per cent, or 0.05 per cent a year. Well done! That is the plan. That is the great dividend of the Liberal plan when it comes to the economy.

The Grattan Institute said that that was very optimistic. They said it would not be one per cent; it would be 0.6 per cent. But let's give the government the benefit of the doubt. Let's accept their figures and say it is one per cent. That is the entire dividend from the Turnbull-Morrison plan. That is not jobs and growth. That is not even a rounding error when it comes to economic growth over 20 years. You would need a microscope to see the dividend from the Morrison plan for the Australian economy.

So the plan delivers nothing. But the plan that delivers nothing has come to nothing, because today we have seen the final confirmation that this plan will not pass the parliament. It is dead in the water. The Morrison agenda is in tatters. At best, the government will be able to pass a tax cut for businesses with a threshold of less than $10 million. Our position is $2 million, but at best—let's give them the benefit of the doubt—they will get through a tax cut for businesses with a turnover of less than $10 million. If the entire package delivered 0.05 per cent a year, I wonder what this tax cut of under $10 million delivers. You would have to get the super powerful microscope out now to see the dividend from the government's plan.

If you imagine that the growth dividend is miniscule then all this begs the question: what is the point of the Turnbull government? Why are these people still here? Their agenda lies in tatters. They go to an election with a plan; the plan will not pass the parliament. We asked them in question time—and thankfully we got only three minutes of waffle, not 47 minutes of waffle, because of the time limits—but they do not have an economic agenda. You might remember that the Prime Minister was asked, 'What is the great achievement of the Turnbull government?' He had a cracker of an answer. He said, 'Well, of course you saw it in the budget reforms to superannuation and the reforms to business tax.' How is that working out? Both of them have had to be changed. Both of them are dead in the water. Both mean that the Turnbull government have at this point amounted to absolutely nothing, because at their heart they had a slogan, not a plan. They had a motto and not a program for Australia. They had an election slogan and not a plan for the nation. And they had a reckless, unfunded corporate tax cut, and even that they will fail to deliver. That was at the expense of a real plan to properly fund Australian schools and give young Australians the best possible start in life regardless of their background, their parents' wealth or where they live. That is a real plan for Australia's future. That is what this side of the House would deliver. All the other side of the House could deliver was a slogan which will come to nothing.

All this happens at a time when the economy is going through a difficult period. It is 100 days since the election and we have heard nothing from the Prime Minister and the Treasurer about their plan for the Australian economy. What are the results of the Turnbull government so far? We see 50,000 fewer full-time jobs than there were at the end of last year under the Turnbull government. And we saw confirmation in Senate estimates today that underemployment, at 8.7 per cent, is the highest since the series began in 1978. Let's just consider that. We got through the 1981-1982 recession under Treasurer John Howard, we got through the 1990s and we got through the global financial crisis with underemployment below what it is today, and the great contribution of the Prime Minister and the Treasurer is to deliver us the highest underemployment on record. That is their contribution to the Australian economy. That is not jobs and that is not growth. That is failure. That is a sign of failure and the sign of a lack of a plan.

What we know is also that the participation rate has been falling. That means that people are leaving the labour force because they know that they can look for as many jobs as they like, they can go to as many interviews as they can, they can go up and down the nation looking for work, and they will not get it. We know that if it was not for that fall in participation the unemployment rate would be closer to 6.3 per cent.

And what is the government's response to this? It is to say, 'Well, we've still got the plan.' It is the same old one. It is all they have got, despite the fact it would generate miniscule economic growth, despite the fact it would not generate jobs, despite the fact above all that they cannot deliver it. This is a Treasurer who could not deliver a pizza, let alone an economic plan. This is a Treasurer who is just not up to the job. This is a Treasurer who just is not capable of delivering on his commitments to the Australian people. And it is a Prime Minister who is too weak to deal with it. It is a Prime Minister who does not have the authority within his government to take charge of the economic agenda or to replace a Treasurer who is failing daily, to replace a Treasurer who does not have a plan for the Australian economy or for the Australian people.

This is a government with no understanding of the challenges in the Australian economy. They have no understanding that, actually, if we are going to keep our quarter of a century of economic growth going—which came about because of difficult decisions and reforms by Labor governments in the 1980s and 90s, Labor governments delivering the sorts of decisions and sorts of plans that this government could only dream about—this government would not have the wit and imagination to come up with. This Treasurer would not have the ability to think about those things. That is what delivered a quarter of a century of economic growth for our country.

This government is failing the Australian people, because this Treasurer and this Prime Minister do not understand what brings about economic growth, and what brings about economic growth in terms of productivity and investments in things like the NBN. This government does not understand what brings about economic growth through investment in our people, our most important resource—investment in young Australians so they get the best start in life. All they have got is a slogan, and an empty one at that and one that they cannot deliver.

The task is urgent. Unemployment and underemployment are at high levels. We are doing worse than we did in the worst economic and financial crisis in 80 years, on this Prime Minister's watch, on this Treasurer's watch. At the end of the day, we have a Prime Minister and a Treasurer with no understanding, no ideas and, above all, no plan for Australia's future.

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Minister for Small Business) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is great to be part of the Turnbull-Joyce-Liberal-Nationals government—and I hear them applauding. They know how proud I am to be part of the Liberal-Nationals-Turnbull-Joyce government. They do know that. And they are cheering. They should be cheering, because we are getting on with the job of boosting growth and boosting investment.

The shadow Treasurer quoted from a speech—a budget speech no less—of a Treasurer from this side of the House. I would like to quote from a Treasurer from the then government benches delivered on 8 May 2012, when the member for Lilley was Treasurer. He started his budget speech on that night, and this is what he said.

The four years of surpluses I announce tonight are a powerful endorsement of the strength of our economy, resilience of our people, and success of our policies.

How did that go? How did that work for the member for Lilley? We all know that Labor would not know a surplus if they fell over one. We all know they have not delivered a surplus for decades. We all know that; it is an absolute fact. The shadow Treasurer opposite knows that. Goodness, gracious—if ever he gets hold of the Treasury benches again, he will continue to produce deficit and debt further than the eye can see.

I rise to speak on the member for McMahon's matter of public importance debate and to place on record the proper plan this Turnbull-Joyce government has for the future of Australia's economy, for the future of Australia's jobs, and to ensure that Australia's more than two million small businesses are central to our economic prosperity.

There are many facets of Australia which make this country great, and I am sure those opposite would acknowledge that fact. Whether it is our entrepreneurial spirit, our sense of a fair go, our natural ability to produce some of the best and most in-demand agricultural and mining commodities, Australia's economy is one that has led the world for more than two decades.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Member for Parkes, I know your patch of Australia, your large patch of New South Wales, has produced much of that agricultural and mining wealth. Well done to the people out in the electorate of Parkes.

There are now people in Australian workforces and at university who have never known a period without growth in the Australian economy. Quarter after quarter, Australia's economy grew, and our gross domestic product increased. Quarter after quarter, small businesses took risks. Farmers took risks. Employers took risks. And the dividend we all reap today are benefits of our 25th year of uninterrupted economic growth.

Today the Australian economy is the world's 12th-largest. It is versatile, it is highly productive, it is multifaceted and it has got relatively low unemployment and relatively high education compared with our trading partners. That is a good thing. That is why our trading partners in the rest of the world look to Australia.

Jim Chalmers (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It has the worst underemployment in history.

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Minister for Small Business) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Be quiet, Member for Rankin. Our natural commodities and Australia's natural commitment to hard work means that this really is a time of unparalleled opportunity for our country. You might be a farmer, set to take advantage of the coalition government's trifecta of trade agreements—

Ms Butler interjecting—

I can not understand why the member for Griffith continually carps when I am talking about the importance of the role our farmers play. She should know. I know she comes from Brisbane. I know she comes from a capital city, but farmers feed her and everybody else in the nation besides. She should listen to how important a role they play.

You might be a farmer, set to take advantage of our trifecta of trade agreements in south Asia, with new markets and great opportunities for your products. You might be a student at one of our many world-class Australian universities, studying STEM subjects, science, technology, engineering or mathematics. You might be on the cusp of research that will find a new treatment for a medical issue or a breakthrough in technology to make the lives of other Australians, and many other people besides, a lot easier.

You might be an enterprising small business owner such as Cooma's Jane Cay or Wagga Wagga's Simone Eyles. They are in fashion and coffee respectively. They are great things. We all know that. I am sure the member for Griffith agrees. They use the internet to develop global businesses from regional towns and communities. You might be an employee enjoying the benefits of Australia's relatively low unemployment—lower under us than under those opposite—and easier movement of labour between industries.

No matter your industry or your background, Australians can all take advantage of our economic resilience, our safe low-risk investment paradigm, and see a brighter future for us all. We all want that because, more than anything, enterprise, education and, indeed, enthusiasm are the keys to success in the modern, changing Australian economy.

And, as our national economic landscape adapts to changes in the global market, it is clear that there are great opportunities for Australians, but we need a plan to take advantage of this. We need a plan. That is why the central tenet of the coalition's economic plan—

Stephen Jones (Whitlam, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Regional Development and Infrastructure) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Here it comes!

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Minister for Small Business) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

'Here it comes!' the member for Whitlam says of the coalition's 10-year enterprise tax plan. It is so clear. It is all about jobs, growth, investment and lowering company tax rates, while those opposite continue to run scare campaigns. They chatter like parrots as I speak about these important things—I could say 'galahs', but I will be respectful!

And, speaking of an Australia with a bright future, we know that Australians deserve a government which needs to do so much better. We want to continue our economic success. And that is why we are doing much better than those opposite did in the six sorry years that they were in power. Australians deserve a government which wants to create more jobs and ensure opportunities—something which anyone can take advantage of in the Australia of today.

Our economic national plan understands the challenges and opportunities of a modern Australia. We are the nation's leaders. Those in this parliament are the nation's leaders, and that is why we should all get behind our 10-year tax plan, to take advantage of the globalised 21st century.

That is why we have got a plan to cut the company tax rate to allow Australia's small and medium enterprises to employ more people and create better opportunities. That is why our 10-year tax plan is so important. It is a plan which will cut small businesses' taxes. It is a plan which will increase by 870,000 the number of small businesses to which that tax cut applies. And it will mean, more than anything, that Australians have a plan from this government which is about backing them—getting behind them; boosting their confidence; boosting their agility. We want to back the small-business owner, the IGA owner, the cafe owner—the person who has taken a risk, not the one who has just received a cheque from their union mates, picketed outside a shop or heavied somebody who just wanted to get on with the job of a cement pour on a construction site. We want to back real people—real, decent, hardworking, good people who want to get behind this nation and boost it. We want to back the farmer who wants to feed and clothe the world, besides our nation. We want to back the business with a turnover of between $2 million and $10 million to get the company tax rate that they need in order to grow.

We on this side of the House understand small business. We know that a small business might turn over $2 million but that that does not mean that is their profit. That is what those on that side do not understand. They think that a business with a $5 million turnover is in clover! They think that they are rich. But it takes hard work to run a small business. It takes hard work—the sweat of your brow. You are up at sun-up and going home at sundown and then having to get on with the paperwork. I do not think they understand or quite appreciate just what that means.

But I dare say that the shadow Treasurer understands, because in his Hearts & MindsI borrowed it from the Parliamentary Library; I did not want to actually pay for the thing—he says:

…it's a Labor thing to have the ambition of reducing company tax, because it promotes investment, creates jobs and drives growth.

Well, if he wrote that in his book, why does he not get behind our 10-year enterprise tax plan now? Why doesn't he do it? I just cannot understand it.

There are 2.1 million small businesses in this country. Between them, they employ nearly five million Australians. And, through championing these small businesses, through being their advocate and making their job just a little bit easier, we will see small business grow. We will see more people employed and see more than two decades of uninterrupted economic growth continue.

It is not just the coalition that understands that cuts to the company tax rate are important. Peter Strong, the chief executive of the Council of Small Business said recently:

It gives the opportunity for the senators, and others who are opposed, to have a look at the impact of the tax cuts from the ground and make an assessment.

Mr Strong knows this change to the company tax rate will open opportunities for small business. He gets it. And those on the other side should follow suit. He knows it will encourage growth and he knows it is something that small business owners themselves want. They need it. They demand it. Get on board!

The Australian Small Business and Family Enterprise Ombudsman, Kate Carnell, gets it. She said of our proposed tax cuts:

I've spoken to countless small business owners about the tax cuts; they all plan to put the money they save back into their business, not into their back-pockets.

She continued:

So often, small businesses are described as the engine room of the economy; this is certainly true, and if our politicians are truly serious about getting the engine room firing on all cylinders, they'll unite on this important measure and pass the small business tax cuts into law as soon as possible.

That is what Kate Carnell said. I could not agree more.

So the leader of the opposition needs to get on board, absolutely. It is important. It is critical for small businesses, for farmers and, indeed, for our nation.

Julie Owens (Parramatta, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Small Business) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There was a moment of hope in the speech of the Minister for Small Business; a moment of hope—

An opposition member: Yeah—when it finished!

No, earlier than that. Something I have been waiting for, for the nearly 40 months of what is now the Abbott-Turnbull-Joyce government, is: any sense of what this plan is. They keep talking about the plan, and I keep looking for it! And actually, I really genuinely am looking for it.

Over the first three years of this government, I would go out and talk to business, and what I heard back from them was this incredible disappointment that we had a government that, in a time of rapid change, when there was so much work for a government to do, really did nothing. It was as if they had pushed a pause button for three years.

I have to say: when Tony Abbott was finally rolled as Prime Minister and Malcolm Turnbull became the Prime Minister, the better angels in me said, 'No matter what this means for a future Labor government, even if this means that the Liberals will actually win again, we cannot continue with our finger on pause. We actually need a plan for this nation. Maybe now we can have one. And that is more important than which of us wins.' A plan was desperately needed because we had gone 2½ years without one. So I had been waiting for it.

This is what I heard from the Minister for Small Business: I heard him bag Labor for three minutes—that is the first thing in the 'plan'. He talked about 25 years of growth—which of course is not this government; it is many governments. He talked about the trade agreements—true: there are three trade agreements; there will be winners from those; there will also be losers, which are never mentioned. Then we heard about businesses using the internet—this from a government that scrapped any opportunity to build a decent fibre network in this country by their stuffing of the NBN! Then we heard of a great university student—although a 20 per cent cut to universities is still in their budget. Then we heard the words 'jobs and growth' again. And then, for the last four minutes of the speech, we heard about the tax cut which is now not going to pass the Senate anyway in its full measure.

So what did we hear from the person who said 'I'm now going to outline the plan. We have a plan. Here it is'? It was a rote plan on a piece of paper—and I thought: wow, I'm actually going to hear it! What did we hear? Nothing. NBN would be a plan. Funding universities would be a plan. That would matter—actually funding infrastructure. Rather than putting it in the budget and then removing it and then saying it is big again the next year and then removing it and then saying it is big again, an actual plan would help.

Even if they have a plan, you would think that when key moments take place in the financial year—such as the release at the end of September of the final budget figures from the preceding financial year—this government, which has been spruiking how they have been reducing deficit and how they have such a great plan, would actually talk about. Instead what happened was really quite interesting. In the last few hours of 30 September, which is the deadline—under cover of the football grand finals, a long weekend and the start of the school holidays—the government released the financial statements for the previous financial year without a press conference and without even a detailed media release. Extraordinary! In all my experience in government, I have never seen a government actually try and hide the outcome of its previous financial year in that way, particularly when it comes into the parliament every day and talks about how well it is doing in reducing 'Labor's' debt and deficit.

Let's look at the figures they tried so much to hide. The 2015-16 budget deficit was $39.6 billion, or 2.4 per cent of gross domestic product—up from $17.1 billion in the May 2014 budget, which was Hockey's budget. They tripled the deficit! And then, when the results come out, this government, which has claimed for the last three years to have had this plan, hides the results as much as it can. They are not out there spruiking their great achievement; they are doing everything they can to hide it. And it is not surprising.

So when we talk today about the collapse of the Turnbull government's economic plan, the real tragedy is that they never had one in the first place. And we desperately need one. Every single peak body or business that comes into my office talks about the changes in the way the world is operating and the desperate need for a policy response that will stimulate them and allow them to take up the opportunities that exist in the world. We desperately need a plan; we really do. And we do need one that includes something more than a tax cut that you cannot deliver anyway.

Andrew Hastie (Canning, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have never been in opposition myself but it seems quite a gloomy affair. To use the word 'collapse', which the Oxford Dictionary defines as 'to fail suddenly and completely', you really are jumping at shadows in opposition.

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Andrew Hastie (Canning, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Keep calm. Everything is okay. This country is going quite well with the coalition at the helm. There is no such thing as collapse. Let me walk you through the facts. Fact No. 1: the Australian economy is expanding, not contracting; it is growing. Since Labor lost government in 2013, nearly 500,000 jobs have been grown—180,000 jobs in the last year alone. GDP growth in this country is at 3.3 per cent. As the minister said just a few minutes ago, Australia's economy is the 12th largest economy in the world. The June quarter national accounts confirm 2015-16 was Australia's 25th consecutive year of economic growth. We are growing the fastest we have been growing in the last four years. We are growing faster than every G7 economy—twice the rate of the US and Canada. If you call that a collapse, I do not know what words you would use to describe the experience in the US and Canada; you are breaking the English language with topic choices like this.

Fact No. 2: government is investing in future growth. We are enabling economic growth with infrastructure investment. Our efficient delivery of the NBN is one such example. Over 3.2 million Australian premises can now be connected to NBN, with 1.3 million Australian homes or businesses currently connected. This opens up social, economic and educational opportunities for Australians.

We are delivering critical telecommunications infrastructure in regional Australia. We are investing $220 million in the mobile black spot program delivering 499 new or improved mobile phone towers covering 3,000 black spots in regional communities. We are delivering a $50 billion land infrastructure package, with $4 billion to public transport alone and $500 million to make roads safer. All these things are very important. Public transport, roads and telecommunications bring our economy to life and continue to enable it to grow.

Our defence industry plan is growing the economy creating economic and national security into the future with $195 billion over the next 10 years. Fifty four vessels will be built—unlike the zero vessels built in the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd years.

Our enterprise tax plan and holiday makers reform package are both excellent tax packages. If you get on with the job of helping us govern and pass these things through both houses, the economy will continue to grow. But if you want to talk about collapse, let me quote a former leader of yours, Paul Keating: 'Modern Labor, like a souffle, has been collapsing over the last 25 years.' To finish his metaphor: a souffle cannot rise twice. That is not a partisan point. I acknowledge that, during the Hawke-Keating years, you reduced the top marginal tax rate, reformed the tariff system, reduced protectionism, floated the dollar and deregulated the financial system. Tough choices—and that was leadership. But since the Rudd-Gillard years, which were definitely years of collapse, you have shown no signs of changing your tune. In six budgets there was $191 billion in accumulated deficits. The carbon tax would have cost this country $1.3 trillion out to 2050 if we had not axed the tax. I am proud of that. That is a good thing we did.

If you want to talk about rapid collapse, let's talk about the live cattle trade. You brought that down at rapid speed. You hurt small and large businesses, supply chains, regional communities, family farms. That is collapse. That is collapse, indeed.

Now, at the last election you confirmed you would deliver higher debt, higher deficits and higher taxes. You confirmed you would increase our deficit by at least $16.5 billion. According to Saul Eslake, a leading economist, there is a greater risk to our triple-A rating under Labor. If you want collapse, let's hand the reins over to you.

Mr Conroy interjecting—

Mark Coulton (Parkes, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for Shortland will be quiet. I give the call to the member for Cunningham.

Sharon Bird (Cunningham, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Vocational Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Deputy Speaker—and can I just say, on your behalf: that was an outrageous list of accusations that the member just made against you, Deputy Speaker. I am sure you did not do any of those things whatsoever, so I am very happy to defend your reputation in this place from those accusations.

It is just over a year since that momentous moment when the current Prime Minister marched into a courtyard not far from here and announced that he was calling on the then Prime Minister—who has continued to be nothing but helpful since!—to call a spill in the party room. There were some pretty significant things said by the current Prime Minister on that occasion. In particular, he said:

It is clear enough that the government is not successful in providing the economic leadership we need.

The Prime Minister set the bar for his leadership and his government. So what has happened in the 12 months since then?

I have to say that it reminds me, particularly, of an episode of the Get Smart TV show—I do not know if all members in the House remember it. But you might remember those particular sessions where Smart would be up against the wall, and he would say to the baddies, 'I have got this building surrounded by 100 heavily armed federal police officers', and they would look at him in great disbelief, and he would say, 'Would you believe 50 police officers with a couple of dogs and slingshots?' and they would look at him in disbelief, and he would say, 'Well, what about a couple of dogs who look pretty cranky outside the building?' That is what we have seen over the last 12 months from this Prime Minister.

Stephen Jones (Whitlam, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Regional Development and Infrastructure) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Pity they don't have a code of silence!

Sharon Bird (Cunningham, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Vocational Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They could, indeed, well do with a code of silence—and I have a good suspicion of who the Prime Minister would be putting under the code of silence, given the 7.30 report tonight. I am sure we will be watching that with great interest.

What we have seen is exactly that scenario rolled out time and time again by this Prime Minister in the last 12 months: 'We are going to massively restructure the GST. This will be a great answer to resolving the economic challenges of the country.' A few—and I would have to say they were not really on the other side; they were mostly on his side—just looked at him and went, 'Nah, I do not think so.'

It did not take long. 'Well, instead of that, we will have a proposal for the states and territories to raise their own income levy; would you believe that?' and along with most of the country they sort of looked at him and went, 'Nah, not so much'—and that disappeared. We ended up with a fairly pathetic claim that the budget itself was going to be an economic strategy, and it would be so exciting and innovative that they would take it to the election.

One could forgive us, then, for having reasonably high expectations of the budget—that there was actually going to be a detailed plan for investing in the infrastructure and people of this nation to create new job opportunities, boost existing industries, lay the foundation for new industries that would be competitive into the future in areas, for example, like renewable energy, where we could be a world leader and, in fact, once were. But, no; the keystone, single, only way that they were going to deliver an economic plan for this nation was a massive tax cut for the big end of town. What a disappointment! I have to be honest: I do not even think Maxwell Smart would have tried to run that one by anybody!

An opposition member: Missed it by that much!

As the member quite rightly says: missed it by that much—another of the great statements of the show. So we now see a situation where even that is falling apart. Even those on the crossbenches in this place are looking at that, saying, 'Yeah, nah—I do not think so.'

So we do not even have a plan from this government to do what it needs to be doing—investing in this nation, creating real opportunities and laying out an economic plan that is much more than a failed trickle-down economic theory that, to be honest, has been discredited probably for much longer than most of them have been walking this earth.

Andrew Laming (Bowman, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It seems a little ironic, when solid economic news is coming out, that we are having a debate about whether there is a plan or not. I think that most small businesses out there would be horrified at the nature of a Labor government coming up with a plan.

What small businesses out there want is government out of their lives, not another plan. They want government out of their lives so that they can employ. They want government out of their lives so that they can get on with business. What they want is a solid and consistent approach to business and not to watch the surpluses accrued by responsible coalition governments frittered away like we saw over the last six years—and that is the great fear. We are not talking about plans; we are talking about a genuine fear of a return of a rat with a gold tooth saying he has a plan. That is not what they want. They do not want plans. What they want is confidence to employ.

Let's accept it: every developed economy has an issue with underemployment and under-utilisation—which is unemployment and underemployment added together. But we continue to defy market expectations. That is the big point. When you compare us to the US or to Canada, we are doing exceptionally well. In fact, reported growth rates are double those of the northern American economies.

Now, that is not by accident. America and Canada are resource-based economies facing exactly the same challenges that we are, transitioning to a broader-based approach. When you do that you have frictional challenges, with people moving out of where we had high terms of trade and looking for new work. It, by definition, creates high levels of underemployment as people find first small levels and then, later, greater levels of employment. That is a transition. It is precisely what we are doing, but we are doing it better than every other OECD nation. It is a gold star for Australia. Let's not get that wrong.

What I love about the opposition is when they are in a tight corner. They know that when they go home from Canberra and back to their electorate office there will be one big burly dude sitting in their waiting room, with a CFMEU hi-vis vest on and 'WTF' on their forehead, saying: 'Explain what happened in Canberra. What went wrong? What went so terribly wrong?' They will be able to say: 'Oh no, we threw a really big smelly cat on the table. We wasted the time of that parliament for at least an hour saying the economy wasn't being run well. Then we got onto gun laws. To be honest, just ignore the fact that we're not your operator anymore.'

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Andrew Laming (Bowman, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

When those over there meet their maker—the big burly dude, with the fluro jacket on and with halitosis—on this Friday, in their electorate offices, they can say to that individual: 'I'm really sorry. You can no longer wreak your havoc on the building site, but we did debate the economy for an hour. Did you hear my speech?' I mean, seriously! We have had unemployment at record lows for the last three years. We have had growth in full-time employment for 11 of the last 18 months—and then we have the leader of this debate from the other side come in here and report a 40,000 drop in full-time employment. He took the July figure and ignored the September figure, when it went up. That is right: just wherever it is convenient. You see this opposition conveniently redefining the debate wherever it can.

It was like that with Medicare yesterday. I think the member for Oxley was there for that debate. It is so inconvenient that Medicare bulk-billing rates keep going up in these Labor electorates—so let's redefine bulk-billing rates and not ask how many services are being delivered. Let's ask how many people are getting the services—a figure that has never been calculated in the history of humanity. But they are going to change the figures to suit their own convenience, because bulk-billing rates have gone up. There has never been a better friend of bulk-billing than the coalition government. There has never been a better friend of full-time employment than the coalition government. Ask anyone out there! Don't believe me. Don't believe that mob over there. Talk to the people doing the employing, because every night they go to bed praying that this government stays in government for another six years to give them some certainty.

Let's wind the time back a bit. It was back in 2008 when this lot thought they knew everything, didn't they? There was $80 billion in the coffers and it was a case of: let's just let it rip and spend the lot and see what happens. What they know over there is that, ultimately, the only people who pay off Labor debt are Liberal voters. So it never really matters, does it? They leave it as low as they can go, as long as they do not hurt the credit rating, and then they let the other guys clean it up. It is like the fire and rescue guys turning up to a burning house when the rogue tenants have escaped—that is that lot over there. And then they are getting in our way when we are trying to get the economy back under control.

Opposition members interjecting—

They are running interference at every step, making it harder to employ and making it harder to provide incentives. What are these corporate tax cuts for billionaires, again? That is 2024, isn't it? We have businesses with $1 million turnover and $2 million turnover thanking this side of politics that we are getting the tax cuts now so that there is a chance for there to be more employment for small business.

Mark Coulton (Parkes, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Before I call the member for Gellibrand, the volume is increasing. We will have the cone of silence, thank you, and continue. I call the member for Gellibrand.

Tim Watts (Gellibrand, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In September 2015, when the current Prime Minister tore down the member for Warringah and installed himself as the leader of the government, he did so on the promise of 'economic leadership'. Those were heady days for the coalition. The moderates of the coalition were celebrating their newly-won freedom in the streets. The business community rejoiced at the prospect of an end to the chaos and economic mismanagement of the Abbott government. The media feted the arrival of a political colossus, a philosopher king, who would dominate the political stage with an assault of urbane, socratic monologues. It was almost like the Prime Minister was 10 foot tall and gold-plated. But barely 12 months on, it feels like we live in a different world. How would we describe the world in which we live to a traveller from that antique land? We might say:

Two vast and trunkless legs of stone

Stand in the desert. . . . Near them, on the sand,

Half sunk a shattered visage lies, whose frown,

And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,

Tell that its sculptor well those passions read

Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,

The hand that mocked them, and the heart that fed;

And on the pedestal, these words appear:

My name is TURNBULL, King of Kings;

Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!

Nothing beside remains. Round the decay

Of that colossal Wreck, boundless and bare

The lone and level sands stretch far away.

For that is all that is left of the promise of the member for Wentworth's economic leadership. Like the Prime Minister's leadership, the economic plan has collapsed and only ruins remain.

We have discovered that Turnbull's leadership is like anti-matter—all public support for a position, any policy position, is obliterated on contact. Can you name a single issue that this Prime Minister has been able to change public opinion on? Certainly not his plans for a $50 billion tax cut to the biggest companies in Australia—a policy that was unpopular on announcement and became even more unpopular with every subsequent cut to Medicare, schools and hospitals. Of course, I am not sure even Tim Shaw could have sold a totally unfunded structural hit on the budget that would cost over $13 billion a year while also talking about 'fiscal repair' and protecting our AAA credit rating. It is like trying to sell a summer holiday to Antarctica—certainly beyond this Prime Minister's pedestrian political abilities. Yet this ruin is the PM's self-proclaimed 'greatest achievement' since becoming PM! It is as good as it gets. That is supposedly the plan for the 'growth' bit of the three-word slogan from the man who promised us no slogans.

The other third of the slogan—jobs—is just as dire. While the Prime Minister talks of jobs, there are now 50,000 less full-time jobs than there were at the end of last year. We have record under-employment. The participation rate is plummeting. The proportion of Australians either underemployed or unemployed is now higher than it was during the depths of the global financial crisis. And that is 30 per cent of the government's three-word economic policy slogan. He has nothing to say about wages growth in Australia being the lowest on record. He has nothing to say about rewarding the hard work of working- and middle-class Australian families.

The Prime Minister's inability to lead, either in the electorate or in the Parliament, has left him hostage to the lowest common denominator of existing opinion. As a result, he has been forced into regularly drinking the bathwater of his own backbench—the tepid, scungy policy run-off that lingers in the corners of the coalition party room. He has had to take dictation on superannuation policy from the Monkey Pod Generals and then suffer the indignity of having the member for Dawson come out and publicly mark his homework in a live, nationally broadcast press conference. I am not sure that is how the member for Wentworth imagined being Prime Minister in all those decades of coveting the job.

He was also given his marching orders by the party room on changes to negative gearing. While the Prime Minister talks about growth, he has nothing to say about the distortionary loopholes in our tax system that are channelling torrents of Australian capital into relatively unproductive property speculation and away from Australian businesses—the generators of growth—while also costing the budget more than $10 billion a year. The Murray inquiry in financial systems expressed high levels of concern that negative gearing and capital gains concessions are 'major tax distortions' that 'encourage leveraged and speculative investment'. The Grattan Institute have pointed out:

... the greater leverage encouraged by negative gearing arrangements also reduces the stability of the Australian financial system.

Labor believes in real economic growth that benefits all Australians, not just the lucky few at the top. We believe in budget repair that is fair. That means a tax policy that does not give a tax incentive to people buying their second, third, fourth or fifth investment property but gives a leg-up to Australians trying to buy their first home. Inclusive economic growth requires investment in infrastructure and investment in education and training—investments that allow everyone to participate in the Australian economy and thrive in the new economy that Australia moves into. We are up for the challenge of providing this economic leadership, even if the Prime Minister is not.

Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Turnbull government's priority is to promote economic growth and improve Australia's competitiveness on the world stage. Why? Because only through ensuring our nation has a stable and well-regulated business environment can we provide jobs and career opportunities for Australians. It is for these reasons that the government remains committed to pursuing policies and reforms that improve productivity and grow our national economy. Two of those reforms include issues that are near and dear to my heart: changes to the way registered organisations operate and the reinstatement of the Australian Building and Construction Commission.

There are currently 110 registered organisations that represent more than two million members. Between them they have annual revenue of $1.3 billion and they own or control $2.2 billion in assets. The majority of these registered organisations are not-for-profit and operate to supposedly serve the interests of their members. In many cases, registered organisations and their branches command significant financial resources. As is the case with any corporation in Australia, it makes sense that the registered organisations act requires a high level of financial oversight by officers to ensure that funds are used legally, responsibly and to benefit their members. It is also reasonable to accept that members and the broader community have high expectations regarding conduct of officers in charge of financial matters. In other words, it is expected that they act in the best interests of their membership at all times and conduct their business in an open and transparent manner. Let's not forget that registered organisations in Australia are given special privileges, like being income tax exempt. So it is reasonable that they should be accountable.

Unfortunately, there is evidence that some registered organisations do not meet their financial disclosure obligations. The recent royal commission into trade union governance and corruption uncovered numerous cases of misuse of member funds—for example, the National Union of Workers official who spent more than $100,000 of members' money on holidays, toys, dating service subscriptions and even a tattoo. It is clear that existing laws have done nothing to prevent thousands of Australia's lowest paid workers from being ripped off. The only way to ensure this does not continue to happen is to apply proper standards of governance to registered organisations—the same rules that apply to Australian corporations.

As part of the coalition's commitment to improving productivity and strengthening Australia's economy, reform must also come to the building and construction industry because it is one of the largest industries and employers in our nation. It employs one in 10 Australians and represents eight per cent of our GDP. The ABCC will return the rule of law to the industry and that will be music to the ears of the many thousands of workers who have been forced to submit to the will of those in the union movement who believe that they are above the law. There are in excess of 100 CFMEU officials before the courts. So far, the courts have imposed more than $8 million in fines for those in the CFMEU who are breaking the law. Large building contractors are currently free to lock out smaller contractors in the industry by discriminating against those who do not have a particular type of EBA favoured by them and/or the unions.

Since the ABCC was abolished by the Leader of the Opposition in 2012, the rate of disputes in the construction sector has increased by 40 per cent. It is clear that reform is desperately needed to improve productivity and grow our national economy. We must press on with important reforms, including those that will improve how registered organisations and the building and construction industry operate.

Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I give the member for Fisher his due: he certainly is not going to be gagged by the Leader of the House. He was committed to giving that ABCC and registered organisations speech and he gave it, even though the Leader of the House gagged him. Unfortunately, the matter of public importance topic was the collapse of the Turnbull government's economic plan—nothing to do with the registered organisations bill. However, he is a new member of parliament who came in on the double dissolution trigger, which was the registered organisations bill and the ABCC legislation—something not mentioned in any of the campaign material in the lead-up to the election. I saw around my electorate's booths on polling day that those opposite had the big sign saying: 'Plan. That's what we have. We've got a plan. We're going to give $50 billion, unfunded, to big business.' That was the pivotal point of the LNP plan in Queensland and rolled out—unfunded. Even though we know that about $9 billion of those tax concessions would go overseas to foreign shareholders, they were still committed to it. Obviously the Labor Party understands that small business plays a pivotal role, and we are happy to concede that businesses with a turnover of $2 million—that is what we call a small business; we do not call Coles a small business and we do not call Westpac a small business—do need a fair break. We were prepared to do that. As I said, congratulations to the member for Fisher for delivering his speech. He would not be gagged by the Leader of the House.

I remember the election campaign. I heard it over and over again: 'jobs and growth'. Remember that? And what was the platform for jobs and growth? This plan, based on fiscal recklessness. It was based on the idea of giving $50 billion to big business and that would somehow stimulate the economy. Well, we heard today from the Nick Xenophon team that they are going to reject this. Labor will reject it in the Senate and the Greens will reject it in the Senate, so we will not have their centrepiece plan coming to fruition. This glorious plan is dead in the water. Their plan is up the creek without the proverbial paddle—I will not name the creek. All that we have left is this slogan 'jobs and growth'. I remember what the Labor Party was about in the election. We were prepared to invest in children's education. That is where we were prepared to put taxpayers' hard-earned dollars. I know there were a few false Gonski promises floating around in 2013 and a couple in 2016—

Ms Henderson interjecting—

I take that interjection opposite. They were putting false ads out there—yours were delivered to the ETU, in fact. I seem to recall the corflutes saying that they supported Gonski; then they reneged on the promise. They lied about Gonski. In the hundred days since the election—we know that there are economic headwinds heading our way. We need a strong Prime Minister, someone who can get Australia out of the troubles we are in. Instead, we have this hillbilly-harbourside alliance over there that is producing nothing but no direction for the government and no direction for the nation. We see an unemployment rate of 6.1 per cent, even higher than the 5.1 per cent under the Labor government. We have a national unemployment rate since the Abbot-Turnbull government—or is it the Turnbull-Abbott government or the Abbott-Turnbull-Joyce government—I cannot work out who is in control over there. Is it George? Is it Cory? Is it Eric? It is hard to work out.

Pat Conroy (Shortland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is like a boy band.

Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is, we know. We have a Prime Minister who is prepared to do anything to come into office. He has the office, but he has no real power. We have George with the power, Cory with the power, Eric with the power—

Mark Coulton (Parkes, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Moreton will refer to members by their titles.

Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Prime Minister is now a mere husk. All those dreams he had of doing a work of noble note devoured by that rapacious right that is hovering around in the coalition room. All those dreams for nought. I am going to quote some bloke from about 2,000 years ago, who lived around the Palestinian territories: 'What shall it profit a man if he gain the whole world and suffer the loss of his soul?' Surely that is what we are seeing with this current Prime Minister and his economic plan.

Sarah Henderson (Corangamite, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What words of wisdom we have from the member for Moreton. Let me pick up one thing that the member for Moreton said in relation to false ads. The ads that we saw in the election campaign in relation to Medicare were an absolute disgrace. They were designed to scare older Australians. They were designed to cause fear and concern among some of our most vulnerable. The fact that you have even raised false advertising is an absolute and utter joke. Frankly, the member for Moreton should hang his head in shame at the way Labor scared our older Australians. I know that so many people on election day and leading up to election day just shook their heads in horror.

Today we have had some wonderful incitement from the members opposite. We have parallels with one of my favourite programs, Get Smart. In relation to Get Smart, I think I can say that Kevin Rudd was no Maxwell Smart. Julia Gillard was no Agent 99, and Bill Shorten is certainly no Chief Thaddeus; but there was chaos all around. Four surpluses never delivered—it was chaos. Record debt; record deficit; in fact it was even worse than that—

Jim Chalmers (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The deficit is bigger now!

Sarah Henderson (Corangamite, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will take the interjection from the member for Lilley's former chief of staff, who was one of the architects of the promise that the member for Lilley made to all Australians that the surpluses had been delivered. The member for Lilley's former chief of staff, who is now sitting on the other side of this chamber, should hang his head in shame at the appalling way in which Australians were misled.

Jim Chalmers (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What a joke you are!

Sarah Henderson (Corangamite, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You may have a point; you may want to contest ideas; but you do not disparage members in a personal way. That is a disgraceful thing to say and I ask you to withdraw it.

Jim Chalmers (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What a great debating point.

Mark Coulton (Parkes, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Corangamite will resume her seat. The shadow minister will withdraw.

Jim Chalmers (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I withdraw.

Sarah Henderson (Corangamite, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We are very proud of our strong economic plan, which is laid out in this particular document in the 2016-17 budget papers. While members opposite have held up a blank piece of paper, I would like to refer to them to this document. Let's have a look at the important principles of our economic plan. It is a plan for jobs, for jobs growth and for building a stronger economy; for backing work with investment with lower taxes; for growing small business; for investing in the ideas boom; greater choices for consumers; embracing our new financial economy; transforming the defence manufacturing industry; building a navy for the future; building a stronger, new and more diversified economy; investing in infrastructure; growing Australian exports; supporting our rural and regional industries; cutting red tape and creating a new pathway to youth employment. They are all in this document. Clearly those opposite have not quite managed to get their hands on it.

We are very proud of the many ways in which we are working to grow the economy with our strong economic plan, which is delivering record economic growth and low unemployment. One of the very important platforms of our plan is lower taxes for middle-income earners and also incredibly important tax cuts for small and medium businesses. These were tax cuts that were previously supported by the Leader of the Opposition, and in another unprincipled backflip the Leader of the Opposition is now fighting against those small business tax cuts, which is very disappointing.

We have delivered a fairer and more sustainable superannuation system. we are investing record dollars in health and education and we are investing in regional communications infrastructure—an issue that has been blatantly ignored by members opposite. We are doing wonderful work under our mobile communications—fixing blackspots right across Australia. We know how important that is for rural and regional's families, for students and for businesses. What but of course whenever we hear from members opposite, our farmers and rural and regional industries barely ever get a mention.

We now in the House have passed our Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Amendment Bill 2014. Yesterday in the House our Building and Construction Industry (Improving Productivity) Bill 2013 because we know how important it is to drive productivity to boost growth and to care for the one million workers who work on Australian building and construction sites.