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

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

The harm that will be inflicted on Australians in just nine days.

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—

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Australians should be aware that, nine days from now, we will see the unfairness of the Liberal coalition's Australia writ large. In nine days from now, in the world that the Prime Minister envisages for this country, if you earn $1 million, you are going to get a $16,400 tax cut, courtesy of the Turnbull government. But at the same time, on the same day, in some real irony, for 700,000 workers who are covered, in hospitality, retail, pharmacy and fast food, under their awards their penalty rates will be reduced, and not for an offsetting wage rise. It is just a pay cut. Under Prime Minister Turnbull, the first weekend of July means a wage cut for workers and a tax cut for millionaires.

Nine days from now, Australian families will start to pay the price of this government's four years of failure of energy policy. Power prices are set to increase by up to 19.6 per cent in New South Wales, 7.3 per cent in Queensland and nearly 20 per cent in South Australia. And, every time the Prime Minister says the problem is fixed, the electricity prices go up. People of Australia are wondering what is going on with this government. They keep hearing that the Prime Minister has solved the energy crisis, but, every time they hear that the Prime Minister has solved the problem, they keep hearing from their gas and electricity companies about a new price rise—seven per cent, 14 per cent, 18 per cent.

The Prime Minister keeps wanting to blame Labor. But the coalition have been in government for four years. The Prime Minister says that now they have fixed the gas crisis caused by Labor, but where were the government for the last four years? They should hand back their wages, because, if they want to pretend they were not there, they were taking their wages under false pretences. When they talk about the causes of rising prices, there is always one cause that this conservative, right-wing, hopeless government never concedes: privatisation of energy assets. We have seen rising power prices hit the hip pocket, time and time again, and this is at a time when wage growth is at historic lows. From 1959 to today—incomes and wages in this country are at their lowest proportion of the national economy since records were kept. What did the Prime Minister say about wages growth when the shadow Treasurer asked him about it on Tuesday? I am going to give the exact quote, because it tells you so much about the out-of-touch world that our Prime Minister inhabits. He said:

Low wages growth is an issue—it is. We are very aware of it. That is why we are supporting Australian business.

But corporate profits are at record highs and wages growth is at record lows.

Mr Hawke interjecting—

There is the old member for Mitchell, the trickle-down economics 101 guru! He says, 'Oh, if the corporates are making more profits, the wages will go up.' That disconnect has been proven in the last economic data.

Let us be clear about this country. Under Malcolm Turnbull, the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer and the middle class is getting squeezed. There are no wage rises, productivity growth is anaemic and economic growth is desperately dependent purely on terms of trade overseas, and there is no plan to look after the average battler. Actually, they have got a plan, and that is that millionaires get a tax cut, the big corporates get a tax cut and average working-class people in this country have to pay more income tax.

Then they give a Medicare guarantee. If you ever see a Liberal Medicare guarantee on a shelf in the pharmacy, run 100 miles away. Let me tell you what is behind the badge of a Liberal Medicare guarantee. What it says is that the freeze will still be in place on 1 July 2017, 1 July 2018 and 1 July 2019. GP consults for chronic diseases like asthma and diabetes will be frozen until 2020. GP items to treat pregnant women and women who have recently had a child will be frozen until 2020. Rebates for GPs to conduct Pap smears will be frozen until 2020. Rebates for GPs to have mental health assessments for people will be frozen until 2020.

And all the time we get these patronising lectures from the establishment class of this country saying, 'It's all about Australian values.' The Prime Minister looked like he was trapped in his own body last week and this week when he talked about Australian patriotism—as if Australians need to be lectured by the top end of town about loving this country. They say that patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel. Look how this government seeks to wrap themselves up in our national flag while they attack the fair go in this country. We are not copping a lecture on Australian values from a minister for immigration who would not support the apology to the stolen generation. As for a university English language test, give us a break! Most days in parliament, the Deputy Prime Minister would be flat out trying to pass that!

As for the Prime Minister's values, why on earth is this desperate party so keen and hungry to have Senator Hanson's references? Why has no-one in this government called out her disgusting attack on children with autism? I make a promise to every parent in this country with a child with a disability: we will stop a forced segregation of kids with disability out of our mainstream schooling system. It is long overdue for all of you on that side to join us to say no to Senator Hanson's segregation in our schools.

And today we had to listen to those opposite lecture us about respecting the rule of law. But I saw at least three ministers of the crown, the Minister for Health and—

Mr Hawke interjecting—

He says, 'Give it up'. No way, son. No way are we going to let you lecture us, when three of you, the Yarra 3, went out there and now you have to go to court tomorrow. I make no comment about the case, but I make this comment about the Yarra 3 and their benefactor, their sponsor, their honoured leader. The Prime Minister went on radio and endorsed their comments.

Opposition members interjecting—

Oh, yes, we'll give them a pair. Respect the law—pull the other one! And let's have a look at the schools policy. For all the confused horse trading going on, the government is just trying to work how much money you can get away with from ripping off Australian schools. You were having an auction and you wanted to get away with $40 billion and then you rolled poor old member for Warringah and then the member for Wentworth turns up and says, 'I'm the hero of the ages,' and says, 'I'll only cut $22 billion.' Then of course, they went, 'Oh, my goodness; no-one in Australia likes it, except a couple of school chums of the Prime Minister.' And then today they started lecturing us about standing up for public schools—

Ms Henderson interjecting—

You would be better off saying nothing, Member for Corangamite. The Catholic education system has worked you out. The $22.3 billion cut was in the Prime Minister's own fact sheet. Let me read out what they distributed to the media:

Compared to Labor's arrangements, this represents savings of $6.3 billion over four years … and $22.3 billion over 10 years ...

That is their confession. An average of $2.4 million per school is the equivalent of not hiring an extra 22,000 teachers over the next 10 years. But they say, 'Oh, that's only compared to Labor.' Well, here is a news flash: you are in a contest with us and we are going to win the education debate, because we are the party of education. We are the party of needs based funding.' To be fair, the member for Sydney is wiping the floor with the lot of you reprobates, even without the rest of us. But we are up for this fight on education and we are not the only people. The teachers hate this policy. The Catholic education system—

Ms Henderson interjecting—

You say, 'Rubbish'. Don't you read what they say about you? What do you have against parents who choose to send their kids to low-fee Catholic parish schools? Why do you want their fees to go up? Whatever happened to the 'party of choice'? Whatever happens in nine days time with their manifest unfairness, their rising prices, their tax cuts for millionaires and their penalty rate cuts for hundreds of thousands of workers, I promise the Australian people that we will remedy and right the wrongs of 1 July. We are on the side of the people and we will take this government on all the way to the election.

Alex Hawke (Mitchell, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Immigration and Border Protection) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If you believe any of that, Mr Deputy Speaker, you must have had the Senator Doug Cameron lobotomy he says members of the backbench in the Labor Party have to have. If you have watched federal politics for the last 10 years you would understand that so much of what the Leader of the Opposition just said is completely at odds with the position of the Labor Party in government. Of course, we do not accept that they believe any of what the Leader of the Opposition just said because we know from history that when they were in government they did the exact opposite.

We know the member for McMahon's position on company tax cuts—company tax cuts for small and medium Australian businesses that this government has passed. Those tax cuts for small and medium Australian family-owned and operated businesses mean that they will have more money in their pockets to pay the very wages that the Leader of the Opposition talks about.

There is only one kind of wage the Leader of the Opposition means when he talks about wages, and that is increasing government wages. We know that when they were in government they blew the budget sky high. We are supposed to believe that the Labor Party now cares about debt and deficit—that they suddenly discovered a long-lost care for the debt and the deficit. If we had continued spending at the same rate as the Australian Labor Party it would not be half a trillion, it would be $1 trillion of debt. If the Labor Party had stayed in office and continued spending like drunken sailors, it would be $1 trillion. This is the only government—that of the Liberal and National parties—that has proposed savings and cuts and has delivered them.

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

That didn't work very well!

Alex Hawke (Mitchell, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Immigration and Border Protection) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Parramatta said it did not work very well. That is because you have been opposing them, member for Parramatta. You have blocked the government's cuts and savings measures. In spite of the Labor Party's opposition, it is the Turnbull government that has cut $26 billion since the last election. The only government—the only parties—in this House that proposes savings is this government. At the same time as we have done so, we have cut tax for small and medium Aussie businesses. We have taken measures to ensure income tax cuts. Half a million Australians will no longer go into the second-highest tax bracket because of this government.

Every time the Leader of the Opposition gets up and says: 'What about the debt? What about the deficit?' he needs to get a big mirror and look in it because it was they who ran up the debts, ran up the government spending and delivered the conditions we inherited. We will not take a lecture. He says he will not take a lecture from us, but we will not take a lecture from him on debt and deficit. We will not take a lecture from the Labor Party—the absolute vandals of this parliament, the vandals of Australian politics and the people who ran up more government spending, more government debt and more government deficit than any other government in Australian history. We are the ones proposing to do something about it.

At the same time, we have delivered an education policy which delivers more money to schools—$18. 6 billion—which is proposed to go through this House today. It is an $18.6 billion increase which the Labor Party says is a cut to school funding. Only a Labor Party completely and utterly at odds with its own policy could believe—

Ms Owens interjecting—

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

The member for Parramatta will be silent!

Alex Hawke (Mitchell, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Immigration and Border Protection) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

that an $18.6 billion increase in education funding is actually a cut. I do not believe any teacher or any member of the public would believe it. We have seen the Australian Education Union break ranks in recent days to say an $18.6 billion increase is an $18.6 billion increase. Go figure! No amount of untruths, half-facts and misleading questions we have seen day after day in this chamber can erase the fact that the Turnbull government is solving the education wars in this country and making sure we have a genuine, needs-based national model.

Nothing could convince Australians that the Labor Party and this Leader of the Opposition are not genuine about their approach to politics more than this Leader of the Opposition coming into this chamber and saying that he is concerned about energy prices. A Labor Party brought in the world's highest carbon tax to Australia—the world's highest carbon tax applied to Australian businesses. Now, we are supposed to believe that, after decades of Labor governments, state and federal, applying policies that have lifted power prices in this country, they care about your power bill. This is the only government that removed the carbon tax. It was this government that removed the carbon tax.

Ms Owens interjecting—

The world's highest carbon tax, the member for Parramatta says. She is criticising our approach We know, if they were ever returned to government, policies like the carbon tax would come back. How do we know that? Well, they are proposing—variously, depending on what day it is—a 50 per cent renewable energy target with no idea about how they would meet that renewable energy target. If the Leader of the Opposition wants to address power prices, if he is ever elected, how is he going to do it when his own government would have a 50 per cent renewable energy target?

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

Don't talk about your own record.

Alex Hawke (Mitchell, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Immigration and Border Protection) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That is depending on what day it is, Member for Parramatta. We know, of course, that it has been 40 per cent and it has been 50 per cent. They have no idea how they would do such a target. We need to introduce a spot price for the renewable energy target over there. We do not know what it is. We would have to look it up depending on the day of the week it was; how high they would do it. One thing we do know is that you would increase the renewable energy target in such dramatic ways that you would increase power prices for end users.

Contrast that approach with the Turnbull coalition government. We are taking action on gas. We are taking action on gas once again, following a decade of Labor, state and federal, who had recklessly run up the ability for people to export gas overseas. It is actually easier to export that gas than it is to supply our own domestic market. Today in question time, the member for McMahon, no matter what he likes to say, was yelling out 'sovereign risk' when the Prime Minister was talking about the gas supply. He might want to make a personal explanation and say, 'Oh, I meant some other sophisticated thing,' realising he had been badly embarrassed. He says that when the Turnbull government acts on gas, reserving domestic supply and ensuring that the price pressure on gas comes down, he describes it as sovereign risk. That is what he said. I heard him say it. He says, 'Oh, no, I didn't mean that; I meant something else.' But he was yelling out 'sovereign risk'.

This government removed the carbon tax and lowered the RET. It was the coalition government that proposed to lower the RET because there was no way that we could feasibly meet the RET at the target the Labor Party had left us with. Labor agreed, of course, to the reduction, even though their policy now says—variously, depending on what day it is—it will go up. You know that the Leader of the Opposition is being his most disingenuous when he comes into this House and says: 'I'm really worried about your power bill. I'm really worried about the price you're paying for power. I'm so concerned. It is this mob that's been in government.' Well, we know that the South Australian state Labor government is the cause of the blackouts that we have seen. The reckless pursuit of renewable energy at the expense of base-load generation has meant a disaster for the economy of South Australia.

We know that the Victorian Labor state government has said not that you cannot frack for gas—you cannot in various rural or regional areas; we do not want to do that on prime farmland; they have banned non-conventional gas and they have also banned conventional gas exploration. Why would you ban conventional gas exploration and, at the same time, build a port to import the very same gas into your state? We have more gas under Australia than Saudi Arabia has under oil, but we cannot supply our domestic market because of the decisions of Labor state governments. That is before we turn to the Queensland state Labor government and look at their ownership of the energy assets in Queensland. How much do they take out of those assets, those utilities, each year in dividends?

When the Labor Party comes in here with one of the highest renewable energy targets in the world, with a carbon tax at the highest rate in the world, all of the pressures that the state Labor governments have put on power prices, we know that the Leader of the Opposition is not genuine about your power price. He has no idea how to lower your power bill. Any policy that the Labor Party pursues will mean higher power prices for business and higher power prices for households. We will not be lectured by this man on power prices. It is a Turnbull coalition government that is acting to lower people's power prices. We are governing in the national interest. We are delivering to schools genuine national, needs based funding. We are tackling debt and deficit in this country, with no help from the Labor Party. Their approach will deliver a debt and deficit disaster. We will not be lectured by this kind of Labor Party that has no regard for the Australian people.

Tanya Plibersek (Sydney, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I was so interested a few weeks ago, towards the end of May, when the Prime Minister spoke at CEDA about the top marginal tax rate and the reason the government has to give millionaires a big tax cut on 1 July. Do you know what he said? Mr Deputy Speaker, I am sure you paid a lot of attention at the time. He said that this would be a success tax—that cutting the tax paid by millionaires and multimillionaires would be a success tax. Someone earning $1 million a year would pay $16,400 less tax a year and a bank CEO would get a tax cut of $171,000 a year from 1 July. I thought it was interesting the way that the Prime Minister was justifying this. He said that to not do this would be a success tax.

The people who teach kids to read are a success. I think nurses are a success. I think the police, who keep us safe, are a success. I think carers, who are home looking after family members, are a success. I think ordinary people working hard every day are a success. It is offensive to suggest that the only people who are successful are those earning $180,000 a year and that the way we measure success in this country is simply by your pay packet. If that were the case, every corporate crook in Australian history would be a great success, wouldn't they?

I mentioned teachers because one thing that has distressed me so much about the education debate this week is the sanctimony from the Prime Minister. He says, 'It's all about the children.' We had the Minister representing the Minister for Education this week confirm that Northern Territory public school children will get the worst deal in the country if this legislation passes. They will not even keep up with indexation. This deal is not needs based when Northern Territory public school children get the worst deal and Tasmanian public school children get the second worst deal. It is not sector blind when the government says it is going to pay only 20 per cent of the cost of educating a public school kid but will pay 80 per cent of the cost of educating a private school kid. Even a school that has fees of $30,000 or $40,000 a year will still get 80 per cent of the cost of educating a child. In effect, that means that, while public schools will lose funding and small Catholic systemic schools will lose funding, some of the wealthiest schools in the country will see an increase in their funding.

You only have to look at the state of Tasmania to see the actual effect at a micro level. It is a bit hard when you are talking about billions of dollars to really understand the impact of this. The Prime Minister admitted the other day in question time—it took me three days, mind you, to get him to admit this—that students with a disability in Tasmania will lose a third of their funding next year. It took me three days to get him to admit it, but he did admit it. They will lose a third of their funding.

There are beautifully resourced schools. The Friends' School in Hobart will get a $19 million increase. St Michael's Collegiate in Hobart will get a $11 million increase. The Scotch Oakburn College in Launceston will get a $22 million increase. Launceston Church Grammar School will get a $15 million increase. The Hutchins School in Sandy Bay will get a $19 million increase. They are very well resourced schools already.

I compare those to the schools I visited on my last trip to Tasmania. Campbell Town District School has a fantastic principal and dedicated teaching staff. I asked them what they would do with the extra money. What did they tell us? They told us: 'We'd make sure that the kids had sporting opportunities. We'd give them more access to a few computers. We'd make sure that we could help with homework because a lot of these kids are travelling a long way to come to school and are working many hours on the weekend to support the family budget. We'd help them with their homework. We'd give them some opportunities to participate more broadly in the community of Northern Tasmania and Central Tasmania by maybe travelling to Launceston, and getting a bit more vocational education.' They knew how they would spend the extra money if they got some extra needs based funding. Well, guess what? Public schools in Tasmania will lose $68 million over the next two years alone. Disability students will lose money, small Catholics schools will lose money and public schools will lose money.

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

It is my great pleasure to rise and speak on this MPI. As Australians hearing this debate may have noticed, the real subject before the House today is the harm that would be inflicted on Australians if Labor is re-elected. The best judge of future behaviour is past behaviour, and we saw this in action from the member for Sydney in her contribution just a few moments ago. Even the ABC's Fact Check has made it very clear that the member for Sydney is misleading Australians. She is misleading Australians by claiming the $22 billion that, in fact, never existed in Labor's budget. This is all funny money. This is all made up. And, as we have heard from the member—

Tanya Plibersek (Sydney, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I seek leave to table the budget document from 2014 that shows that it is a $30 billion saving. You cannot have a saving if there is no cut.

Leave not granted.

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

Regrettably, we have seen more out-of-order conduct from the member for Sydney by that intervention just then. As I was saying, the member for Sydney, in her contributions in the parliament, has fundamentally misled Australians. Shame on the member for Sydney. There is no $22 billion. This is funny money. Our government is delivering fair, consistent and needs based funding—$18.6 billion—and, judging from the reports today, it could be even more, depending on what comes out of the Senate. But this is another example of why you cannot trust Labor.

On 1 July, we are very proud that we will be introducing our Australian Domestic Gas Security Mechanism, and this will introduce tough new regulations in the gas sector, in contrast to the absolute basket case of policies from Labor that we have seen on energy which have driven up electricity—doubled the cost of electricity—and also driven up gas. Under Labor, these hideous export deals were entered into. Labor was not cognisant of the damage this would do to our domestic supply. We are taking the strong action, and we are ensuring that Australians will be able to access cheap and accessible power and have energy security.

On 1 July, we are introducing our company tax rate extension. Companies with a turnover of up to $25 million will enjoy a tax rate of 27.5 per cent. The member for McMahon used to believe in company tax cuts. He used to think that would drive jobs and investment. What absolute hypocrisy. The Labor Party is a laughing joke. They are looking more and more like the Communist Party. It is an absolute and utter joke. Paul Keating is embarrassed by this Labor Party. He said it is an absolute joke, and I can tell you, on this particular issue, the member for McMahon has absolutely embarrassed himself.

On 1 July, our Medicare Guarantee Fund will come into place, and we are unfreezing Labor's indexation freeze. This is Labor's damage. This is Labor's great work! We are taking strong action to guarantee Medicare and to give Australians the assurance that there is only one party that cares for Medicare, and that is the Liberal-National coalition. We are introducing the major bank levy. We are taking strong action. We are holding bank executives to account. We are introducing the Australian Financial Complaints Authority. And what has Labor got? What policies has Labor got to hold the banks to account? It has zero. Calling for a royal commission shows it has no ideas, no policies.

On 1 July this year, we will introduce our National Firearms Amnesty. This is the first nationwide gun amnesty since 1996, and what do we see from Labor? In contrast, we see Labor rejecting legislation to impose mandatory jail terms for gun traffickers. Labor says it does not believe in mandatory sentencing. That is why the state of Victoria is in such a mess with its crime. It is in such a mess. It is not prepared to take the strong action. What we are seeing from Labor is an absolute basket case of policies—of flips, of flops. On 1 July, we are proudly introducing a whole range of new measures to give Australians confidence in our government for all Australians, for jobs and for security.

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

Before I call the member for McMahon, I remind members that they might be required in here for a division later on. I will not be beyond throwing someone out. I am not going to allow this MPI to degenerate any further. I call the member for McMahon.

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

I hope the member for Corangamite's lectern is okay over there; I am very concerned about the property of the parliament. The bad economic news comes so thick and fast under this government that it is very understandable that members of the public—and indeed members of the House—might have trouble keeping up with it and the confused economic response of this government.

It wasn't that long ago that we heard the fact that debt ticked over in Australia: half a trillion dollars for the first time—$500 billion worth of gross debt under this government's watch. That has never happened before, and the government says: 'Well, it's net debt that counts more.' And we accept that: we accept that net debt is a very important measure, and net debt will peak at 20 per cent of GDP, a rate never hit by a Labor government, apart from the financing of World War II—never hit by a Labor government once.

We have issues around debt and deficit in Australia, and the government has a response. Their response is to give a tax cut to high-income earners. Their response is to reduce the tax take in Australia. I would have thought that, when you have got debt at half a trillion dollars, when you have got a deficit that is 10 times bigger than Joe Hockey predicted in 2014 in the coming year, the government would say: 'Well, we might not be able to proceed with that tax cut. We might have to cancel that tax cut, because the budget needs to be in better shape.' But no: this government's priorities are clear to see, because on 1 July, they will deliver that tax cut.

This is a government that is not too fussed about breaking election promises when it suits them. When they find that there is a matter of great principle—of values; it is in their DNA, to their core—like looking after high-income earners, they are completely honourable. They will not have a cigarette paper's worth of difference to their comments about what they have said before. They will deliver in full. On 1 July, as other honourable members have said, we have a government—and even the member for Corangamite just said—that will deliver tax cuts for businesses, tax cuts for high-income earners and a pay cut for low-income earners.

We heard about the corporate tax cuts from the honourable member opposite—and that is another bit of news that honourable members may have forgotten. Remember in question time just a few weeks ago? It took us four or five questions to get it out, but the tax cut cost had gone from $50 billion over the next decade to $65 billion over the next decade.

The Prime Minister stands there and says: '$22 billion worth of education funding is unaffordable.' It was funny money. It was fantasy money. It was unfunded. He said it with a straight face—$65 billion worth of corporate tax cuts.

Brendan O'Connor (Gorton, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

How is it funded?

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

How is it funded—asks the member for Gorton, as well he might, because the government has no clue. So they can afford $65 billion worth of corporate tax cuts—no problem They can afford the money for high-income tax cuts—no problem. Can they afford the money for schools? No, they cannot afford that.

And of course the other bit of bad economic news that we have had lately is the fact that wages growth continues at a record low—in fact, I am being small-l liberal with my language when I call it wages growth; because it is not growing at all. Real wages are going backwards. It is negative growth. People are not keeping up with inflation, and the government, yet again, has a cunning plan. They have worked it all out: their answer to negative wages growth is to cut wages further on 1 July.

The member for Higgins would be proud. Remember when she said that the negative gearing policy is going to put house prices up and the Prime Minister said they were going to go down? She might have come up with a policy to cut wages as a response to falling real wages.

This government, at its core, lacks a comprehensive and comprehensible economic agenda. Their only agenda is to look after people who they regard as the most important people in Australia—high-income earners. We have nothing against people earning a good income but we want people making a fair contribution. When the budget is under such pressure, we want people to make a contribution which they can afford to do, as they have done now since 2014 when this government introduced the deficit levy. Has Western civilisation ended for the last few years? Have people refused to turn up at work because the tax rate is too high? Have people refused to engage in economic activity? No. This government's priorities are all wrong, and 1 July is the day it will be shown they are— (Time expired)

Kevin Hogan (Page, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The sanctimony from the other side is palpable. The member for McMahon, a man who has written books about certain things, will get up and talk about the debt and the rising debt, and have a go at us about our debt management when he himself said that if they won government at the last election debt would go higher. I think he thought it would work out to be about $16 billion to $17 billion higher. So the sanctimony of it is ridiculous.

The other thing that he has also written books about is the importance of a competitive tax rate. If you believe the rantings of that side of politics, why don't we put the company tax rate up to 90 per cent? Why don't we put tax rates up to get more money? Labor of the past—as in the Hawke-Keating type of governments—and the Howard-Costello Liberal-National governments understood that for every public dollar that we want to spend on health, education, welfare, defence or any other thing that we should do as a government it has to come from a healthy private sector—one that is growing, one that is competitive and one that we can, therefore, know is healthy. Go and speak to your luminary past leaders like Hawke and Keating. They knew that to have a healthy private sector you have to have a competitive tax rate—more so now more than ever because of how global and how inter-traded a lot of companies are, and how even small companies have competitive pressures from overseas.

I could go through and quote for you how many countries have a lower tax rate than ours, and that is why we need to do that to remain competitive. There have been many times that I have quoted it before—and I will not do it again—as well have others in this chamber. In the past, when we have cut company tax rates, within two years we have been collecting more tax at the lower rate than the higher rate, because the private sector is getting healthier. So we have a great policy coming in on 1 July.

We know that that side does not like small business. We know that they do not understand small business. That is why the 3.2 million small businesses in this country that employ—

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Kevin Hogan (Page, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Real small businesses—that is right. Two million dollars—that is not profit, mate. It is turnover. So you can be a small business and have a $2 million turnover, but the profit is not that great.

Opposition members interjecting—

But I do not expect you to understand. I would not expect you to understand because you know nothing about small business.

The other thing that we are doing, too, is on 1 July we are extending the $20,000 asset tax write-off. Every small business that I talk to in my electorate loves that. It is good for business, it is good for regional communities like mine. It has spurred economic activity. It is good policy. The other thing that we are doing on 1 July is diverted profits tax. The philosophy behind that is: if you earn the money here, you pay tax here. For some reason, they do not support that, either. They did not vote for that policy in this chamber, as well. But that is another thing that we are going to bring in on 1 July. There is the bank levy tax. They want to bring in a royal commission. We just want them to pay their fair share and help repair the budget. This is a good policy because it is confined to the four majors and Macquarie bank. There is an implicit government guarantee for the big banks that credit agencies like Standard & Poor's note. They actually quantify it and say that the implicit government guarantee is worth about 20 basis points to banks. We are taking the six-basis point levy on them to help us do budget repair. As the previous member said, we do have a budget issue and we do want to repair the budget. We know it all took off and was out of control under the six years of the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd government, but we do want to repair the budget and we will repair the budget. That is an important part of that.

I have been thinking: why doesn't Labor like small business? Obviously, they have also done deals. Big businesses and big unions have done deals together. Some of them have actually been done by the opposition leader himself. What it means is that a family chicken shop on a Sunday has to pay $8 more than KFC, a family-owned takeaway must pay $8 more than McDonald's on a Sunday, a family bottle shop has to pay $7 more per hour on a Sunday than Dan Murphy's, and family greengrocer has to pay $5 more per hour on a Sunday than Woolworths. (Time expired)

Brendan O'Connor (Gorton, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That was a load of nonsense because the reality is, Mr Deputy Speaker, if you want to talk about deals, let's talk about the Prime Minister. The bankers' friend has managed to negotiate a $65 billion gift to big business in this country at the same time as cutting $22 billion to schools over the next 10 years. Again, $65 billion to big business and a $22 billion cut to schools in this country. That is the position and that is the plan of the Prime Minister and this government. That is why Labor will stand up for the kids of those schools and the workers in workplaces who are going to also receive on 1 July, in nine days time, a pay cut. Up to 700,000 workers in this country—retail workers, hospitality workers and those who work in pharmacies and fast food outlets—are going to receive real pay cuts as a result of the government refusing to actually respond to the concerns of Labor to quash the order of the commission and ensure that those wages do not go down.

This government has chosen to turn its back on 700,000 workers whilst giving tax breaks to millionaires and $65 billion to big business. In fact, if you look at the tax cuts, Deputy Speaker, they are quite interesting. Everybody under $87,000 does not get a tax cut. Indeed, the same people that will be subject to a pay cut as a result of the penalty rate decision the government refuses to respond to will of course not be receiving a tax cut. Yet those that earn $1 million a year will receive a $16,400 tax cut courtesy of the Prime Minister and this government.

As the shadow Treasurer, the member for McMahon, said earlier in this debate, wage growth is at an all-time low. In fact, we have been collecting data and in the last 20 years there has never been so little growth in wages. We are seeing, effectively, a wage recession in most parts of the labour market. It is exactly the wrong time to be cutting wages, if there is ever any good time to do so—of course, there is not. To combine the pay cuts because of the penalty rates decision with a decision to increase taxes on those workers on under $87,000 is just madness unless you have a callous disregard for these people and unless you have an indifference towards these workers. The Prime Minister and the government have shown time and time again that they have a disregard for the people who built this country—those workers in the workplaces across the land who are going to get a tax increase and a pay cut on the same day, courtesy of the Turnbull government. That is the reality as a result of the decisions taken by this government. That is an absolute outrage.

I have to say: is it any wonder? We have had the Prime Minister seeking to emote. He is now using the word 'fairness' more often. He tends to use the word 'fairness'. He has gone to a focus group and has realised the word 'fairness' helps and thought: 'We should say it a few times. We should say it in the budget speech. I should say it when I get up.' But the reality is that he does not believe in fairness. In fact, he is also trying to revise his personal history. He tries to make people believe that he struggled financially. The Prime Minister wants us to believe that he struggled financially. I do not mind him making money, but let's be honest: it is easier to make money from money. That is what the Prime Minister has done. He likes to pretend he has struggled and he likes to create this log cabin story about his past, but we know those logs were made from bars of gold. He has never struggled in his life. He has no empathy at all for those workers. He has no understanding that, if you cut even as little as $50 a week from a household budget, that makes it difficult for thousands and thousands of families in every electorate of every member in this place. That is the result of the combined effect of cutting the pay of those workers and increasing taxes on workers below $87,000 a year. That is a deliberate attempt by this government to make those who cannot afford it pay for the tax cut to billionaires and millionaires. That is the reality, and this government has to reconsider this position, because it is unfair and it is intrinsically against what Australian values are about. Indeed, they should come in here, support Labor's bill and support workers on penalty rates.

Steve Irons (Swan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Just to remind the speakers on this particular MPI and also the people who are listening, I would just like to go through the policy that are commencing on 1 July. We can start with the Australian Domestic Gas Security Mechanism; the national firearms amnesty; the US-bound air cargo 100 per cent screening; the company tax rate cut turnover threshold being extended from $10 million to $25 million; the Medicare Guarantee Fund; the major bank levy; the diverted profits tax; the superannuation package reforms; the foreign investment capital gains tax; the Infrastructure and Project Financing Agency being established as an executive agency; the commencement of the cashless debit card Ceduna and East Kimberley trial and income management extension; the vocational education and training ombudsman; the commencement of the WA National Disability Insurance Scheme transition; the Skilling Australia Fund; the social services legislation amendment; and the disability services amendment.

I will also go through the achievements that we have had since we came into government. There are more than 232,000 more Australians in jobs than just a year ago. We have passed small and medium—

Luke Howarth (Petrie, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Hear, hear! Say that one again.

Steve Irons (Swan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Do you want to hear it again? More than 232,000 more Australians are in jobs than just a year ago. We have passed small and medium business tax cuts benefiting 3.2 million small businesses that employ 6.5 million Australians. I see the minister is here, and he wants to hear it again: more than 232,000 more Australians are in jobs than just a year ago. We have also provided a middle-income tax cut stopping 500,000 Australians from moving into a higher tax bracket. We have implemented the bank levy, representing a fair contribution to the community from our major banks. We have passed childcare reforms that will benefit around one million families. We are working to secure Australia's energy future through Snowy Hydro 2.0, which will be the biggest project of its kind in the Southern Hemisphere. We have banned secret payments between employers and unions and restored the rule of law in the construction industry, which employs more than a million Australians. We have also defended 60,000 volunteer firefighters in Victoria from a hostile union takeover. We have continued strong border protection policies, with over 1,000 days since a successful boat arrival, and we have secured resettlement for the refugees on Manus and Nauru. We have also passed additional antiterrorism legislation to keep Australians safe and allow us to keep terrorists behind bars when they continue to pose a danger to the community after their sentence has ended. We have also fixed Labor's VET FEE-HELP mess, which paid people to study massage therapy for pets. We have added lifesaving medicines to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, saving hundreds of lives, and I know there are people in my electorate who have been benefiting from that as well. We have also fully funded the National Disability Insurance Scheme and guaranteed Medicare, and we have made strong laws to make multinational companies pay their fair share of tax. I think that is not a bad record since we have been in government. On that side, most of the people over there voted against all those great moves that we have had.

The matter of public importance today, according to the opposition, is 'the harm that will be inflicted on Australians'. I am sure I do not need to remind the House of the devastating harm they inflicted on everyday Australians during the six years of the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd governments, through unnecessary taxes. Let's start with the anti-Western-Australian mining tax. There is a Western Australian in the chamber supporting that anti-Western-Australian mining tax; I cannot believe it. Those on that side expected a total of $22.5 billion to be raised over the first four years of that tax, to be spent on a list of priorities. As you would expect, that disappeared, but guess what: they still spent the money, even though they did not get the money in. In fact, it was broken promises and they were broken because their harmful tax was a failure—$22.5 billion they claimed and somewhere along the way the figure went into the ether.

By 2012, Labor had reduced that to $2 billion and not even a year later they projected it had fallen to less than $200 million. The great state of WA was even promised $100 million by Kevin Rudd at the 2007 election to boost the economy as part of his repair to the GST problems—problems that existed even back then for Western Australia. But I can assure you we never got the $100 million. That was typical of Labor: do not worry about what they say, just worry about what they do. That was typical: $100 million that never materialised for Western Australia but Labor reaped tax from businesses and the mining industry in Western Australia.

Mark Butler (Port Adelaide, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Environment, Climate Change and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That was quite a magical mystery tour from the member for Swan, who is a very popular member across both sides of the aisle. I think someone must have written that for him and held his arm behind his back and forced him to read it, except for the last bit which was a nice bit of history. As my colleagues have pointed out, and as those opposite appear intent on denying, 1 July is firming as a nightmare for ordinary Australians. There is a series of measures, driven by this Prime Minister and this government, that are going to hurt ordinary Australians. As my colleague the shadow minister for employment pointed out, it is going to be a day of joy for the big end of town. Those earning $1 million are going to receive a tax cut of $16,400 on 1 July, but ordinary Australians are going to take hit after hit, blow after blow, as a direct result of decisions by this government.

The shadow minister referred particularly to the penalty rates decision by the industrial commission—an unprecedented decision to cut the take-home pay of hundreds of thousands of Australian workers with no offset. There has been legislation in this parliament that we pleaded with the government to support to prevent 700,000 workers from receiving a pay cut. We gave them opportunity after opportunity to do the right thing by some of the lowest paid workers in Australia, and they have just shunned us; importantly, not only shunning us but shunning those 700,000 workers. Households across Australia, many of which will be dealing with the impact of penalty rate cuts for those who work on Sundays in retail, hospitality and pharmacy are also receiving notice from their power companies—AGL, Origin Energy and Energy Australia—that they will receive price hikes of up to 20 per cent.

Mr Craig Kelly interjecting—

The member for Hughes is from New South Wales, and I am sure we will hear something about renewable energy from him. New South Wales—a state governed for six years by a Liberal government—under four years of this federal government is facing a power price increase of 16 per cent from AGL, 16.1 per cent from Energy Australia and 19 per cent from Origin Energy.

Mr Craig Kelly interjecting—

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

The member for Hughes will get his turn in a minute.

Mark Butler (Port Adelaide, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Environment, Climate Change and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We know exactly why because report after report has told us why, including the recent report from the Chief Scientist. The key driver is the policy paralysis in this building under this Prime Minister and his predecessor, the member for Warringah. Wholesale prices under this government have doubled. We saw the numbers in The Australian, the newspaper favoured by members opposite, in an article by David Crowe, who showed that even under the carbon tax—the dreaded carbon tax—wholesale prices were around $58 a megawatt hour and now they are $130. Of course under the carbon price mechanism there was the household assistance package—pensioners received increases and we tripled the tax-free threshold—which more than covered the impact in energy prices and other prices of the carbon price mechanism. In my state of South Australia, the impact of the carbon price mechanism was about 4.5 per cent. In New South Wales, they are dealing with 20 per cent power price increases, at the same time that wages are as flat as they have ever been. People are actually receiving real wage cuts under this government. And just to put the cherry on the top of the outrage, at the same time, this government is going to cut the pension by $365 a year for new pensioners—hundreds of thousands of pensioners into the future will have their pension cut by $365—at a time when we are seeing record power price increases.

As my friend the member for Grayndler has said time and time again, this government had a plan to get into government but no plan to govern. For four years we have had no energy policy in this country. The Finkel report has given us an opportunity to work across the aisle to put downward pressure on the power price increases that the member for Hughes is going to have to explain to his constituents in New South Wales over the coming weeks. But we still do not quite know whether this Prime Minister and the Minister for the Environment and Energy will be given permission by the member for Hughes and others in the coalition party room to do the right thing by the nation and actually start to put downward pressure on power prices in this country.

Craig Kelly (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have heard some hypocrisy coming from the other side through my 6½ years in parliament, but to hear the member for, of all places, Port Adelaide stand at the despatch box and cry about the effect of increasing power prices on consumers just takes the cake. Member for Port Adelaide, go and give yourself a gold medal for your performance at the despatch box crying about power prices. Under those 'most magnificent glory years' of the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd regimes, of which the member for Port Adelaide was a senior member, power prices increased in this nation 118 per cent. And do you know where they bit the most? It was in the member for Port Adelaide's electorate. If you look at the statistics, you see that, over the last several years under the Labor Party, nowhere have households had their power cut off more than in South Australia. And the member for Port Adelaide comes in here and talks about how upset he is about power price increases. Member for Port Adelaide, go and give yourself a gold medal for hypocrisy, because that is the best that I have ever seen.

Getting back to the MPI, I actually read it and I was a bit confused. The MPI from the Leader of the Opposition says, 'The harm that will be inflicted on Australians.' So I thought, 'Is this an extension of the threats made by the CFMEU?' They are the ones who talk about harm to Australians. Actually, let's just see what the CFMEU have said about doing harm to Australians—and I quote:

Let me give a dire warning to the ABCC inspectors: be careful what you do.

When we come after you, you'd better be careful.

We're going to expose them all. We will lobby their neighbourhoods. We will tell them who lives in their house …We'll go to their local footy club, we'll go to their local shopping centre. They will not be able to show their faces anywhere. Their kids will be ashamed of them, who their parents are, while we expose these ABCC inspectors.

Threatening children. This is the type of rhetoric that you would expect from a criminal outlaw motorcycle gang. Yet these are the major benefactors of the Labor Party. Millions of dollars from the CFMEU underwrite the elections and the campaigns of the members sitting over that side. When we raise this issue, their heads go down and silence comes across them, because in their hearts they are embarrassed to receive funding from an organisation that makes such criminal threats.

The late great Bill Leak, in one of his cartoons, summed up the relationship between the CFMEU and the opposition. His cartoon showed a CFMEU official with a CFMEU t-shirt on, with the tatts and the muscles, holding up a sock puppet, and that sock puppet of course was the Leader of the Opposition. We know who pulls the strings. We know what would happen should that Labor Party ever sit on this side of the chamber. They would merely be puppets of the CFMEU. And I think that is something all Australians should consider. All Australians should consider what this country would be like if an organisation like the CFMEU was running the show, because that is what would happen should the Labor Party ever sit on this side—hypocrisy, threats; that is the modern day Labor Party.

The other hypocrisy we have heard from them is that this MPI, which should have been an uplift and a chance to talk about the progress our nation is making—instead, we see this appalling motion to end this session of parliament. Simply hypocrisy for the Labor Party to come in here and complain about cutting penalty rates when no-one has cut more penalty rates than their trade union bosses, when no-one has done more to increase electricity prices than the Labor Party and when no-one has done more to run up debt and harm the citizens of this nation. We are working to improve this nation. We must keep these people away from this side of the chamber.

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

The discussion is now concluded.