Ann Sudmalis (Gilmore, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister: Will the Prime Minister advise the house of the importance of carefully developing policies so that there are no unintended consequences for Australians, including pensioners and retirees? Can the Prime Minister describe how alternative approaches will affect Australians now and in future generations?

Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for her question. What we're seeing is record growth in jobs: 420,700 jobs created in Australia last year, the highest annual growth in our history, and the longest run of monthly jobs growth—17 months—in our history. That is happening because businesses are creating jobs, including the businesses that are already benefiting from the tax cuts for small and medium businesses that we have been able to legislate. Our goal is to have more jobs and better-paid jobs for Australians and their families. That's why all of our policies are designed to encourage investment and employment. That's the focus of our policies, and the jobs numbers demonstrate that they are having success. The enterprise of Australians is responding to the incentives and encouragement from government.

On the other hand, we've had a long run of policies designed principally by the member for McMahon, the shadow Treasurer now, which have had to be wound back or scrapped altogether. Fuelwatch—remember Fuelwatch, the full-time petrol cop? The member for McMahon said that would bring down petrol prices, but it was scrapped after it failed. And then, of course, there was Grocery Choice. That was another textbook example of policymaking from the shadow Treasurer. It was dumped before it was fully set up, costing taxpayers millions. And then, of course, there was the mining tax. I have to give the member for Lilley credit for that as well. They said it would raise $12 billion; it raised $300 million.

That's the type of chaotic, shambolic policymaking we get from the Labor Party. And, of course, with the retiree tax, they said they were cracking down on a loophole for the very rich. They accused the government, only today, of running a scare campaign suggesting it would impact on pensioners. Well, if it was a scare campaign falsely suggesting it would impact on pensioners, why, in a week, did they turn around and change it and say they were protecting pensioners? They were protecting them from the truthful reality that Labor were going after their savings. The member for McMahon, of course, said that policy was carefully designed, properly designed, beautifully calibrated. And now, in a scene right out of Yes, Minister, he says he's fixing it, and he's turned around and imposed new arrangements which guarantee that any pensioner with a self-managed super fund after 28 March gets hit. It's a complete shambles. (Time expired)