Gai Brodtmann (Canberra, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Cyber Security and Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister: Why won't this arrogant and out-of-touch Prime Minister support Labor's personal income tax plan that will give a married couple—one serving in our Defence Forces, earning $90,000—

Government Members:

Government members interjecting—

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

Members on my right!

Gai Brodtmann (Canberra, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Cyber Security and Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

These people don't care about the ADF, Mr Speaker—and the other working in aged care on $50,000—a total tax cut of $1,856 a year, almost double the amount they'll get from the government?

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

The Leader of the House on a point of order.

Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, the government gives the opposition a lot of leeway in terms of its questions, but I would urge you to caution the member for using insults and epithets at the beginning of that question. She's perfectly entitled to ask a question about aged care—

Opposition members interjecting—

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

The Leader of the House will pause for a second. Members on my left will cease interjecting. The Leader of the House.

Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, the member's perfectly entitled to ask her question, but she should not start it with insults and epithets. That's quite outside of the standing orders.

Opposition members interjecting—

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

Members on my left. I would have thought members on my left would be the last people wanting to delay question time, but they're succeeding. I thank the Leader of the House for his point of order. I'll certainly say this: there are some phrases in questions and, indeed, answers that are less than desirable, but the approach I've taken—and the Leader of the House knows this—is that, whilst I don't think it really adds to our business here in the chamber, if that sort of question is asked, the person asking it should expect at least equal treatment in the reply. The Prime Minister has the call.

Mr Rob Mitchell interjecting—

The member for McEwen—I don't understand what he said, but he's warned anyway. He's too loud! The Prime Minister has the call.

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

I thank the honourable member for her question. The government's plan for personal income tax is a long-term plan that makes the personal income tax system fairer and provides more incentives for Australians to get ahead, to get a raise, to get another job, to take a promotion, to work some overtime, to start a business. The honourable member mentioned a worker on $50,000 a year. That worker would receive $530 back next year as a tax refund under the government's plan. But, more importantly and over the longer term, the worker the honourable member talks about is going to know that she will be working in an environment where 94 per cent of Australians will not pay a marginal tax rate on an extra dollar more than 32½c. That is the reform and that is going to mean that, from $41,000 all the way up to $200,000, a marginal rate of 32½c will apply. It will provide enormous incentives for people to get ahead. It's not as low as the tax rate that the Leader of the Opposition recommended years ago—he thought there should be a top tax rate of 30 per cent—but it is 32½ per cent. And, of course, it isn't unlimited as he proposed years ago; it stops at $200,000, where the 45c marginal rate commences.

The Labor Party have made a number of false statements about our personal income tax reform. One of them—which has been comprehensively debunked, of course, but bears repeating—is that this is unfair. A person on $200,000 under our reforms will pay nearly 13 times as much tax as somebody on $41,000. They'll earn a little less than five times as much but pay nearly 13 times as much tax. In fact, taxpayers in the 45c tax category will pay a higher personal of total personal income tax receipts than they do today.

This is a plan that is thought out. It's considered. It is long term, and it provides the assurance that we will be respecting and encouraging the incentive and the enterprise, the spirit, that have delivered us 1,013,600 jobs since the coalition came into office. And that is the spirit that the Labor Party would crush with their job-destroying, antibusiness program. (Time expired)

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

Before I call the member for Denison, I just want to briefly take the time of the House to add to my earlier comments in response to the Leader of the House with respect to his objection to that question. I should point out two things. There's certainly precedence for those sorts of questions, as much as I think some of the language is unnecessary. But the other point I'd make is that there is some language in some of the answers from ministers with respect to the Leader of the Opposition that I find unnecessary as well. If I think it's becoming a big distraction in the chamber, I certainly will take action on both sides. But I don't want to, at this point, censure debate.