Tim Wilson (Goldstein, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. Will the Treasurer explain to the House why it is important to keep taxes under control to support a stronger economy and provide tax relief to hardworking Australians, including in the electorate of Goldstein? Is the Treasurer aware of alternative approaches?

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

I thank the member for Goldstein for his question. Firstly, he'll be pleased to know, like everyone else on this side of the House, that there are more than a million extra working Australians in this country since the coalition came to government back in 2013. Those working Australians, over the next four years, will pay $954 billion in income tax, and over the next 10 years working Australians in this country will pay more than $3,000 billion in income tax. So I think it's the right time to have a tax plan that comes before this parliament, as was passed through this House yesterday, that provides $140 billion worth of tax relief to not just some but all working Australians. They're going to pay over $3,000 billion in personal taxes over the next decade, and we think it's entirely reasonable that we can bring a tax reform plan in here that deals with bracket creep and with a simpler tax system. As the Prime Minister said, 94 per cent of Australians will be paying no more than 32½c as their marginal tax rate, dealing with immediate relief for low- and middle-income earners. That's what was put to the House last night. That's what was passed through this House last night.

But, before it was passed, what the Labor party did was strip away steps 2 and 3 of that plan and replace them with other measures. Now the cost of what Labor put into the House and voted for last night was to turn a $140 billion tax relief plan into a tax plan that is $70 billion less. That $70 billion is the cost of the changes and the amendments that they put to that bill last night to strip away steps 2 and 3. They've taken a tax relief plan that is worth $140 billion and they've reduced it by $70 billion. That is what the shadow Treasurer did in seeking to rip off working Australians last night. Every single one of them voted to cut that plan in half last night. What it means is as follows. Over the next 10 years, we already know that the combined total of the oppressive tax burden will be $220 billion. Last night, they just jacked another $70 billion onto that. It will be $290 billion. They wanted to turn a $140 billion tax plan into one that is just over $70 billion. The shiftiness of it! They came into this place, said they were voting for it in the House and then said they're going to vote against it in the Senate. How can anyone believe a Labor Party that does one thing in this chamber and another thing in the other chamber? Unless they want to change their tune, unless they want to tell Australians they can get the full $140 billion— (Time expired)

Jenny Macklin (Jagajaga, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Disability and Carers (House)) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. What is the point of this Prime Minister and his government, given that his signature tax policy to give $80 billion to big business appears doomed? Is the Prime Minister's big business tax cut as doomed as his colleagues are claiming?

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

I thank the Prime Minister for the opportunity to respond to the member on the issue of taxation. Our side of the House, the government, believes that lower, simpler, fairer, more competitive taxes are good for the economy. It's reward for effort. It actually grows the economy. That's what we believe. As I said yesterday when the member for Fenner gave us the benefit of the behavioural impacts of the tax treatment on mammals in his own references to these matters, I was mistaken to think that the Labor Party actually supported lower and fairer taxes. But I have found the reason for the apparent contradiction in the Labor Party's view on this issue. It seems the member for Fenner is familiar with the work of Lord Layard—this was brought to our attention by Ross Gittins back in April of 2005—who wrote the book Happiness: Lessons from a New Science and, drawing on studies of vervet monkeys, concludes that we need to keep tax rates high to discourage people from working and to make them happier. 'Eureka!' the member for Fenner must have said: 'I've finally seen the light! Higher taxes are good for people!' and they've decided to go down the path of having higher taxes. Well, I've got some advice for the member for Fenner: stop listening to monkeys when you set tax policies.

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

The Treasurer will resume his seat. The member for McMahon on—

Mr Bowen interjecting—

I haven't called the member for McMahon. The Treasurer has concluded his answer.