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

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

The government's decision to give big business an $80 billion handout while cutting schools and hospitals.

I call upon those 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

This is a matter of real public importance. A matter of what choices the parliament makes, what priorities it adopts and what values it implements.

Today, I want to talk past the government to the Australian people. The fact of the matter is that wherever I travel in this great country the two biggest priorities for all of us, and for the people I talk to, are their family and their health. It's the questions about: can you pay the bills? Do you have enough for a holiday? Are you able to make sure your kids can get a good education—do an apprenticeship if they want or go to university if that's their inclination? They talk about whether or not their kids will ever be able to buy their first home. They talk about their ageing parents and will they be in a position to care for them and what can be done?

They always talk about their health. I was talking to a former member of mine who is an underground miner in northern Tassie. He was going to work, doing a shift at the mine. He had just taken his daughter to the local hospital. She's battling cancer. These are the issues which affect the Australian people and this is what matters to me. This is what matters to the Australian people. This is what matters to the Labor Party. This is what Labor values are about—a fair go all around. The Australian people do not talk to me about the urgency or the importance of an $80 billion corporate tax handout.

I'm privileged to do a lot of town hall meetings around Australia. I have literally spoken and listened to tens of thousands of our fellow Australians in every location. What I want to say to the Australian people is that the issues that I understand and that Labor understand are important are: how are the people on the pension going? How are they making ends meet? Will there be an affordable place for child care? Does the childcare worker get paid appropriately? What to do about the waiting lists in hospitals? The challenge that Tasmanians have that they have to go to the mainland to get medical services that other people take for granted. The parents raise the issue about lack of resources in the schools, especially when their kids are getting bullied. We talk about energy prices in these meetings—they go up and up and up. We talk about the poor administration of the National Disability Insurance Scheme and the lack of putting people with disabilities at the centre of these services. We talk about the frustrating search for adequate and dignified aged care. The parents talk about apprenticeships for their kids like the ones they once had the chance to do. Certainly people do talk about the boats with me, but they don't say that the answer to stopping the boats is indefinite detention on Manus and Nauru. People raise the low level of Newstart and whether or not an older Australian has a fair go when it comes to discrimination and whether they keep being sent for interviews manifestly inappropriate and soul destroying for the jobseeker. The workers in the audiences talk about labour hire and how it's used to undermine existing conditions at work, and the people in insecure work talk about the inability to get regular rosters.

Then we talk about housing, and people complain they feel the deck is stacked against them. Some people complain about foreign investors buying residential housing, and others complain that, whenever their kids save up for the deposit, they find the price of the house just leaps the next $200,000 and they've got to go back to the start again. Then there are plenty of people who talk to me not about the inability even to own a house but about the cost of rent, secure housing, public housing and social housing. People talk to me about the job losses in every part of Australia. We hear the government boast about job creation, but they never seem to worry about the people who lose their jobs.

Of course, I hear about the NBN failures—the fact that people have to wait for countless unmet installation turn-ups and missed appointments, and the fact that the service drops out. They talk to me about the fact that as small businesses they get ignored not just by NBN Co but by the government who delivered the policy. They complain to me about the treatment of small business by banks. They do complain about being made to feel second class if you receive a government payment, because of the cutbacks at Centrelink. They certainly ask me why politicians don't listen to them more.

But there are things I don't get asked about by the vast bulk of the Australian people, the people making ends meet and working hard. The small business minister, when he was taunting me, 'Oh, you've ever only signed a mortgage.' Well, whether or not that's true—which it's not—what a patronising statement that people who might have signed mortgages and haven't inherited a lot of money somehow are not as smart as other people! I never get asked about how we do income splitting in discretionary trusts for adult members of the family, and I do not get asked about the importance of wedging Labor on national security, and I don't get a lot of complaints about the ABC, and I do not get asked about buying the Liddell Power Station—although it is fair to say that some people challenge the role of privatisation in energy prices. I never get asked why we aren't giving the banks a $17 billion tax cut.

I am interested in what is real in the lives of Australians, and I know that on 1 July those two important priorities of families and health will take another setback. There will be more stagnation of the standard of living in the country. On 1 July, there are new cuts to child care, which will hurt families; new cuts to family payments, which will hurt families; and new cuts to Sunday penalty rates, which will hurt families. This is on top of the Medicare freeze, which hurts families; the rising private health insurance premiums, which hurt families; and the power bills that keep increasing, which hurt families. This is on top of the longest period of wage stagnation in the nation's recorded economic data. That hurts families.

So today I say to the Australian people: Labor is listening to you, and we know what the real issues are. We understand that, when your family's okay and your health's okay, you have a fighting chance to really start thinking about having quality of life and a decent standard of life. That is why our party will not be deterred by the catcalling, shouting and buffoonery of a government who desperately want to pretend that somehow, if we don't back the tawdry, meaningless, shallow nature of their tax cut agenda, this is not the right thing to do. We will offer Australian workers better tax cuts, and we do, but we will also offer a plan to lift the living standards of families. We will invest in schools, we will invest in hospitals and we will invest in the safety net. We will make sure we pay down this ballooning national debt, but we will not do it at the price of cuts to schools, hospitals and the standard of living.

We can make all of these promises because we've made a choice. We've made a choice not to go with $80 billion of corporate tax giveaways and $143 billion of unfunded personal income tax cuts on the never-never. We understand—and our economic values are very straightforward—that when there is a fair go for all, when this country becomes more equal, then we make progress as a nation. I did say that politics is about choices and values; it's about making hard decisions. I must talk about a senator in the other house, Senator Hanson. She understands it's about choices. She clearly enjoys it. She wants to take her time to savour the experience of making choices. Indeed, she started out in favour; she made a choice to back the $17 billion to big banks. Then she was against it, then she was for it, and now she's against it again. Then she said, 'I haven't tried undecided yet, so I'll give that a go.' People have said she's a flip-flopper, but 'flip-flop' implies changing once, not every few hours. People might say this is an unfair interpretation of Senator Hanson's position. Let's put it in her words. Last night, as she reproved those pesky Labor senators to put them back in their box, she said:

I said no originally, then I said yes, then I said no and I stuck to it.

She stuck it for nearly 12 hours. Post-it notes stick for longer than Pauline Hanson does to her decisions! This morning she said on the Today show, 'I'll change my mind as many times as I want to ensure that I come up with the right decision.' To be clear, Senator Hanson: the right decision is not simply to vote with the LNP 90 per cent of the time. The right decision is to back battlers, not to back the big end of town.

The Liberal Party homing pigeon has one destination in mind, and that is to give the banks a $17 billion tax cut. It's a decision which the people of Australia will understand. If Australians vote for our Labor team, we can promise that the early years of your child's education will be properly funded. We will invest $17 billion in schools and teachers, based upon need. We'll renovate the TAFEs instead of closing them. We'll train Australian apprentices instead of importing skills. We'll make sure kids in every postcode in Australia don't have to rely on having rich parents to get a university education, to get a good job or to buy a house. We will make choices because we know our values and we know to stick to them. The fundamental choice in this matter of public importance for the Australian people is that the Australian people have priorities. Long after people here have moved onto other things, long after the debates are finished, the priorities of the Australian people will remain the same: their families and their health. The Labor Party will make sure that you can raise your family with financial security and dignity, and we'll protect and support your health. That is what the people expect.

Michael Sukkar (Deakin, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister to the Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The next time the Leader of the Opposition walks into one of these businesses that he talks about, I want him to look those owners in the eye, look those workers in the eye, and tell them that he wants to increase their taxes. That's what the Leader of the Opposition should do. Every time he wants to use one of them as a backdrop while he's wearing his high-vis, every time he wants to use them for a political stunt, I want him to tell those owners and those workers, 'I want to increase your taxes.'

We've seen the Leader of the Opposition run around this country for two years talking about the billionaires and the millionaires. He's been talking about the big, nasty multinationals—the Apples and the Googles—and saying that these are the people he's going to go after, and now what have we got? We’ve got the Leader of the Opposition saying that he doesn't want to keep taxes where they are for small family businesses in this country that might employ as few as a dozen staff, or fewer, and that treat their employees more like family than employees; he wants to increase their taxes—they're the nasty, terrible billionaires and millionaires at the top end of town. So when he talks about visiting these small businesses and these small family enterprises, I want him to look them in the eye and tell them, 'You need to pay more tax.' But we know the Leader of the Opposition won't do that, and we know his backbench doesn't support him. It's wonderful to see that there are some sensible Labor people who want to repudiate what the Leader of the Opposition has done. They want to run away at a million miles an hour, because who would want to be associated with such a tawdry policy? It treats small Australian businesses that are trying to get ahead as some kind of second-class group of citizens who don't pay their way and who should be paying more tax. What was the most telling example of running away from the Leader of the Opposition?

It was referred to in question time today. It was the member for Bass, who has got a promising career ahead of him in radio, I'm sure! He was asked by the presenter, 'Ross, are you on a unity ticket with your leader, Bill Shorten?' The member for Bass said, 'The leader has announced that he would support a reduction in—sorry, a repeal of the tax rate. It has not been discussed, as I understand, by shadow cabinet.' The presenter said: 'This is a captain's call on which your leader has staked his leadership, I would argue, and here I'm getting from you a bit of equivocation. Do you support the bloke or not? Do you back your leader Bill Shorten's call to repeal the tax for companies with a turnover of between $10 and $50 million?' The member for Bass said, 'Well, that's a matter that has been announced by Mr Shorten.' The presenter said: 'So you don't, Ross. You don't support this, do you?' The member for Bass said, 'Let's have a conversation about this at another time.' I could read on and on, and we could spend the next six minutes going through that transcript. It's pretty repetitive, but on 13 occasions he tries to run a million miles from this Leader of the Opposition.

It's very interesting to hear the Leader of the Opposition's MPI. He wasn't talking to the Australian people. He wasn't talking to the government. He was talking to his backbench. I must say there's some glimmer of hope on the Labor backbench, because they didn't look very enthusiastic with the Leader of the Opposition—and nor should they. This reckless Leader of the Opposition who has run around for two years making a whole lot of claims about Australians, the economy and who he was going after—the top end of town—where has he landed? The Leader of the Opposition goes for those who can't fight back.

We shouldn't be surprised that he goes after small Australian businesses—independent grocers, small manufacturers, car dealers, car repairers. They're who he's going after. But we shouldn't be surprised, because who is the other group that the Leader of the Opposition has gone after for his unsustainable spending? The only other group he has gone after in the same way as small Australian businesses is our retirees. The single biggest tax increase from the Leader of the Opposition, if he were to be elected, would be to go after the savings of retirees by ensuring they can't use their franking credits. Again, the top end of town, the so-called nasty billionaires and millionaires, get to keep their franking credits under the Leader of the Opposition. But low-income retirees don't get to use them. So we've got low-income retirees who the Leader of the Opposition is going after. We've got small businesses that the Leader of the Opposition is going after. So we know that those who he doesn't think can fight back are the ones who are going to fund his unsustainable spending spree.

Next time the Leader of the Opposition tries to use a small business as a backdrop while he wears his hi-vis, I want to remind him that he wants to increase taxes on 20,000 small businesses that employ 1½ million Australians—20,000 Australian businesses that are competing to export around the world, that are competing in our economy, and employ 1½ million Australians. That's who the Leader of the Opposition is going after.

I welcome the member for Bass, who has just walked in. I welcome him and say he is a glimmer, an absolute ray of light, on the Labor backbench. Thirteen times! Is the member for Bass leaving the chamber? He didn't get asked to leave the chamber, surely? Please stay, Member for Bass. You'll assist our MPI! Oh, he got asked to leave. I hope the cameras panned around at that point in time. The member for Bass was asked to leave the chamber. The member for Bass was told that he's not assisting the MPI and he was asked to leave the chamber. Unbelievable! This Labor Party is unbelievable. Shameless!

I was giving the member for Bass some points for being brave and fronting up, and what happens? He gets asked to leave the chamber—unbelievable! The member for Bass will now be going to some sort of Labor Party re-education camp. They all go through it at some point in time. The shadow Treasurer wrote a book about how reducing taxes increases investment and wealth, and he went to the same re-education camp where the member for Bass is off to now: how to do a radio interview and support the tawdry, disgraceful policy of your Leader of the Opposition. His instincts to repudiate the Leader of the Opposition 13 times were correct, because this Leader of the Opposition is unfit to lead his party, let alone this country. He has been running around for two years—

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

The member for Griffith on a point of order.

Terri Butler (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Preventing Family Violence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member knows he can't impugn the motives or character of the Leader of the Opposition.

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

The member for Deakin can continue.

Michael Sukkar (Deakin, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister to the Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You know things are getting a little bit fractious in the Labor Party when the member for Bass is asked to leave and then we have spurious points of order from those opposite. The Leader of the Opposition in raising this MPI clearly wasn't speaking to the Australian people or the government; he was speaking to his backbench. I say to the Labor backbench that this Leader of the Opposition is unfit to lead your party, because he believes small Australian businesses, people who put their hard-earned on the line and treat their employees more like family, are somehow the top end of town—big, nasty millionaires and billionaires who need to pay more tax to fund his unsustainable spending. All of this is on top of every other group he wants to attack, including Australian low-income retirees living on $25,000 or $30,000 a year, who might have up to a quarter of their income ripped away by this Leader of the Opposition. It's clear: his leadership has failed. The member for Bass was right, his instincts were right and we'd love to see him back in the chamber. Bring back the member for Bass.

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You know you're under the government's skin when a wannabe stands for 10 minutes and lectures us about his own obsessions, his own fantasies, his own private world over there—nothing whatsoever to do with the topic of the MPI today. Not one minute was spent trying to justify this government's use of $80 billion in precious taxpayer funds whilst at the same time cutting all the essential services required in our community. This man, I understand, heads up the 'Parliamentary Friends of Payday Lenders'. This man stands in this chamber to defend the indefensible, the very companies that prey on the most vulnerable and marginalised in our community, the very companies that stand to gain so much from government policies. These members opposite dare to stand up in this chamber and pretend to occupy some high moral ground now.

I'm sorry; that doesn't cut it with people in the gallery or in Newcastle. When I'm in my community, what do people want to talk to me about? It is exactly the things articulated by the Leader of the Opposition a few minutes ago. What are you doing to health and education? Let me tell you about your decision, your choice, to waste $17 billion of precious public dollars—not your money—by giving it away to people like the four big banks. Well, I've got to tell you: if anyone on the government side can stand up and tell me who in the community actually backs that in, I will be flabbergasted. That is because I am yet to meet a single Australian who says: 'Do you know what? Despite everything I've heard in the royal commission, those guys need a break. They need a $17 billion break. Don't give that $17 billion to my local schools. Let's not fund education. God, no! Who needs those dollars? Do our kids? Not at all!'

In Newcastle, I've got schools that are all facing cuts, that are all not getting the money that was once promised. There was that unity ticket—remember that famous interview with the member for Warringah? We were 'on a unity ticket', with 'not a cigarette paper' between us on health and education? Remember that? Well, every school in Newcastle is losing $350,000 on average each year, this year and next year. I have not met a single parent who says: 'Give those banks a break! Our P&Cs don't need the money. We'll just keep fundraising. We'll just have more fetes, more lamington drives. That's fine; that's how we'll fund our schools from now on.'

What about hospitals? In my electorate of Newcastle 10 million bucks is coming out of hospitals. That's dollars that are not going into additional nursing staff, reducing waiting lists, helping out on security matters at the hospital—for example, in those ever-burdened emergency departments. There is $6.8 million out of the John Hunter Hospital, a major regional hospital. Mr Deputy Speaker Hogan, I know people in your own electorate would be coming into the John Hunter Hospital for emergency care and treatment—6.8 million bucks ripped out of that hospital. Calvary Mater Newcastle—$1.6 million ripped out. The kids' hospital, the John Hunter Children's Hospital, isn't even spared from these cuts—$1.2 million out of that. How many nurses is that that we lose from delivering quality health care in our towns and cities?

There is nothing that defines the difference between the government and the members on this side of the House now more than those choices we make. We make no apologies for funding health and education and no apologies for not funding big banks, which, frankly, have spent years ripping off the very vulnerable people that that member just previously tried to defend, the very people that get attacked by payday lenders—the blokes he thinks are on the money in this House.

David Coleman (Banks, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Australian people understand that, when those opposite say they're coming after the big end of town, what they really mean is that they're coming after you. That is because they are coming after Australians from all walks of life, from all economic backgrounds, and they are coming after every single category of Australians. They say that a business with $10 million of revenue is some massive multinational that shouldn't get any support, despite the fact that those businesses are typically suburban family businesses and employ 1.5 million Australians. They say they should not have any support. They say that a crane operator should pay $940 more tax per year. They say that a drilling technician should pay $2,200 extra tax per year. They want a forklift driver to pay almost $4,000 extra tax every year.

That is absolutely true, because they voted against the historic personal tax reform that was passed through this place last week. They voted against that. By doing so, they say to the forklift driver, 'Pay $4,000 more tax,' and for a miner it is $4,061. They want a miner to pay $4,000 more tax. And they say this is about the big end of town. Last time I checked, the definition of 'the big end of town', did not include small businesses, did not include forklift drivers, did not include crane operators and did not include miners. So, every time you hear them say 'the big end of town', what you need to keep in mind is that what they are really doing is coming after virtually all Australians.

And what about retirees? My image of the average retiree is not the same as the image that those opposite would have of some sort of massive multinational corporation. Now, I might be wrong on that, because clearly their view is that a retiree couple that have saved a little bit of money and maybe got $50,000 income a year are the big end of town. That's what they say. They say those retirees are from the big end of town, that they should be penalised through higher taxes and that they should not in any way have their achievements recognised. They say that their taxes should be increased. They shake their heads over there, but what the members opposite need to understand is that they are all individually positioning themselves to become the tax collectors for the Shorten state. That is what they are doing. They will become the tax collectors for the Shorten state. That is absolutely what they will be.

The member for Bruce has a suburban electorate in Melbourne. I'm sure the member for Bruce will be very aggressively distributing pamphlets and maybe sharing some Facebook posts to all the members of his electorate, saying: 'If you happen to be a forklift driver, you're going to pay $4,000 more tax under me. If you happen to be a retiree couple, you are going to pay substantially more tax.' There are no doubt thousands of retirees who would be affected in his electorate. If you opposite believe that to be the right thing to do—and evidently you do, because that's the policy that you've all signed onto—then you should celebrate it and go and tell those retirees that they should pay $5 billion more in tax a year. I'm sure you will do that because I'm sure that you want to be tax collectors. Those opposite want to be tax collectors. They want to smash ordinary Australians with higher taxes.

It was fascinating, wasn't it, to listen to Tasmanian radio today? I don't do it very often. I probably should do it more often, and I might after what I heard today. The member for Bass gave a fantastic contribution. The interviewer asked, 'Do you back your leader?' The member for Bass said, 'Well, that's a matter that's been announced by Mr Shorten.' The interviewer asked, 'So, Ross, you don't support what your leader's done?' The member for Bass said: 'I'm not saying that, Brian. I'm not saying that.' The interviewer said, 'But you're not saying you agree with him either.' 'Let's have a conversation about that another time,' is what the member for Bass said. He didn't want to sign up to this appalling tax increase because he knows that it is poison for jobs in regional Tasmania.

There must be a lot of people in Braddon who are thinking about the upcoming by-election. They know that those opposite represent tax collection on ordinary Australians. They know that, every time they hear those opposite talk about 'the big end of town' or 'evil multinationals', what they're really saying is that they are coming after them. They are coming after ordinary Australians with unprecedented tax increases of some $290 billion. That is absolutely the wrong thing for this country. We are a low-tax government while they want to tax Australians excessively.

Joanne Ryan (Lalor, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Today's question time was interesting, to say the at least. The thing for me that connected to this MPI was when the Prime Minister said that he was interested in a unity ticket. Clearly, the Prime Minister has either a tin ear or a very short memory, because I clearly remember the promises about a unity ticket. I know where I was when the government, then in opposition, promised a unity ticket on school education. I know exactly where I was, because I wasn't the member for Lalor. I was a school principal sweating on the Gonski money being delivered to my school for the next 10 years. That's where I was: keenly listening to see if we could get the opposition across the line on that funding. They were making that promise and, today, the Prime Minister has the audacity to use that phrase in this space when he is planning $80 billion worth of tax cuts, a handout to big business in this country. That's what he's planning. At the same time, since they came into government five years ago, they have shifted every cost they can back onto the states. They've moved everything that the former Labor government set up as a partnership around education, health and hospitals. There were national partnerships happening. The Commonwealth, under a Labor government, were taking on their fair share of funding those things for Australians. This government, in coming to office, ripped up those arrangements, ripped up those agreements and shifted all of the costs for the future in education and health back onto the states as fast as they could.

What that means is that $17 billion in tax cuts will go to the big four banks, exactly the same amount of money that's not going to be given to schools—a clear breach of the no dollar difference. That's not going to go to our schools. They've done that. That is nearly $17 million over two years in my electorate for our schools. Ouch! If I ask the people in my electorate whether they think that the big four banks deserve to have some money put in their pockets or whether they want proper education for their kids, I know what they'll tell me. I stand very proudly behind Labor's decisions here.

Let's have a little bit of a think about health, because they've done the same in health. We've heard them, day after day in this place, saying: 'We're spending more on health. Please don't mention the National Partnership Agreements that were there beforehand! Please don't mention the cuts! Please don't mention the breach of faith to the states, which did their planning only to have money ripped away from them.' In my community, we have a public hospital, the Werribee Mercy Hospital. It's going through an $80 million rebuild as we speak. Good on state Labor. Good on Daniel Andrews; Tim Pallas, the treasurer, the member for Werribee; and Jill Hennessy, the health minister, the member for Altona. One of her first acts as health minister was to put money into that hospital to rebuild it so that we could have an emergency room, so that we could do emergency surgeries and so that we could have a modern hospital.

But when it comes to the ongoing funding of that hospital and when it comes to paying the salaries of the nurses, the doctors, the cleaners and the people who work in catering, the state's going to be on its own, because this government has walked away from its promises in the National Partnership Agreements. What it means is cuts, cuts, cuts to public hospitals in my state. What it means is that I've got a state government now committed to rebuilding the hospital, but now they have to find the ongoing money to staff it appropriately. They went into a partnership with the federal government and now they find themselves on their own.

They've done similar things in the MRI space. Labor committed money to MRIs around this country. I heard the member for Chifley talking about this very point earlier, saying they'd suddenly lost the money in his electorate. Labor has made a commitment for MRI licences, for the full rebate. This government needs to match that commitment, because my area, with 250,000 people, needs access to those MRI machines at the full rebate.

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

It's a great pleasure to rise to speak on this MPI, and a good opportunity to set the record straight on a number of misrepresentations and untruths that have just been espoused by the member for Lalor. First of all, this is a member, along with all other members on the other side of this parliament, who told the Australian people that Medicare was going to be privatised—a complete and utter lie. The 'Mediscare' campaign goes down in history as one of the worst lies we've ever seen from Labor.

I say to the Australian people, when you hear Labor members open their mouths and make claims, question whether that could possibly true, because Labor has form. The members open their mouths and it's very hard to know whether the truth is being told. We saw that in spades at the last federal election. That is Labor's way. They don't care what they say. They have no regard for integrity. They will say and do whatever it takes to win. Frankly, the Australian people are sick of that. I want to put very clearly on the record and correct the member for Lalor in relation to the unity ticket on the first four years of education funding.

Julian Hill (Bruce, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Come on, Crankymite!

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

The member will Bruce will withdraw and remove himself from the chamber under 94(a).

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

I was a candidate in that election. You might have been a principal; I was a candidate.

Julian Hill (Bruce, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I withdraw 'Crankymite'.

The member for Bruce then left the chamber.

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

Let me state that it was for the first four years of funding, not six years. That was the unity ticket. The member for Lalor was wrong, wrong, wrong. More misrepresentations. She's also wrong about health funding. Contrary to Labor's lies, funding to public hospitals is at record levels for every state and territory. Our new hospitals agreement, which has now been signed by three Labor and three Liberal state governments, will guarantee funding through to 2025. It's very regrettable that the Labor state government in Victoria, the Daniel Andrews government, has not signed this agreement. As I said, we are delivering record funding to all states. In effect, we are delivering double the funding that was delivered in the last year of the Labor government—double the funding.

On a day such as today, when we're speaking about Labor's track record, we are very proudly standing here, delivering tax cuts to all Australians and, of course, to all companies. That is our policy. Yesterday, the Leader of the Opposition made the declaration—a captain's call like no other—that Labor would reverse the tax cuts for companies turning over between $10 million and $50 million. That goes down, I think, in this term of parliament as Labor's biggest stuff-up. There are members opposite who are hanging their heads in embarrassment. We've seen the member for Bass is embarrassed. He knows businesses in his electorate will not cop this from Labor. As I mentioned earlier in my 90-seconder, I've already spoken today to one business owner, in Geelong, who is very concerned about his company, which turns over between $10 million and $50 million, and concerned about the lack of certainty and the impact that this would have if ever Labor were elected. The day before, I spoke to some other owners of small companies in the surf industry, working in the Torquay area, and they also said, 'We are starting to get very, very concerned about these policies.'

We are very proud of what we are doing. We're building a stronger economy, building record jobs growth and delivering GDP growth at 3.1 per cent. In contrast, this appalling Labor opposition has no plan to create one new job. The only plan Labor has is to wreck the economy and to pump up the unions, to pump up their mates, to be beholden to the likes of the CFMEU. Even the AWU has deserted the Labor Party when it comes to Labor's policy on power prices. What we see is an economy-wrecking opposition, and that is why it is so important for all Australians to back the Liberals and Nationals at the next federal election.

Matt Keogh (Burt, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What a performance we have just seen from the member for Corangamite. It just goes to show that, when the members on the government side are backed into a corner, all we get is some flailing about and some lashing out; don't worry about the accuracy of what's said! Clearly, what we've seen here today is a demonstration of just how wrong the priorities of this government are. Paul Keating famously said, 'If you change the government, you change the nation.' What are we seeing from this government? We are seeing the wrong priorities, and they are not what the Australian people demanded.

When I stood for election to this House, and I am sure it is the case for everyone here on the opposition benches—why did we want to come here? We wanted to come to this parliament to represent our communities and stand up for the priorities that they want. When it comes to their priorities, just as the Leader of the Opposition said earlier in this debate, they want to make sure that their health is looked after, they want to make sure that their kids can get a good education and they want to know that their parents and their grandparents will be looked after in aged care. They want to know that their kids will be able to get training, get an apprenticeship and get the skills that they need for a job. They want to ensure that, if they go back into the workforce after having given birth to a child, they can get access to affordable child care and early childhood education. They also want to know that—lo and behold—if the financial services industry and the big banks of this country are not looking after their interests, they will be held to account.

But, when we look at the priorities that have been set by this government, what do we see? The failure that is the falsehood of trickle-down economics—voodoo economics. This government's solution to everything is: 'What we will do is give a tax cut to big business. What we'll do is give a tax cut to our mates in the big banks, $17 billion.' Hold that figure in your heads, ladies and gentlemen—$17 billion. It comes up again later. 'We'll give that money out there and hope that it rains down and eventually lands at the feet of ordinary Australians.' That is not the right approach, and it is not what ordinary middle-class Australians and low-income earners want to see. What they want to see is an actual investment in the economy and in their future and their lives.

I said to hold onto the number $17 billion, the tax cut that's going to the big banks. Why does that number sound familiar? Oh, that's right: it's the exact same amount of money that this government has decided to cut out of the funding for our schools—the schools that are so essential to make sure that our children are able to get the education they need so that they can get on in a modern economy in a modern society. We know we're having this discussion about automation. We're having the discussion about the future of work. What is going to ensure that Australia prospers and thrives and that our children can get a good job and are able to look after their families? It's about getting a good education. This government's solution to that problem to is cut $17 billion out of funding for our schools. You guys are a mob of geniuses! You really are! Then what do they decide to do in this budget? In this budget they decide to double down and cut money out of TAFE funding: $270 million is being cut from TAFE. We want to make sure that our children and those who want to get ahead in life can get a trade and an apprenticeship and can get the skills they want, and instead this government's solution to that is, 'Oh, we'll just cut funding out of TAFE.' Thanks, guys! A pack of geniuses! Labor, meanwhile, will guarantee the up-front fees for 100,000 places. We will restore the $17 billion that's being cut out of school funding. We'll invest $100 million in a Building TAFE for the Future Fund to make sure that those who want to get ahead can actually get ahead, not through your big business tax cuts and plans to help the banks and the top end of town.

Then we've got the childcare changes. This one really does my head in, and I'll tell you why: not only have you set up a system which has now disenfranchised a whole heap of working Australians from being able to access child care, but you've now set up a system where they've got to use myGov to go on and re-register to get their rebates. Let me tell you right now: my wife and I have four degrees between us. Two of them are law degrees. The system is broken if we can't make it work the first time around. I have a lot of sympathy for every Australian out there who is trying to rely on the systems this government creates—systems such as robo-debt and trying to get on the phone to talk to Centrelink. Well, good luck with that one!

This is a government has no regard for the needs of ordinary Australians whatsoever. Then what does it decide to do? Rip billions of dollars out of our health system. Thanks! Meanwhile, we need to rely on our hospitals. We need to be able to guarantee we can get access to the health care we need, and this government cuts billions of dollars out of health as well. Then, when it comes to financial services, they rip money out of ASIC, who is supposed to be the big corporate cop on the beat. (Time expired)

Julian Leeser (Berowra, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I never thought the discussion of the MPI would remind me of the movie The Godfather Part II, but this afternoon I am reminded of a scene in The Godfather Part II. I am reminded of that scene when Frank Pentangeli was going to testify against the mob, and the Corleones wheel his brother in and he changes his testimony. This afternoon, when the member for Bass walked in here in the middle of the MPI—the one member opposite who's not prepared to testify in favour of the Leader of the Opposition's company tax plan—what happened? Well, he was ushered out of the door and into the witness protection program.

Michael Sukkar (Deakin, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister to the Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Into the re-education camp.

Julian Leeser (Berowra, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

And into the re-education camp, as the assistant minister reminds us. This is an extraordinary day to choose to have an MPI on company tax cuts from the Labor Party, because more and more of those opposite are crab-walking away from the Leader of the Opposition's company tax policy. First we had the member for Grayndler in his speech saying that Labor needed to adopt a different attitude towards business. Then we had the member for Bass, who refused to defend the Leader of the Opposition's policy. We have all the Labor MPs who've been backgrounding Simon Benson in News Limited. The company tax policy of the Leader of the Opposition is falling apart, and with good reason: because company tax cuts are important. Company tax cuts are important because they help the economy grow. The difference between those opposite and the government is that we've got a plan to grow the economy.

The benefit of company tax cuts to this country has been huge. When you combine the company tax cuts with the free trade agreements and the workplace relations changes, you have seen from our government the creation of a million jobs since we came to office in 2013. Last year there was record jobs growth—1,100 jobs every single day. You've seen record low welfare dependency, with only 15 per cent of Australians now on welfare. There has been record low growth in the size of government, too, under the Turnbull government. How has all this happened? This has happened because the economy is strong. How do you create an economy that's strong? You create an economy that's strong by having a plan for growth. Company tax cuts are absolutely vital to that plan for growth and to that economic plan.

We had from the Leader of the Opposition earlier in this debate a list of grievances. I don't doubt that those grievances are true, but we didn't have any solutions to the grievances. We didn't have any solutions that would provide growth and revenue for all the spending programs he wants. Instead, we have a plan from the opposition for $200 billion worth of new taxes, but no plan for growing the economy. Without economic growth, there are no jobs. Without economic growth, there's no money to pay for the schools, the hospitals, the pensions, the NDIS, the child care and all the other spending promises they're interested in. Without economic growth, there's no way of paying for spending on a whole range of things.

How do you create economic growth? You create economic growth by backing the people that are having a go—by backing the small, medium and large businesses of Australia who employ people, who take a risk, who try and build a better country and a better economy by taking the risk, and who are creating jobs every single day through what they're doing. Having to pay less tax means that they can take some of the revenue they would have given to the taxman and put it into somebody's job, put it into the expansion of their business or put it into research and development. This is how you grow the economy.

Those ideas seem to have completely escaped those opposite. You can't grow the economy by taxing people. You can only grow the economy by getting off the backs of people who've had a go. The Leader of the Opposition thinks that anyone who runs a business with a turnover of $2,000,001 is running a big business and doesn't deserve a tax cut. Nothing could be further from the truth. I've got 15,000 small businesses in my electorate, and they talk to me about the benefit of the company tax cuts. It's the benefit of being able to give someone a job, the benefit of being able to invest in new plant and equipment, the chance to expand their operation and the chance to expand into new markets.

Joanne Ryan (Lalor, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

How many of them are single operators with an ABN?

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

The member for Lalor has had her go.

Julian Leeser (Berowra, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What they're not interested in is a class war. They're not interested in the class war of the Labor Party. They're not interested in the class war rhetoric because, at the end of the day, they just want to get on and run their businesses. They want to get on and give people opportunities—they want to give their own family an opportunity and they want to give new people who want a job an opportunity. These are people like Julianne's Kitchen, which is one of the great pate businesses in my electorate, Pennant Hills Dry Cleaners, Wash Box, GeoSentinel or Steam Yard Cafe, all of whom I talked about as example of great Berowra businesses when we had the debate on this legislation in the first place.

The choice for Australians at the next election is very clear: between one side of politics that understands business and understands the need for tax cuts to grow the economy, and another side that plans a $200 billion hit to our economy and a hit to small business.

Maria Vamvakinou (Calwell, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question I want to ask is this: when will the government get the message that, outside of their own personal ideological bubble, the broader Australian community does not want corporate Australia to be handed $80 billion of tax cuts in the hope it will create jobs and secure people's futures whilst cutting schools and hospitals in the process. If the government has been listening at all to the Australian community, it would have noticed that they're fiercely resistant to and downright offended by the prospect that the big end of town, including the banks, will actually put the welfare of the community ahead of their own profits. Revelations in the banking royal commission confirm just how much big business and corporate culture values or cares about the welfare of people.

In my seat of Calwell, we have bitter experiences of the so-called trickle-down economics on which the government repeatedly bases the benefits of its corporate tax cuts. We have seen thousands of jobs lost because big business has taken its business offshore, leaving people unemployed and leaving families in the lurch, from Pacific Brands to Goodyear, Yakka and Autoliv, just to name a few. That's why my constituents aren't buying the government's sales pitch. At a time when they're struggling to make ends meet, this government is prepared to make cuts to vital services in education and health—$17 billion from schools and $715 million from hospitals.

Each school in my electorate deserves all the resources it can get in order to assist our students to develop to the very best of their abilities. My local schools—public, non-government and in the Catholic school sector—serve a community that varies in socioeconomic status. Our enormous intake of refugees from Syria and Iraq has placed pressure on many of my local public and Catholic schools. Seventy per cent of the students at the Good Samaritan Catholic Primary School in Roxburgh Park are refugees, mostly newly arrived. This is a great school, a compassionate school that is very happy to have the students, but the government's $17 billion cut to schools will further disadvantage its students and our local school community. The Labor Party has its priorities right. Education is vital. It enables and it transforms. That's why we have committed to fully restoring the $17 billion of cuts made by this out-of-touch government.

In trying to sell the government's corporate tax cuts for multinationals and big banks, the Prime Minister talks about the importance of investment, but he seems to be oblivious to the fact that directly investing in education and skills, especially in TAFE, will reap greater benefits for my constituents and for all Australians. It's the people, Prime Minister. Investing in our people should be our priority. Since coming to government in 2013, the Liberals have cut more than $3 billion from skills, training and apprentices. Today there are 140,000 fewer apprentices than there were when they took office. The 2018 budget saw a further cut of $270 million from TAFE and training. There are 41,000 fewer trade apprentices in training, while employer groups are reporting shortages in trades and technical occupations, particularly in construction and engineering. These are opportunities for training and employment pathways that my constituents, especially the young people in my electorate, are missing out on. The government should prioritise skilling and educating Australians rather than lining the pockets of big business.

Because Labor will not be giving multinationals and the big banks an $80 billion tax cut, we can afford to invest in our people, in the Australian people. Giving Australians an affordable and real opportunity should be our priority, not leaving them dependent on the wing and a prayer of trickle-down economics. We will waive up-front fees for 100,000 TAFE places, we will guarantee at least two-thirds of public vocational education funding for TAFE, and we will invest in a new $100 million Building TAFE for the Future Fund to revitalise TAFE campuses and facilities in regional and outer metropolitan areas. This is great news and will be very welcomed by my constituents, because it means that the Kangan Institute, our local TAFE, will be able to rebuild its capacity, having endured so many cuts that recently it had to close its library. This government needs to understand that investing in our people is— (Time expired)

Melissa Price (Durack, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for the Environment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Well, what a gift this MPI is! It's fantastic that we've been given the opportunity to address some of Labor's lies and deception. What better time to debate the merits of taxation policy than when all of Australia has just recently learned that the Leader of the Opposition is now waging a war against the business community? The Leader of the Opposition talks big about big business and why the private sector doesn't deserve tax relief, but we on this side know what he considers to be big business. Now we know—aha! The secret is out. Now we know that any company with an annual turnover of more than $10 million is big business. But there's more, to our surprise. Possibly a big business could also have a turnover of $2 million. There is more to come on that, I'm sure. We know that, if those opposite ever get the chance, they will repeal that legislation that we have recently introduced.

Let's put that into perspective. If Labor gets into government, the 17,000 businesses in my electorate of Durack will pay higher taxes. Make no mistake: farmers, horticulturalists, retailers, boatbuilders and even the crayfishermen—or women, I should say—will all pay more tax, because that's what Labor thinks they deserve. Those that I have just mentioned are all small businesses, they're all family businesses, and they are the engine room of our economy. Labor's policies will see that engine grind to a halt. It's incredible when you think that the last time Labor were in government—a dark time; a nightmare at times—the Leader of the Opposition stood in this very chamber and told the country how wonderful it would be to lower the company tax rate. We know deep down he believes our policy is the right way to manage the economy. He knows it creates jobs and encourages Australians to have a go. In 2011 he pretty much said so:

Cutting the company tax rate increases domestic productivity and domestic investment.

Michael Sukkar (Deakin, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister to the Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Who said that?

Melissa Price (Durack, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for the Environment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Smart man, the Leader of the Opposition—

More capital means higher productivity and economic growth and leads to more jobs and higher wages.

Michael Sukkar (Deakin, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister to the Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Very sensible.

Melissa Price (Durack, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for the Environment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm sure the Assistant Treasurer would agree with that sentiment exactly. Clearly the Leader of the Opposition has been recently spooked by the member for Grayndler. I think he has panicked—to be fair, he's only human after all—and made a captain's call, taking his own colleagues by surprise.

Let's talk about the myth the opposition have been peddling here today—that somehow we're cutting money from schools and hospitals. Every time they say something, you have to bear in mind that they cannot be trusted. You must always question it, because they cannot be believed. There are no cuts to school funding; in fact we're delivering record funding for Australian schools. In my electorate more than 23,000 students are enrolled across 131 public schools, so I know a little bit about school funding, because I have a lot of students and a lot of schools. This year those schools in Durack will receive funding of $91.8 million from those sitting on this side of the chamber. In 2027 those schools will receive a share of $163 million in federal funds. The funding per student will jump from $3,900 this year to nearly $7,000 over the next 10 years. Let's be clear: that's up, not down.

Michael Sukkar (Deakin, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister to the Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Very happy students.

Melissa Price (Durack, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for the Environment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's nice to see how the students in the gallery are all smiling. They might even be from Durack. My electorate has some of the most remote schools and, more than that, some of the most disadvantaged students in the country. Only the coalition is going to put money in the right places, into the schools where the students need our support the most.

Let's talk about what the other side would do. They talk big about school money, but we can guarantee there would be special deals like there have been for those inner city schools in Melbourne and Sydney. You can guarantee that there would be no special deal for any child in my electorate, in the regional and remote areas of Australia. We're not going to sell out those kids—no way! We're going to make sure there are no backroom deals, so that our kids in remote and regional parts of Australia get the support they need. We know that those opposite cannot be trusted to deliver for Australia. They cannot be trusted to encourage and support businesses, whether big or small. We heard that today. The Leader of the Opposition can't even be trusted to consult his own party.

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

The time for the discussion has concluded.