Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is again addressed to the Prime Minister. Would the tax cut of just over $1,000 a year for a pharmacy worker in my electorate have more of a positive impact if the penalty rate cut the Prime Minister supports wasn't taking more than $5,000 a year off the same worker?

Terri Butler (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for the Environment and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I wonder why the rate of consumption is so low?

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

The member for Griffith is warned.

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

The government endorses the industrial arrangements put in place by the Fair Work Commission, which were introduced by those opposite. We have always supported the independence of the Fair Work Commission to consider matters and to come to judgements. We do not believe that politicians should set people's wages. We believe that should be done through the fair and transparent process that provides certainty for investment and engagement in the national economy. It would seem that, while the Leader of the Opposition may have changed names, the same old class war he is seeking to perpetuate in this place is all just the same.

Nicolle Flint (Boothby, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. Will the Treasurer update the House on the government's efforts to provide income tax relief for millions of hardworking Australians, including in my electorate of Boothby? Is the Treasurer aware of any alternative approaches?

Josh Frydenberg (Kooyong, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Boothby for her question. I can inform her and the House that nearly 70,000 taxpayers in her electorate will benefit from the passage of our tax bill through this parliament. Around 30,000 of those will get the full $1,080. On 2 April in this place, we brought down this year's budget. The budget is back in the black and back on track. It's a budget with a record $100 billion of spending on infrastructure and record spending on schools and hospitals. As members on this side of the House will remember, we have done all of that without increasing taxes.

Central to the budget was $158 billion of tax cuts focusing on short-term relief and long-term structural reform, which will see around 94 per cent of Australian taxpayers pay a marginal rate of no more than 30c in the dollar. Our tax package of $158 billion of tax relief builds on the $144 billion of tax cuts that we already legislated from last year's budget. That's around $300 billion of taxpayers' money that is back in their pockets where it belongs.

Our budget and our tax cuts are based on the values and principles that the Nationals and Liberals sign up to: reward for effort, encouraging aspiration and enabling Australians to earn more and keep more of what they earn. We are doing all we can to reduce taxes, against the will of those opposite, because those opposite are ignoring the will of the Australian people. They are ignoring the message that was sent loud and clear at the most recent election. We on this side of the house, all 77 members, got the message, but only two members opposite got the message that the Australian people want tax cuts: the rent-a-quote, the member for Hunter over there; and the aspirational frontbencher, the member for Wills. They got the message from the Australian people. As long as the member for Rankin, who was so proud and pleased, in his own words, of the retirees tax and the housing tax, and who thought it was courageous to have $387 billion of higher taxes put to the Australian people, is in charge of their tax policy, the coalition will always be on the side of Australian workers and lower taxes.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is again addressed to the Prime Minister. The government has refused to adjust deeming rates since March 2015, despite interest rates being cut five times. What has this cost the average pensioner?

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

The Leader of the Opposition would be aware that the deeming rate currently sits at 1.75 per cent for the lower threshold, which is to the first $51,800 of a single aged pensioners financial assets. The 3.25 per cent upper deeming rate applies to financial investments above this threshold. He is correct that the last time—

Mr Perrett interjecting—

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

The member for Moreton is warned.

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

The last time that this was changed was when I was Minister for Social Services. We have had a consistency in cash rate positions for some time. In fact, it has been a record for the consistency of cash rates. There have been two changes to the cash rates most recently, and that is what prompted the Minister for Families and Social Services, with my encouragement, to bring forward a submission to the ERC and ask the Department of Social Services to review the deeming rate once again. That matter will be considered by the ERC in the normal course of events. It will be done responsibly and in accordance with the government's overall fiscal strategy.