Sally Sitou (Reid, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Industry and Science. How will Australian scientists and researchers benefit from Labor's tax cuts? And are there any risks to Labor's plan?

Ed Husic (Chifley, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Industry and Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thanks to the member for Reid for that question. Her electorate is home to many scientists and researchers who are employed in terrific businesses within the electorate. The member for Reid knows, like many of us do, that Australian science and research will be the key to unlocking a lot of opportunity for Australian industry—a future made in Australia, where we see advances in manufacturing, clean energy and agriculture through to critical technologies.

We want Australian scientists and researchers to earn more and keep more of what they earn, and Labor's tax cuts, that passed the House today, will help terrifically. A scientific assistant working in South Brisbane earning $63,400 will get a $1,264 tax cut. An earth science lab technician working in Perth earning $70,000 gets a $1,429 tax cut. Also, a lab technician working on soil testing in Adelaide earning $60,000 will get a $1,179 tax cut.

The contrast couldn't be clearer. This side wants Australians to earn more and keep more of what they earn. That side wants them to work longer for less. It is a clear contrast.

Now, I'm asked about risk. The biggest risk to our plans is the confusion and chaos of the Liberal and National parties, who wanted to talk about literally anything else other than the cost of living. When it came to forming a position regarding our tax cuts, they were everywhere and nowhere at once. We had the Deputy Leader of the Opposition committed to absolutely rolling back our tax cuts, before she was rolled back absolutely!

And the member for Hume—boy, you've had a good week! The member for Hume, our good friend, was breathlessly attacking us on Sky News, including a bizarre reference to the PM studying Marxist economics. The star of Lenin, friends, goes to this man, who has socialised the means of overreaction! Fantastic!

Meanwhile, on Nemesis, Tony Abbott blames Malcolm Turnbull; Malcolm Turnbull blames Scott Morrison—oh! The serial censor!

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The minister will pause. He will also direct his remarks through the chair, under standing order 65(a), rather than using the term 'you'. I give the call to the Manager of Opposition Business on a point of order.

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Government Services and the Digital Economy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On relevance—I think you can probably guess what I'm going to say. There is no basis in the terms of the question for the territory that the minister is now in.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I agree with the Manager of Opposition Business. The minister was asked about risk; that did not allow him to go into the topics that he was going into. I ask the minister to return to the question and to refer to the risks as part of the question, and not make a general commentary.

Ed Husic (Chifley, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Industry and Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I understand. I note the presence of the member for Cook, who I understood had resigned. He's 'Schrodinger's Scott': both the member for Cook and not the member for Cook at the same time. Well done, right there!

What the mockumentary pointed out was the complete and utter absence of accountability: no responsibility, absolutely no ownership—

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I appreciate that the member for Petrie is trying to assist the House. The minister has concluded, so he can conclude back to his seat.

Honourable members interjecting—

Order! I call the House to order. Members are entitled to raise points of order; the member Petrie did so. We will move to the next question.