Stephen Jones (Whitlam, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the House insist on disagreeing to the amendments insisted on by the Senate.

The Treasury Laws Amendment (Support for Small Business and Charities and Other Measures) Bill 2023 is a good bill. It provides $20,000 in instant asset write-offs from July for over 300 small businesses in this country. It'll increase cash flow. It'll decrease the compliance burden and provide over $290 million worth of relief to small businesses throughout the country.

About 10 days ago, the Leader of the Opposition stood at that dispatch box and gave his budget speech in reply. In his budget speech in reply, he said that he supported providing an instant asset write-off for small businesses in this country to provide more cash flow and compliance relief for small businesses. I thought it sounded good. You can imagine my surprise that, at the very same time, he was instructing his senators in the other place to vote against a bill which would provide an instant asset write-off for small businesses of over $290 million. What we see here is that they say that they want lower taxes and lower taxes for small business, but then they vote for higher taxes and higher taxes for small business. They say that they support small businesses, but then they vote to oppose the interests of small businesses.

There's a pattern of behaviour here. They say that they want lower energy bills for Australians, but then they vote against energy bill relief for all Australians. They say that they want cheaper medicines for all Australians, but then they vote against provisions for cheaper medicines for Australians. They say that they want higher wages for Australians, but then they vote against measures which will provide higher wages for Australians. They say that they want the government to spend less, and then they tell their people in the other place to vote for amendments which will increase the spending. When it comes to the coalition, you cannot trust a word they say, because they say one thing and then instruct their members and their senators in this place and the other place to do the exact opposite.

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

Unfortunately, Minister Jones has just given an entirely misleading explanation of what is going on here, which sadly is not inconsistent with his form in this place over a number of years. The simple fact is that the Treasury Laws Amendment (Support for Small Business and Charities and Other Measures) Bill 2023 contains measures to support small business, which is true, including provisions for the instant asset write-off, which is also true. What is not true is that the coalition is opposed to the instant asset write-off. On the contrary, we support it. The amendments that we moved in the Senate—which I am pleased to say received the support of the Senate in cross-party recognition of the compelling merit of the amendments we moved in the face of the obdurate opposition and obdurate resistance of this government—would extend and strengthen the effect of the instant asset write-off scheme.

Why did we do this? We did this because on this side of the House we are consistent, resolute, determined, trenchant supporters of small business. We know that small business is the very foundation and bedrock of our economy. We know that small-business people do whatever it takes to open their doors every day. If sales are down and times are tough, very often it is the business owner who accepts less in their pocket every month in terms of owners' drawings out of the business so that employees can continue to be paid. Small-business people and small businesses are the very backbone of our economy. When we were in government, the previous coalition government consistently supported small business. We consider that the amendments that we moved in the Senate, amendments that were accepted by a range of other parliamentarians representing a range of other parties and quite a number of Independents as well, have compelling merit. It's disappointing, I have to say, that the government is not prepared to consider them. We think they speak absolutely for themselves in terms of the benefit they will bring to small-business people all around Australia.

Let's remember: this is a cold, dark, long winter for small business. This is a very grim time. Very soon, thanks to the extraordinary laws passed by this government, laws that reflect the agenda of the union movement—every one of the Labor parliamentarians in this place dances to the tune of their union pay masters; the pre-selection of every one of them depends upon the union bosses—and as a consequence of the laws that have been passed in this place by these servants of the union movement, a movement that can command only eight per cent of private sector employees as members, small-business people around the country will very shortly have no legal protection when they are visited by a large group of burly, tattooed union officials with 'CFMEU' or other patches on their T-shirts and jackets. Those small-business people will have no capacity to resist the demand to enter, thanks to the perverse laws this government has passed. Small-business people, sadly, will face no option but to have union thugs enter. Sadly, certainly when it comes to the CFMEU, many of them convicted criminals, many of them convicted multiple times, they will be free to enter the premises of small businesses around this country. On the other side of the House they think that's a laughing matter. We don't think it's a laughing matter. We think it's very serious, indeed. We think it's a grave error in judgement.

In this grim, dark winter for small businesses, the amendments that we moved in the Senate, which would have extended the operation of the instant asset write-off scheme, would bring a shaft of light into the lives of small-business people. They were passed by the Senate. On this side of the House, we strongly believe that they should also be passed by this House.

Zali Steggall (Warringah, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I call on the government to stop playing politics with small business—97.3 per cent of businesses in Australia are small businesses, and they are hurting. I moved amendments when this bill was first before this place in relation to extending the scale of the asset write-off and the time frame for it to go for another year. The government dug its heels in, and I should say the opposition voted against it. You're all very happy to play politics, but the people on the ground that are hurting actually need this to happen.

What happens in practice is this legislation is stalled. Of course, the government, at budget time—and it was back in the budget in 2023—made the big announcement that there was going to be this asset write-off. Businesses—small businesses—think they can count on that. They make provisions, and then nothing happens. The legislation doesn't pass either House and then they are left in the situation of not being able to do the measure that was promised by the government on budget night. What we saw last week, with the budget for this year, was the announcement again, but again the digging-in of the heels by the minister and by the government of insisting on this lower asset write-off. The reality is, you do not have majority in both places, and the majority in the other place has told you, loud and clear—has insisted—on returning this bill with an amended asset write-off to the $30,000.

So the question to the government now is: are they going to continue to play politics and risk all small businesses? We know that some 43 per cent of small businesses aren't profitable at the moment and are continuing to face an ongoing storm of cost increases and regulatory complexity. The government have a question before them: it is in their hands now. Get on the side of small business and embrace these amendments. The will of the other place has been clear. The majority in that place have asked you to reconsider and to amend this provision to ensure it is of sufficient scale that small businesses can actually take advantage of it.

The uncertainty is incredibly damaging. How can small-business owners have confidence in the government if they can't even know when something is going to come into effect or what scale it's going to be, and it takes so long? As it is, with the discussion in this place, so many small-business owners wouldn't even know what's happening. There isn't even a way of making sure that they are informed. Rather than playing politics, being obstinate and sticking to this to send it back to the other place—where it is clear it will not pass in its current form—I call on the government to recognise the need of small businesses to have access to this measure, to accept the amendments that the majority have asked the government to accept, and to ensure it passes amended.

The amendment to $30,000 is incredibly important. This is an asset write-off around an energy incentive bonus. It will help businesses make meaningful investments to ensure they do increase their productivity, their sustainability and their efficiencies. For the government, the question is: are they going to stand up for small businesses, or is it just tokenistic on budget night that they make an announcement and there's nothing that comes with it? For the opposition, the same goes. They voted against it when it came here before, then it got amended in the other place and has now come back. I note it was part of the budget in response speech, yet here we are. It's a promise for the future in an election.

Small businesses need you all to stop playing politics and actually get on with the job of helping them. Pass this legislation amended rather than sending it back to the other place, where it will again be stalled. There's always a lot of talk from all the major parties about being on the side of small business, but now's their chance to show it. Vote for this amended legislation.

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Shadow Minister for International Development and the Pacific) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

One of the most important components of our economy is small businesses. They represent 97 per cent of our businesses. There used to be a joke: 'What is a small business? Well, when Labor's in government it used to be a big business or a medium-sized business. Under a coalition government, they made it a small business.' Whilst that is a slightly humorous little tale, the fact remains that we as a parliament should be doing everything in our power to help small business. All too often, what we see when Labor is in power is the unions taking the hand of the members opposite, and they just put so many obstacles in the way of our small businesses. Those opposite never knew a business that they wouldn't like to put a picket line out of the front of. It is so disappointing.

What we are all about on this side of the House is making sure that we cut through that red tape, cut through that bureaucracy and make it easy for our small businesses to operate.

Government Members:

Government members interjecting—

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Shadow Minister for International Development and the Pacific) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'll ask those opposite interjecting—and I hear the member for Moreton—how many of you have actually run a small business? I don't see too many hands go up. Run it into the ground, maybe! On our side, we are there putting small business at the very heart of our economic principles. That's what we do.

When the member for Dickson, the opposition leader, stood here to deliver his budget reply speech—and I thought it was an excellent one, by the way—he said:

Tonight I announce that we'll extend the value of assets eligible for the instant asset write-off to $30,000 and make this ongoing for small businesses. This will simplify depreciation for millions of small businesses by cutting red tape, boosting investment in productive assets, lowering business costs and prices, and driving productivity in the economy.

That's something we all should aspire to. That's something we all should agree with.

Those opposite want to put in the instant asset write-off at $20,000 and just for 12 months. Why not give those businesses the security, the stability, and make it ongoing and make it $30,000? Let me tell you: when we were in government during COVID, as a productivity measure, as a boost to the economy, we made it unlimited—and so many tradies and farmers and other small businesses went out and bought a motor vehicle. You can't buy too many motor vehicles for $20,000. Let me tell you: under the new fuel efficiency standards and the ute tax those opposite are going to put in place, you won't be able to buy too many vehicles at all. But for businesses $20,000 is simply not enough. Make it $30,000 and make it ongoing.

Those opposite want to impede businesses; they want to get in the way of businesses. I know the member for Forrest, who was here a minute ago, so often talks about the WA sheep farmers. They are businesses, and they are being impeded every step of the way. They've had their live trade cut from underneath them by those opposite. Why are we putting so many obstacles in the way of businesses? Why are we jacking up taxes? Why are we making it so much more difficult for our small businesses to pay their energy bills when those opposite promised on no fewer than 97 occasions that they would reduce power prices—and what do they do? Jack power prices up and put more bureaucratic measures in place to impede and hamper our small businesses.

We need to, every step of the way, protect those small businesses. But it's not just me saying it; it's the Australian Small Business and Family Enterprise Ombudsman. Any of those small businesses out there, whether they're the truckies driving up and down the Newell, Hume or Sturt highways or those other branch routes that are driving productivity and driving the goods around our nation, go onto that website and have a look at what is available for small businesses. You won't see too many compliments from those people who are accessing that website about Labor's budget. You won't see too many people who are genuinely praising the fact that the instant asset write-off is only $20,000 and is only for 12 months. People are getting behind the fact that we have promised to make it $30,000—that's what we should be aspiring to—and to make it ongoing so we give those businesses that certainty. That's what small business is craving—certainty, not just a 12-month stopgap measure and, 'Look at us in 12 months time or less', when, potentially just prior to the election, the Treasurer, the member for Rankin, goes and promises another 12 months. Let's do it now. Let's give small business the confidence it needs because, let me tell you, they are the ones driving and running this economy.

Allegra Spender (Wentworth, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I ran a small-medium business for a number of years. When I talk to other small-business owners in the electorate, they don't listen to what goes on in this House because they do not believe this House operates with their interests at heart. They believe this House is more interested in politics and playing games than in making a difference to small business. As a small-business owner, to be promised something in May and then the following May still not be sure if that promise is going to come to fruition, when you are the government, just makes the word of the government seem absolutely pointless. Businesses need to be able to rely on what government promises. And it is up to the government to make sure they pass the laws they have promised with much fanfare and asking for much support. They need to make sure they can pass those laws in whatever way they can, and get them through this House and the other place.

This is not only about the instant asset write-off; this is also about the Small Business Energy Incentive. All these things have been tied up across these houses for the last year. If you are a business trying to do the right thing, trying to make the right investments to lower your energy bills and do the right thing for the climate, trying to do the right thing to increase the absolutely dwindling level of business investment—which we know is absolutely critical for productivity—you're saying, 'Where is the government on this, because the government said it's going to do something and has completely failed to deliver on this? Now it's over a year since they made that announcement, but we still do not have that support in the House.

As a small businessperson, you need certainty. You need to know that you can make the investments that the government says you can make and that they will support that. They don't follow legislation and they don't follow this House. They heard it from the Treasurer last year in his words, and so I think many small businesses have taken him on his word, and it's about time that we made sure that this House lived up to the budget and made sure that this House delivers on the incentives.

If it has to increase, I support that increase. That's what the government needs to accept because they can't control the Senate and they need to make sure that this bill passes now for those small businesses because small businesses lose trust in government and people lose trust in government when they make a commitment at the budget but it doesn't happen and it doesn't happen a year later.

I ask everybody in this House to pass this legislation. It is time to move on and it is time to support this legislation, as amended, from the Senate. This is not a time to play with a double dissolution, which is what it feels like is being played for here. This is the time to do the right thing by small businesses and give them the opportunity to make the investments they need and make the clean energy investments that they need because they are hurting right now and they need our support.

Angie Bell (Moncrieff, Liberal National Party, Shadow Minister for Early Childhood Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Australia's 2.5 million small businesses, which are families, generate one-third of GDP in this country and they make up 98 per cent of all businesses and employ around half of the private sector workforce. So why is this government punishing them and why is this government not adding that extra $10,000—that the opposition is asking for—for small and family businesses across this nation, when small businesses are the engine room of the economy and when they employ so many Australians?

I started myself working in small business, as did many people one this side. At the age of 13 I was selling pianos in the local music shop. And for the bloke that owned the music shop—the retail outlet—that was his business and he worked there. He was the HR manager, the owner, the salesperson and even the accountant in that small business. And how much money did he take home at the end of the day? He was the last one to be paid. I made more money as a casual in his business than he did, with the hours. I think we worked it out once, and he got about $2 an hour for working in his business.

We know what we will do for small business, but small businesses across the nation are perplexed because they don't know what this government has done for them since coming to power. We know that we will repeal the IR laws that the Labor government has put in place and we will cut red tape when we're in government to make it cheaper and easier for small business to employ Australians.

On the Gold Coast we've got 72,000 small and family businesses and SMEs—small- and medium-size enterprises. In Moncrieff alone there are 32,000 small businesses, and they are hurting. They are having trouble keeping the doors open.

An opposition member: They're doing it tough.

They are doing it tough. And $20,000 will not buy you the kind of equipment that you need to make sure that your business runs well. And, can I say, a lot of small businesses across the Gold Coast have already bought their coffee machines with the coalition's instant asset write-off, they've already bought their utes that the coalition allowed them to buy under a higher instant asset write-off. It was unlimited under the coalition. We are the party of small and family business, and those on the other side are not.

All we are asking for in these amendments is an extra $10,000 for small and family businesses across the nation. The Gold Coast needs an extra $10,000 for every small and family business so that they can write it off in their tax as an instant asset write-off. This is a government that's removing measures that would help drive productivity at a time when we've seen record collapses in labour productivity.

They're distracted. What have they been spending money on instead of an extra $10,000 for SMEs? They spent hundreds of millions of dollars—$450 million—on a failed referendum that the Australian people didn't want, and hundreds of millions dollars on taxpayer funded spin units. That's what they're spending money on. There's $24 billion for more public servants that we don't need. How can the government tell the Australian people, in a cost-of-living crisis, that they are going to spend $24 billion on more public servants that we simply do not need? They are spending billions in subsidies for billionaires. That's right—they are spending billions of dollars in absolutely wasted revenue.

But what are they doing for small business? I asked the Minister for Small Business, who is not in the chamber during this debate about small business, 'What is your government doing for small business?' An instant asset write-off of $20,00 for one year is not good enough. Small and family businesses are hurting, and what they need right now is a $30,000 instant asset write-off that goes on ad infinitum. That's what they need.

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Shadow Minister for International Development and the Pacific) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They need stability.

Angie Bell (Moncrieff, Liberal National Party, Shadow Minister for Early Childhood Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They need security, they need stability—

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Shadow Minister for International Development and the Pacific) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

And consistency.

Angie Bell (Moncrieff, Liberal National Party, Shadow Minister for Early Childhood Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

and they need consistency. They need to know what their costs are and what they can get back on their taxes, and the instant asset write-off is a very important part of that. Small businesses are the heart, the very engine room, of the Gold Coast community particularly. But right across Australia, in every electorate, small businesses are being punished by the Labor government, who have wasted billions and billions of taxpayer dollars on the wrong priorities. They should be looking after small and family business, the engine room of our economy.

Andrew Gee (Calare, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I join those in this House urging all members to support an extension of the instant asset write-off. All around our country you see how difficult and tough it is to be in small business. You see vacant shops in many of our regional towns and cities. If you talk to small-business owners, they will tell you how difficult it is to survive at the moment. They'll talk about increasing costs—like power costs—which are an absolute killer for small business. They'll talk about the red tape which is strangling them. It seems to get worse every single day. Our small-business people need our support, and that is why we need to extend the instant asset write-off—to give them a badly needed boost in a very difficult time.

It's not just power prices but all types of issues, like supermarket price gouging, that are putting increased pressure on our small businesses. On the weekend, I was talking to one manufacturer in Orange who told me about the devastating impacts of supermarket price gouging on their business. These are pressures that our small-business people face every single day. Our small businesses are the engine room of the economy. They employ millions of people. They make up 97 per cent of all businesses in Australia. Our small-business people are innovators. They take risks. They are the ones who come up with the ideas and have the creativity, and they back their ideas. They often have to borrow money to do it. In borrowing that money, they often lie awake at night wondering if they are going to be paid so they can pay the bank or one of their other creditors. Our small-business people need our help. They need our support. Now is not the time to be playing politics with this.

I urge all members of this House to back the extension of the instant asset write-off to $30,000. It's the least we can do for our hardworking and valuable small-business people not only in country Australia but right around this nation. They need our help. They've made that cry for help very loud, and this House needs to answer the call. I again urge all members to back the extension of the instant asset write-off and to do it now.

Bert Van Manen (Forde, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's always a pleasure to rise in this House and speak about small business. It's interesting to note that the minister isn't in the House, but I'll take issue with his comment earlier, when he said that you don't listen to what we say on this side; you look at what we do. Well, if I have ever heard the pot calling the kettle black! It is the Labor Party with whom you don't listen to what they say; you look at what they do, because, nine times out of 10—or, as we're seeing currently, 10 times out of 10—they are two completely and utterly different things. They say one thing to one group of people and one thing to another group of people and hope those two groups of people don't talk and work it out at the end of the day. I've got news for those opposite: people do work it out, and they are working it out.

Our small-business sector is some 10,000-plus businesses in my electorate of Forde and 2½ million across this country. They go out every day and, as somebody said earlier, they're the innovators. They come up with new ideas. They take risks. Their house is on the line. Their family finances are at risk each and every day that they open their doors. And yet we see, each and every day in this place, a government that is hell-bent on destroying small business, through a range of measures. We've seen the IR laws that were rammed through this place and are going to have a disproportionate impact on small business. We have seen the cost of electricity and gas go through the roof. When I talk to small-business manufacturers in my electorate, they talk about input costs. Electricity and gas are two very large input costs that have a disproportionate effect on the profitability of a business. If they're leasing, have a look at how much their leases have increased by with the inflation rate that this government has failed to get under control. Have a look at supply chain difficulties. All of these issues impact small business each and every day.

In addition to that, one of the biggest issues they have is red tape. The owners of our small businesses do it all. They are the HR manager. They are the accountant. They're the business manager. They're out trying to get new business. All of this is in an environment that is being made increasingly difficult by the government. We've seen recently another piece of legislation in this House which will impact many of our small-business owners in this country, and it concerns the issue of additional tax on unrealised capital gains and superannuation. Many of our small- to medium-business owners have their business premises in their superannuation funds. If those buildings increase in value, and their super funds become worth more than $3 million, they are going to unnecessarily pay tax on unrealised capital gain. That is of enormous consequence to those businesses.

So, when we look at these amendments that have gone through the Senate—increasing the instant asset write-off to $30,000 and making it permanent—I think that that is a tremendous win, albeit a small win, for small business, helping them reduce their red tape and regulation and simplifying their bookkeeping. Have a look at the success of that measure when the coalition was in government. The number of small businesses I spoke to who said that was a great initiative by the then government so they could go out and buy new plant and equipment to build the capacity and productivity of their businesses—it was extraordinarily well received. Increasing it from $20,000 to $30,000, as is reflected in these amendments, should be fully supported by this House, as a number of speakers have said, because it is one little ray of light in the darkness—as the member for Bradfield said in his speech—the winter of darkness that small businesses are facing under this government opposite.

For any of the reasons that I have outlined, I fully support the amendments to this bill.

Aaron Violi (Casey, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's important that I can stand and speak on this amendment, particularly after spending more than 15 years, prior to my time in this House, working in and with small businesses right across my community in the Yarra Valley, in Casey and also across Victoria and Australia. I've seen firsthand how important they are to the economy and to the community. It's not just the jobs they create or the economic growth that they create; anyone who has visited a sporting club in their community can look at all those signs on the side of the ground and I guarantee every sign there is a small business of that community. It's not a big business; it's a small business backing the community. That's why it's so important that we're doing everything we can to help small business.

But sometimes we can talk about these terms like 'instant asset write-off', and other terms, and forget the people behind what we are talking about. I want to quickly share a story about one small family business in my community, but it could be any business in my community, any business in any electorate across the country. It's a company called Mainstream Cabinets. Matt and Tayte Tilney started that business about five or six years ago—they may be coming up on a decade now. Time flies! Matt was working as a cabinetmaker and decided to go out on his own and start his own business, and years and years later he's employing many young people and apprentices and giving back to our community. But the reason the story of Mainstream Cabinets is important is they've previously directly benefitted from the instant asset write-off. I got to visit their factory and see the great work that they're doing. They were able to invest significant capital into a machine that automates all the cutting that they need to do to precut a lot of the work for the cabinetry. This is something that was previously done manually but can now be done automatically. It saves time, it saves money and it drives productivity in that business. Most importantly, what it has allowed the business to do is continue to grow and to employ more people because of the investment that they made. When I spoke to Matt about that investment, I said, 'Would it be possible without the instant asset write-off that was quite generous at the time because of the former government?' He said, 'It wouldn't have been.' Without the instant asset write-off, they couldn't have invested that money into their business. That's what we're talking about when we debate this legislation.

Small businesses aren't asking for a handout. They don't want welfare. They want the ability to run their businesses. When they make the decision to invest in their business, give them a little bit of support. Give them a little bit of support in how they manage their cash flow, their depreciation schedule and their tax schedule. It's only a little bit—$20,000 to $30,000. Let's be honest; small businesses are struggling in this country at the moment. This isn't going to make a huge difference, but it's going to help just a little bit. And when you've got everything else going against you, every little bit of help you can get is going to make a difference.

Let's understand the economic environment that we have in this country. It is as tough as it has ever been. I was speaking to a business owner just last week. Well respected, with 40 years in business, he's not one prone to hyperbole, and he said these are the toughest economic times that he has seen. Increasing costs of energy, increasing inputs, increasing wages—everything is going up and revenue is going down, and small businesses are struggling. It is a condemnation of this government that the best they can come up with is this legislation that is 12 months late, but better than nothing. It's very funny how they're quick to criticise those on this side of the House for not supporting them and not being proactive. We put forward an amendment that has been supported in the Senate, working constructively and proactively with the government to support small businesses. The test of this government is: are they going to take that hand and work with us to deliver for the community, or are they going to continue to ignore small businesses? It's a shame that, going by the words of this minister, they're going to continue to abandon small businesses. By abandoning small and family businesses, they are abandoning the communities of Casey, of regional Australia and of every community in this country. As I said when I started, it is the small businesses of our community that back the community when they need it the most.

Phillip Thompson (Herbert, Liberal National Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'd like to start by saying thank you to all the small business owners out there throughout the country. Thank you for being the backbone of this nation, for driving our economy, for employing people and for taking that risk of starting your own business or growing it or just taking that step outside your comfort zone. Without you, this economy would be crumbling. Without you, people wouldn't be getting employed. Without you, the backbone of this nation, we would come to a screeching halt. Small business, mum and dad businesses, those who have saved up, taken that risk to start whatever industry they want to be in, to take that step—you're what keeps the lights on in this country. Without you, this nation wouldn't be as strong and as good as it is. So I want to say thank you. Thank you for taking that risk.

These amendments to the Treasury Laws Amendment (Support for Small Business and Charities and Other Measures) Bill 2023 have come back to the House for a second time because the Senate has insisted on them. In procedural terms, this is a rare occurrence in the life of the parliament. Continued disagreement between the House and the Senate has, in the past, triggered a double dissolution. The continued disagreement—

Pat Conroy (Shortland, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Defence Industry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Call for a double-d!

Phillip Thompson (Herbert, Liberal National Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm actually quite glad that the Minister for Defence Industry is here, because many SMEs in the minister's portfolio have had to close their doors. Many in the minister's portfolio have had to close up and let people go. We have in this country a very strong defence industry, but, with the inaction of certain ministers, like the one at the dispatch box, we've seen SMEs close up for good. We have seen SMEs around the country have to let people go. Only the primes can continue to tread water from the inaction of the Minister for Defence Industry. But the small businesses, the ones that want to break into the defence sector, can't. They can't continue to watch the minister flounder around, not be confident in his portfolio, not make decisions, and cut projects like the infantry fighting vehicle from 400 to 129. Those small businesses that are there ready to work with the primes and Defence now can't. We see it throughout the country. We see in Townsville. Even last night, at a defence industry dinner that I was at in Sydney, there was continual conversation around inaction in defence. So it is encouraging to see the minister sitting here. I hope he's taking notes to know that the small businesses in his portfolio want action. They don't want to see the minister continue to drop the footy here.

This is a very unique time for this House. For the second time, these amendments have come back. We want small businesses to have the instant asset write-off that they have been asking for, that they want, to have it ongoing—

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Shadow Minister for International Development and the Pacific) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That they deserve.

Phillip Thompson (Herbert, Liberal National Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

that they deserve so they can continue to drive our economy. Lamont is a printing business in Townsville. It's the only one in North Queensland. During the instant asset write-off under the previous government, the Morrison-McCormack—

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Shadow Minister for International Development and the Pacific) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Indeed, the golden age of policy!

Phillip Thompson (Herbert, Liberal National Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

golden age, they were able to invest in their business. They were able to invest. They were able to grow. From there, they were able to employ more people. They win awards around the country. But they were only able to do this because of the instant asset write-off under the coalition government.

With this Labor government's position, which is not the will of the parliament or the Senate and goes against what small businesses have been requesting and what they want and deserve, we will see businesses around the regions finding it extremely tough to continue to grow, to employ more people and to do what they do—take a risk, step outside the door and go: 'You know what? We are going to expand. We are going to grow our industry and our business.' We want the government to back in the amendments. We want them to listen to the Leader of the Opposition's speech and agree that this is what small business needs. We want the government to listen to the Senate.

Keith Wolahan (Menzies, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am a proud Victorian. I am the proud son of small-business owners. My father, who is in his 70s, runs a small business as a roof plumber and still climbs up multiple-storey roofs and is doing his best to survive in Victoria. In my home seat of Menzies I recently visited small businesses in my electorate, and I will tell you what you see when you walk through their doors. More often than not you see a family that wasn't born here. You see a family that is first in and last to leave, that pays their staff first and them last, that is struggling under the crippling weight of excessive taxes in Victoria and that is paying record energy bills, with gas up 26 per cent and electricity up 18 per cent, and when you compound that over many years—I walked into a dry-cleaner, and they said, 'My gas bill is six times what it used to be.' In the corner you'll often see their children doing homework, trying to have a better life. That's what small business is about. Small business is about a bet on your family, on your future and on Australia. For this government to be bloody-minded about extending the instant asset write-off from $20,000 to $30,000 shows they are taking small business for granted, and they are taking, in my home state of Victoria, migrant families for granted.

In the last financial year Victoria was the only state in Australia that saw the growth of small businesses go backwards. In the last financial year we saw a decrease of 7,600 Victorian small businesses. Of course, there is a churn and new businesses who come and fail because they've taken a risk and it didn't work out, but year after year, in state after state, there's an aggregate increase except in Victoria. In that same year when Victoria lost 7,600 businesses my friends in Queensland saw theirs grow by 11,000. One of the things that's happening there is that Victorian small businesses are leaving our state and moving north. We've seen this movie play out before; we saw it play out in the early 1990s.

I say to the Victorian members—and there are a lot of them over there; there are not many over here: you are taking your state, your seats and your communities for granted, and they notice. Victorian small-business owners are on their knees. They need you, and they need this small increase. It's not much. It's an extra bit of equipment, a second-hand van, a new coffee machine, a folding press.

I will give an example. I spoke to a small business in my electorate called Fratelli Engineering, a proud Italian family run business in Box Hill North. They have employed many people, including people who are learning their trades. They're teaching them, taking that risk and taking that bet on them growing their business. They're not only bearing the brunt of increased costs and increased taxes; they're trying desperately to compete with the almighty weight of the state and the huge infrastructure costs that come with it. They're trying to compete with people who are earning over $200,000 holding a sign on union construction sites—and they can't. But we know when those construction projects are finished the small business is gone; it may have gone to Queensland or it may disappear forever. We can't continuously fund Victorian employment through big state construction projects. We can't continuously fund all the areas we need in the care economy if we're just going to rely on the state to generate employment.

To those opposite: Victoria needs you. Victorian small business needs you. For the migrant families in my electorate, including many from the Chinese community who had an expo on the weekend—and I single out Laura and Aaron Qin, from Ausfocus, who ran that on the weekend. I spoke to those small-business members, and they feel like they're being taken for granted. Don't be bloody-minded. Stand up for Victorians. Increase the threshold from $20,000 to $30,000. They need it, and they need it in Victoria more than ever.

Garth Hamilton (Groom, Liberal National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In speaking in support of these very sensible amendments, it is heartening to hear so many members on this side of the House speak passionately about small businesses. Like many here, in my log cabin story there's a small business. It was as small as you could get—just my father and I, and I wasn't paid. We had a rusted HiLux and went around South East Queensland doing concreting. It's a great way to start. There was no accounting division, no HR and no health and safety. It was just us navigating our way forward.

I want to speak to another part of what small business does. I want to speak about one of the constituents of the member for Riverina and the opportunity that they provide for Australia. I'm talking about PYBAR, a small business in the mining sector that started off out in Parkes in the Northparkes mine. It invested heavily in good people, gave people a chance and gave them the opportunity to do more. One of the things with small businesses is there's always a chance to play up a level and to go further because there isn't some great big corporate body in front of you. If you can do it, they'll give you a shot. I think of Paul, Yvette, Brendan and Andrew Rouse from PYBAR, who did that and gave me an opportunity early in life, and I'm very grateful because it was a small business that was willing to give me that chance.

I heard one of the earlier speakers say that small businesses don't really think about what happens down here. My experience has been quite the opposite. Small businesses are very focused on what happens down here. I remember during the COVID period the number of small businesses who knew exactly what the impact of things like JobKeeper would have on them. Afterwards they've spoken with tears in their eyes about how interventions by the government during that time kept their business afloat, kept their kids in school and kept the car payments going through. They are very aware of what happens down here, and they remember the role that we have played in helping small business over a long period of time. We can proudly look them in the eye and say, 'Yes, we're proud to have delivered the lowest small business tax rate in 50 years.' We did that

They remember very well the poor friends that the ALP have been to them. If you speak to small businesses, their concerns are very simple. On IR, these aren't businesses that have lawyers on demand who can wade through the various IR changes that have come through. On red tape, they don't have the ability or the overheads to carry it. They're concerned about the impact of inflation and the very small margins that they're operating at. As the member for Moncrieff talked about, they are often operating at a personal loss. They are often the last people to be paid and are often walking away with nothing more than the pride of knowing that their business can open its doors the next day.

What they don't like when they look down here and what they don't like to see is government's picking winners—a billion dollars for a computer company from Silicon Valley with a great big 'Australian made' sticker slapped on the side. They don't like that at all. It's a slap in the face when they hear that this government is supporting small business. They don't take too kindly to that.

There are subsidies worth $13 billion going into an energy sector that has been absolutely tearing at their bottom lines. If you want to talk to small business about their big drivers, energy costs are a consistent theme. I think of John at the Southtown IGA in my electorate, who's invested $60,000 in energy-saving equipment and has still seen his energy bills go up after that investment. This is what they're concerned about. The ability to employ a casual workforce, this is what's important to them as they flex and they grow and they go through these teething stages. One thing small businesses rarely want is to stay small. They want to grow and expand like PYBAR did and to seek further opportunities.

There is a reason for us to be focused on the instant asset write-off. I go back to that time during COVID when support was needed and businesses had their eyes focused very keenly on what was happening in this place. This was the ability to invest at a time when there were significant challenges. We have different challenges now, but they are no less threatening to small businesses.

At a time when we have seen the greatest fall in productivity since we recorded productivity, they want the ability to focus on investments that can drive productivity—which is exactly what the instant asset write-off is all about—like being able to get that new ute, the new tools and the things that can do a little bit extra in the same time period. That's what this is all about. It could not be more important. Productivity has fallen off a cliff, and we know that with productivity falling so do real wages. They've been tied together, and we can see that, and that is where we will continue to drive under this government.

James Stevens (Sturt, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Government Waste Reduction) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Like my colleague the member for Groom, I rise to urge the House to accept the wisdom of the Senate and agree with the amended bill that they've sent back to us. In so doing, I point out, as all the other speakers have so far, how vital it is to send a message to the small-business sector that we back them and that we want to help them, particularly in these very tough times. I didn't think I'd say at any point in my career that I am in this chamber supporting legislation for the small-business sector that even the Greens will be voting for. But that is the situation that we're in now, where only the government are not supporting this very sensible proposition that we should increase the threshold for the instant asset write-off from $20,000 to $30,000.

We've had contributions from the crossbench to that regard. We've had the Senate unite against the government to support increasing the threshold. And momentarily the government will have the opportunity to consider changing their mind, to consider being flexible and to consider listening to all the other political forces in this chamber and the other chamber. When we're in the community, when we're listening to our small-business sector, we hear that they really need this. Frankly they need a lot more than this, but this is one thing that we can do for them right now. We can send a message to the small-business sector that we want to back them to make decisions in their business, to invest in their business and to make purchase decisions that gain a greater tax advantage for them, because that is going to incentivise them to make those decisions and stimulate our economy at a very important time in which we need exactly that kind of activity.

I really commend the opposition leader, Peter Dutton, for his budget reply speech and particularly the commitment that he announced that a coalition government will increase the threshold to $30,000 and will make that an enduring and permanent change to the tax system. It's one of the many great examples of a tradition in the Liberal Party and the coalition of supporting the small-business sector and saying to them: 'We back you. We want the private sector to grow our economy. We want government to be as efficient as possible. We want taxes on small businesses, in particular, to be as low as possible. And we want to back people who go out there, take a risk, put their capital on the line, invest in our economy and actually create jobs and grow it.' As we grow the economy, we can afford to fund the society that we're very proud of as Australians. But that comes from the private sector being encouraged and supported by government decisions and government policy selections.

So the chamber has an opportunity to think deeply about that and think seriously about what sort of message we can send to the small-business sector tonight. I ask the government, I plead with the government, to consider the opportunity that they've got before them. I know that this isn't their idea and the default position in politics is to say, 'Well, that might be a good idea, but someone else has come up with it, so we'll just pretend that it's not and we'll use our numbers in the House of Representatives to stop it from progressing.' But this was such a good idea during the Morrison government. My friend the member for Riverina was in the cabinet that made the decisions around the COVID stimulus and saying to the small-business sector, 'Hey, we want to give you the ability to instantly write off assets up to these values from your tax this year.' How many businesses took up that opportunity and said, 'You know what, government, if you're going to back me and invest in my business, I'm going to invest in my business'? That's them not only investing in their business but investing in our whole economy and investing in our nation. It's a very, very sensible opportunity for the government to reconsider their position here and say: 'Fair enough. Increasing it to $30,000 will unlock more investment in our economy, right at the point at which we need it.'

I've got nearly 7,000 small businesses in my electorate. Everyone would be similar in the number of small businesses they have that would benefit from making this change. We've united the crossbench. Even the Greens party see the merit in this proposition, and they're usually the last to come to the party when it comes to sensible opportunities to support the small-business sector. That should be very telling to the government. It should send a message to the government that this is very sensible policy. It's a very sensible opportunity for them to get on board and send a unanimous message to the small-business community that we back them to make decisions, to put their money on the line, to make investment decisions, to grow their business and to grow our economy. That's what increasing this threshold will do: send exactly that message to the small business community at exactly the time they need to hear it. I commend concurring with the Senate amendments to the House.

Cameron Caldwell (Fadden, Liberal National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It gives me an immense amount of pride to stand to speak tonight, because the topic is essentially about supporting small businesses in Australia. It was 267 days ago that I stood in this place and gave my maiden speech, and I see some people filing in, no doubt to hear the maiden speech tonight from the new member for Cook. I reflect on that speech, because in that speech I talked about my experience as a small business owner and what I went through as a person who had a go—how difficult it is when you feel like everything is going against you in small business.

I remember saying in that maiden speech, that I paid everyone else's super except my own. It still sticks with me to this day how difficult it was, but how worthwhile the endeavour really can be. So I'm really pleased that those speaking on this side of the House come to this topic with an immense amount of actual real-life experience. I say that because I wasn't the first generation in my family to be a small business owner; my dad sold oranges for the family farm—on the side of the road on a highway further up in northern Queensland. Of course, they were the oranges grown on my grandfather's farm. They had a go and they ultimately were very successful in that business. I believe that that small business blood came through to me, and I'm pleased to share my experience with this place tonight. I'm particularly honoured to represent a seat on the Gold Coast, the seat of Fadden, because the Gold Coast is the small business capital of Australia; it's the place where you go to have a go. We need to make every effort to encourage and facilitate small businesses to do what they do best: to deliver services, to do it on their terms and to do it at their price point—to fit in with their lives and, ultimately, to create something that's of value to them and their family.

It is, unfortunately, in the DNA of those opposite, those in the Labor Party, that they will ultimately only want to support large union based workforces; small and family businesses are quite often the last thing on their mind. This message from the Senate is a test for the real Labor Party, that needs to stand up and show it cares for small and family businesses. I recall speaking not that long ago with a gentleman called Madoo who owns a cafe called Relish at Paradise Point. I asked him how things were actually going for him in business. He explained that the cost of everything was going up—everything! He talked about electricity prices and he talked about the carton of eggs he had to buy. Ultimately, things were very difficult, because you can't keep putting the price of coffee up, or the cost of a bacon-and-egg roll up, to meet those expenses. So the business owner is the one who is making the sacrifice.

This instant asset write-off is not only good policy but it's supportive policy of the fundamental ethos of our Australian workforce: the small and family business. It absolutely should be increased to $30,000 and it should absolutely be made permanent. We know the types of outcomes that it will be able to deliver. It will drive productivity and cash flow, and support small businesses to make critical investments—to buy new equipment for kitchens, or manufacturing lines; to invest in energy-efficient appliances to try to beat those power prices; to buy power management tools to lower energy bills; or to buy new cars and vans to deliver services to their clients. I just think of so many Gold Coast families, particularly in the electorate of Fadden—people who live around the corner from me, my neighbours and my friends—who have a small and family businesses where their vehicle is their business and their family is the business. These are the people that we need to essentially support, and it's why this amendment is so critically important. I'll be there to support the people of the Gold Coast and the people of Australia who run small and family businesses.

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

The question before the House is that the House insist on disagreeing to the amendments insisted on by the Senate.