Nick Sherry (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Banking and Financial Services) Share this | Hansard source

That is the sad fact of life for him. I looked at the report on the bill by the Senate Standing Committee on Economics because I thought it would be interesting to see an outline of Senator Joyce’s views on schedule 4 of this bill. I thought, ‘Senator Joyce is so concerned about schedule 4’—in a very muddled economic critique, but I will get to that shortly—‘that I should read, hopefully with greater consideration, the arguments that he would have set forth.’ So I went to the report. Surprise, surprise: unlike Senator Murray, who at least did provide us with a minority report, there is a blank page. I looked for Senator Joyce’s minority report but, despite all Senator Joyce’s grandstanding, there is a blank page. There is nothing there. So Senator Joyce dashed in today, expressing concern in a very muddled economic, populist critique. If Senator Joyce was so concerned, why couldn’t he outline, in a considered way, his position via a minority report from the committee considering this legislation?

Senator Joyce also said in his comments that the bill was going through ‘on a wink and a nod’. For Senator Joyce’s information—he obviously does not know, because he does not pay attention—this particular measure was announced not in this year’s budget but in last year’s budget. This particular proposal has been around for almost two years, Senator Joyce, and you have only just come in here now, grandstanding, with your concerns on this particular measure. It has been around for almost two years. Senator Joyce appeals to the fourth estate: ‘I want some publicity on this issue.’ But the measure has been around for almost two years. Yet here we have him dashing in at the last minute, grandstanding and attempting to drum up some publicity when the measure has been around for almost two years. He suddenly discovered it and suddenly wants some publicity on the matter.

Let us go to his economic critique. The issue we are dealing with today is a matter of capital gains tax application. It is not about private equity funds. It is not about foreign investment. It is about the application of capital gains. We had a very rambling economic critique from Senator Joyce about the horrors of foreign investment, the horrors of private equity funds coming in gobbling up the country and buying everything in sight, and the horrors that workers face as a consequence of this activity, but schedule 4 is not about the set of rambling economic issues that Senator Joyce went on about.

Senator Joyce was so concerned about the impact on workers, which is not the issue under consideration. We had another illustration of grandstanding when he expressed public concern about the government’s so-called Work Choices legislation. But how did he vote when it came to the crunch in this chamber on that fundamental issue of fairness and protection to Australian workers? He did not vote with the Labor Party. He did not cross the floor on that fundamental issue to which he referred and on which he expressed such grave concern in his very rambling contribution.

In terms of foreign investment, I agree with Senator Minchin that the country needs foreign investment. That is the reality. With a minor correction to Senator Minchin, we have needed foreign investment I think for all but one year of the last 200 years of our history. There is a fundamental reason for that: we have to import capital because we do not save enough and we need overseas capital. We particularly need foreign investment because at the present time our household savings rate is negative and has been in negative territory for a couple of years—another failure of this government—but that is an issue for another time.

One of the reasons, Senator Joyce, that we are attracting foreign capital aside from the fact we need it is that our interest rates are higher than most other advanced economic countries. The interest rates are higher because we need to attract the capital in competition against other advanced economies, so we have higher interest rates in part as a consequence of our own low savings rate and the need to draw that capital in. Again, I think that goes back to some failures on economic policy by this government. One of reasons, frankly—aside from other factors—why the government could not meet the promise that they made at the last election that interest rates would not go up under a Liberal-National party government was the need to attract foreign capital. Therefore, to attract it, you have a higher dollar and a higher interest rate environment.

It was a pretty rambling old critique from Senator Joyce about a whole range of issues, frankly, that are not of contention with respect to schedule 4. He is doing his best to ramp up interest by the fourth estate —fine; that is all part of politics—but I think, for the record from the Labor Party’s point of view, we should confine ourselves to the issue at hand. There is a legitimate debate about the issue at hand—about capital gains tax treatment. As I said, this matter was announced in the budget last year. It has been around for almost two years. It is hardly a matter of sneaking it through. I would accuse this government of trying to sneak things through on occasions, but this is not one of them. It has been around for almost two years.

There has been a committee hearing on the bill, albeit we were not satisfied with the level of detailed financial information that was provided at that hearing, and I have criticised the government for that and its behaviour. But, at the end of the day, Labor considers that schedule 4 on balance is worthy of support when considering the passage of this legislation. Labor will be supporting the bill and we will be opposing the amendment moved by Senator Murray.

I should say, unlike Senator Joyce, I do not question Senator Murray’s motivation. I respect his contribution. I respect the fact that he goes to these committees, goes to Senate economics hearings and asks a whole range of worthwhile and considered questions, and participates actively in a highly knowledgeable way in matters of economic and tax law in this country. I congratulate him for that. That is unlike Senator Joyce: he dashes in; dashes out; does not write a minority report; gives a whole swathe of economic critique which is not central to this issue; grandstands; and tries to differentiate the National Party from the Liberal Party.

A fact of life, Senator Joyce, is that your party was buried long ago. Until you face up to that, you are buried by the Liberal Party. You are just a minor distraction in the context of this government. You are a minor attraction to deliver votes to the Liberal Party. You are the doormats of the Liberal Party and the sooner you realise that the better, rather than dashing in here trying to claim some credit, some knowledge, of this particular issue. Stop misleading the people of Australia. Get on it with it. Just own up: the National Party is useless, worthless. Give up. Just merge with the Liberal Party and get it over and done with.