Mark Furner (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

The clear direction has to be based on responsible economic management, and responsible economic management remains anchored in a $22 billion budget surplus—a buffer for the future. Responsible economic management can only be ensured through bills such as the luxury car tax bill. The luxury car tax was announced to enhance fairness in the tax system. Yes, fairness—something the opposition seem to grapple with. They seem to have difficulty with the comprehension of that word, which is evident through their years of power. We saw that in the likes of their Work Choices and those types of legislation where they could not comprehend what fairness means and how it applies to those who are out there struggling to make a living.

The government has to make tough decisions in these times of economic uncertainty; the government sees infrastructure and helping low-income earners and pensioners as a priority, as do a majority of Australians. To do this the government has had to make tough decisions like the luxury car tax in order to grow Australia into the future. If the government has to raise a tax on luxury cars for those who can most afford it—it looks to the future for everyday Australians—then the government will make that call.

You tell me why an individual such as Malcolm Turnbull, who is estimated to have a net worth of $125 million—that is right: $125 million—has the right to complain about a tax increase that would not even put a dint in his pocket. One must ask who the opposition is actually representing. It seems the opposition are only interested in representing themselves and a small minority of Australians.

Should those opposite continue their irresponsible fiscal destruction and vandalism, this bill, like the luxury car tax bill and others, shall be defeated. We will end up with millions in lost revenue over four years. What is the Liberals’ approach? It is seeing how much the Porsche is going to cost with or without a luxury car tax. The government, however, is looking to the future.

The Labor government wants to invest in the nation’s long-term infrastructure, including its public transport infrastructure. To do that we need money, and we need money from various means to manage the budget. I must ask: what is more important—a short-term political gain or a long-term plan that will ensure Australia has a brighter future? I must also ask: what is more important—a luxury car tax that will increase the cost of a minority of cars, or a reduction in the budget and greater pressure on the families of Australia? Fellow senators, which is more important, advocating for a few or advocating for the many?

It is time the opposition got its priorities right. I plead with those of you who empathise with the average family, who cannot afford the natural things required to sustain a reasonable living standard these days, to not block these legitimate types of legislation, to allow the budget to be sustainable for our future. We are talking about people in need. They need our help. It is our duty as representatives of the Australian public to make tough decisions that will make things a little bit easier, comfortable and more suitable for Australians.

Senators, we have a chance here to make a change for the better. Is that not what we are all about in this chamber? I ask the opposition to seriously consider their position and think about the future of Australian families and the future of Australia’s economic growth.