Carol Brown (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I was going on to say that that was a line of discussion that was held in the Senate hearing, but Senator Cormann has beaten me to the punch. Anyway, I will repeat it and I will put the question mark in for you, Senator Cormann. I quote:

... would it be more appropriate, instead of doubling it and probably overshooting the mark, to look at what the figure would be if it had been indexed? I am talking about approximately $75,000 per annum.

The proposals contained in this bill represent the amended figures previously suggested by those opposite. By not supporting this bill their real reasons are exposed. If those opposite had previously suggested the measures contained in this bill, what is the purpose of them opposing it? How can the Australian people be expected to trust those opposite if they go back on their word? If Senators Colbeck and Cormann were serious, they would support this bill.

The proposals contained in this bill, resulting from much consultation with the private health sector, stakeholders and others in this place, represent a solid, sensible and reasonable approach—a middle way—which those opposite should get behind. Access Economics, in its report to the AMA, stated that thresholds of $70,000 and $140,000 would have ‘restored the system to the previous real levels, if this was the goal’. After the original bill was blocked, we have taken our original proposal away and listened carefully to what key stakeholders have had to say about appropriate threshold levels and we have adjusted them.

Further, an important part of the amended legislation is the introduction of annual indexation for the single threshold. This indexation will see the threshold indexed against the wages growth each year to ensure it keeps pace with growth. This will ensure that the application of the threshold will remain relevant and fair now and, importantly, into the future. This reflects the genuine commitment of the government to prevent the levy becoming a tax grab—as it exists today. It reflects a fair and balanced approach to the application of the levy.

This increase was one of a range of measures announced as part of the government’s economically responsible budget, and it is aimed squarely at helping to reduce the cost-of-living pressures faced by average income earners in Australia. Indeed, initiatives such as those contained in this bill reflect an acknowledgement by the government that many Australian workers and their families are under financial strain and the government, where it can, should be trying to ease that strain. In light of the global economic crisis and the government’s $10.4 billion Economic Security Strategy announced yesterday, any such measures that put money in the back pockets of Australian families are welcome and should be supported. Lifting the thresholds to $75,000 for singles and $150,000 for couples will provide savings to around 330,000 average earners in Australia—a significant number who, it appears, will be disappointed again by those opposing this bill. Those opposite appear to be content to continue their program of budget vandalism by once again not supporting this bill. I urge those opposite to support this bill. This bill will operate to bring the threshold levels back to roughly where they were first intended to be. The indexation measure will further ensure that the threshold levels remain relevant and fair now and, importantly, into the future. I commend the bill to the chamber and once again urge those opposite to stop politicking and stop blocking this much needed measure. Australian families need this measure, and those opposite should support the bill.