Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Hansard source

That is exactly right. Senator Xenophon. I will read you through this sequence again for your benefit. On 22 February at Senate estimates, I had the following interchange with the Secretary of the Department of Finance and Deregulation:

Senator CORMANN—Would people like those in Kelmscott who were subject to bushfires be exempt from the flood tax?

Mr Tune—No, not necessarily. That is the government’s—

Senator CORMANN—Why is that?

Mr Tune—The government’s decision at the moment is that those who were subject to the floods are exempt from the levy. It would require another decision to alter that.

Senator CORMANN—Only if the natural disaster you were subject to was a flood will you be exempt from the flood tax? If it is any other natural disaster, you are not exempt at the moment?

Mr Tune—That is the situation as it stands at the moment.

That afternoon, on the back of those comments, a journalist from the West Australian went to the Prime Minister’s office and asked, ‘Why is that?’ I will read the first three sentences of a story that appeared the next day in the West Australian:

Julia Gillard has said the victims of the Kelmscott bushfire will not have to pay the national flood levy. The Prime Minister made the decision last night after a senior bureaucrat said that although the fire victims qualified for $1000 disaster recovery payments, they were still expected to pay the levy. A spokesman for Ms Gillard said victims of this years WA bushfires would be exempted.

That is what I call policy on the run, Senator Xenophon. I am very happy for the good people of Kelmscott, but I want to know about people in all these other parts of Australia that have been subjected to natural disaster events. If the government has made a decision that all of them are going to be exempt, why wouldn’t the minister very simply get up and say, ‘All of those Australians in all of those areas across Australia that are receiving natural disaster relief assistance from the Commonwealth will be exempt from having to pay the flood tax’? Why wouldn’t the minister just get up and say that?

I might be a naturally suspicious person when it comes to promises made by the government. But if the minister got up now and said, ‘We have made a decision that all of those people impacted by natural disasters across Australia will be exempted from the flood tax,’ then I would take his word and the word of the government for it. But he has not said that. He has not been prepared to say that. He has not even been prepared in the debate today or last night in the committee stage to confirm that the bushfire victims in Kelmscott would be exempted. To make things more complicated, the Treasury, on its own website, is saying that only those Australians subject to a flood event will be exempt. It would not take the minister much to clarify this. I can only assume that the government has not got much legislation that they have to deal with in this chamber, because clearly the minister is not interested in cutting through this, in providing a sensible answer to a legitimate question that has been asked to make sure that the Senate can get on with other business.

We know that the coalition is going to vote against this tax, but we want to know whether or not people in areas impacted by natural disaster across Australia will be exempt. It is a very simple question which has a very simple answer. I am conscious, Senator Xenophon, of what Treasury officials said during the committee inquiry as to what is in the draft legislative instrument. I want to know whether the government has made a decision in relation to all these other people. It has been able to make a decision in relation to the people in Kelmscott in Western Australia. Why can’t it make a decision in relation to people impacted by natural disaster in Victoria or in South Australia or indeed in the minister’s own home state of Tasmania?

I can only draw one conclusion from this: the government does not want to exempt all these people across Australia who have been impacted by natural disasters and the government is planning to hit all these people with this flood tax. I can only assume that the government is quite happy to provide financial assistance to people who have been subject to a natural disaster, because they are in financial distress, and then turn around and take back the money by imposing this flood tax.

If this is not the government’s plan, it is very simple for the minister to resolve this. All the minister needs to do is get up and provide an answer. It is very simple. It comes down to this, Senator Xenophon. The very simple question is: has the government made a decision and can the government give a guarantee that all Australians who have been subject to a natural disaster and who are receiving an Australian government disaster recovery payment in relation to any natural disaster, as defined on the Attorney-General’s website—that is, a bushfire, an earthquake, a flood, a storm, a cyclone, a storm surge, a landslide, a tsunami, a meteorite strike or a tornado—will not be required to pay the flood tax?

If the minister can find it in his heart to actually provide reassurance to Australians who are impacted by these sorts of events across Australia that, yes, they will be exempt and that, no, they will not be required to pay this tax, then we can progress this debate. But this minister is too arrogant to provide an answer to a very simple question, which is highly relevant for many, many people right across Australia. The government know how to whack on another tax, but they do not know how to be accountable in the parliament for the impact it has on people across Australia. There is a very specific question before this chamber which relates to those Australians who have been impacted by natural disasters that are not classified as flood events.

Senator Xenophon, I really do hope that you share the coalition’s view that this is an issue that should be clarified by the government before the Senate is asked to make a final decision on this legislation. The federal government have been able to make statements in relation to those Australians who were subject to flood events and they have been able to make a decision in relation to those Australians impacted by bushfires in Kelmscott in Western Australia. I am very pleased that they have decided to exempt victims of bushfires in Kelmscott. But why can’t the government make similar decisions in relation to all those other Australians who have been subject to natural disaster events in all those other parts of Australia, including in the minister’s own home state of Tasmania, as we have been able to identify during this debate?

Why would the government not take this opportunity to provide reassurance to those people across Australia who have been victims of a natural disaster who are in financial distress to the extent that the federal government provides assistance to them through the Australian government disaster recovery payment program? Why would the government not be able to tell the Senate, here and now, that all these people will be exempt?

It is a very simple question and it is a question that deserves an answer. People across Australia would form a very dim judgment of this government if it persists with its refusal to provide an answer. If the Prime Minister can make a decision on the run, because she is worried about a bad headline in the West Australian the next day, to exempt people in Kelmscott who have been victims of bushfires, why can’t she make a decision in relation to all these other victims of natural disasters in other parts of Australia? It is a very simple proposition which the minister should very carefully consider. I can see, Senator Xenophon, that you are very keen to jump up and do the minister’s job again and provide some explanation— (Time expired)