Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern and Remote Australia) Share this | Hansard source

I know I am interrupting Senator Back, who was in full flight when this debate was adjourned yesterday. I apologise for that, but I think it is important, for those who have not understood the debate so far, to recapitulate what happened yesterday.

Yesterday, for three hours, we asked questions of the minister about the Tax Laws Amendment (Temporary Flood and Cyclone Reconstruction Levy) Bill 2011 and the Income Tax Rates Amendment (Temporary Flood and Cyclone Reconstruction Levy) Bill 2011, which will impose yet another tax on some Australians. We were asking questions about why this tax was being levied just on individuals, rather than on multinational corporations. The Greens were very keen about making sure that those multinational companies paid their fair share of tax. The Greens have been railing in this chamber about how these multinational companies rip off huge profits from Australia and send those profits overseas. Yet here is a bill that the Greens and the Labor Party are promoting that taxes individual Australians but not corporate Australians. Whilst the plumber and the electrician will pay the flood tax, BHP, Xstrata and Rio Tinto will not. Whilst the local baker and butcher will pay the flood tax, Woolies and Coles will be exempted.

We asked the minister for three hours last night: what was the policy rationale behind this? We also asked the minister which class of individuals was going to be exempted from the tax. This legislation provides that the minister, on a whim, can decide which Australians are going to pay this tax and which Australians are not. Senator Back, when the adjournment interrupted him, was raising an issue about the north of Western Australia, and I am very keen to hear him complete his question on that. But, with the typical arrogance of this Labor government—a Labor government that, you might recall, Mr Acting Deputy President, had this new paradigm for parliament; they were going to be open and accountable, they were going to address issues and they were going to tell the public what was happening—the minister, when we raised these questions for three hours yesterday, simply refused to answer them.

I know Senator Back has questions. I have some more questions, and I suspect other senators have questions. We want these questions answered. We hope that the minister has had a good night’s sleep and has relinquished the belligerent approach that he adopted last night of just sitting there and simply refusing to answer legitimate questions.