Rachel Siewert (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

It is ironic, isn't it, that on the same day that the government moves the second of its measures to cut revenue, revenue that would create billions of dollars, the Minerals Resource Rent Tax Repeal and Other Measures Bill 2013 [No. 2], the Treasurer is on the radio in the morning, saying, 'We're going to have to bring in more cuts; we might avoid parliamentary processes for that.' This is on the same day that we see two measures going through this place that take billions of dollars out of our revenue stream.

One reason the Treasurer says that the government has to bring in more cuts is that this place is not going to support and has already sent back to the other place measures that it does not accept, because we are listening to the community and we know the community hate the cruel budget the government has brought down. It is a budget that affects young people, students and single parents. Health payments affect pensioners, disability support pensioners, and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders. You name it, this government has a go.

Because the community are saying no, standing up and making their voices heard and being listened to, the government, once again, go behind the back of parliament and say they have to bring in more cuts. And on the very same day the Treasurer is talking on the radio, they want to repeal another revenue-raising measure.

Coalition senators have said how this is a job-destroying tax. Senator Macdonald was in here, saying, 'It's a job-destroying, profit-destroying tax.' BHP increased its profits last year by 83 per cent, to US$8.1 billion. BHP WA alone increased its profits by 20 per cent, paying very little of the mining tax. So much for the job-destroying, profit-destroying tax! We are talking about revenue from the resources that all Australians own.

But of course the government, as usual, are protecting their big business mates at the big end of town. Yes, this tax could operate better and I will come to that in a moment. The government are looking after the big end of town. The three biggest mining companies in WA made profits of over US$17 billion. They paid no MRRT on that. But that is not enough for them, though. They want to make more, more, more and not pay their share. And the government want to protect those people, while making young people, students, single parent families, pensioners, people with disabilities live in poverty. That is what they are doing when they kick young people off the income support and make them live on nothing for six months. 'But it's okay, we've looked after the big end of town and the mining companies. Cross off the billions of dollars of revenue we could make from our own resources.'

Yes, this tax does have some flaws as Senator Milne pointed out. And Senator Macdonald, if you are listening, no, we were not there. You keep having a go at the Greens and saying, 'You were there and you supported the government.' Well no, we were not in the room—and, let me tell you, if we had been, the mining tax would not have been this bad! It would in fact have been fixed. It would actually be generating the billions of dollars that if you had actually listened—and even had the original one—you would now be making money from to provide the revenue that we know is needed to ensure that our community is a fair, just and compassionate community.

But no, you are running to the orders of the mining industry, who have graciously provided certain senators in this building with nice high-vis tops with their names on them. Senator Macdonald wore his into the chamber to do another little bit of advertising for the mining industry. That was clearly around Senator Macdonald trying to advertise for the mining industry. It sends a really clear message about who is giving the orders and calling the shots in this place. That is what it does. It sends a really clear message about who is calling the shots in getting rid of this mining tax that provides Australia with a fairer share of the super profits from the resources that they mine. I continue to remind people that they are Australia's resources. It is only fair and reasonable that Australians get a fair share of the super profits from those resources—and this mining tax is about providing that.

Proceedings suspended from 18:50 to 19:30

I will start where I left off before we had that interlude for dinner. I was making the point that members of the coalition were in here 'vested up' by the mining industry, who quite clearly had vested interests. So it is appropriate that they provided vests for certain senators to wear in the chamber while they are doing the mining industry's work by getting rid of the mining tax for them. To make it even better for the mining industry in this country, and to ensure that the superprofits from their digging up of our resources are not shared with the community, those on the other side of the chamber make the most vulnerable Australians pay the price for their supporting and looking after the big end of town.

As I pointed out before, we do know that there are holes in this mining tax. We tried to fix them—and what this government should be doing, instead of scrapping this mining tax, is improving it so that it genuinely delivers a revenue stream that, according to the government, we need in this country. The government is saying that there is a budget emergency but, with gay abandon, they get rid of the carbon tax that would have generated billions of dollars for our country. Now they are in the process of trying to get rid of the mining tax—that would, again, generate billions of dollars for our country.

The Greens supported the original proposed tax on mining superprofits recommended by the Treasury in 2010, because it did make sense. It made sense because it was a tax only on those companies earning gargantuan, huge profits. It was fair because it ensured that Australians benefited from their exploitation of publicly-owned resources. The principle of the tax was that the superprofits were made by the mining companies when they were digging up mineral resources—which, I repeat again, are owned by all of us—and selling them. Originally, the tax was meant to be 40 per cent on superprofits above $50 million and applied to all minerals. It got watered down to an effective rate of about 22½ per cent on profits above $75 million. In its original form, it would have raised $4 billion last year alone.

As I said, you have got to keep in mind the fact that the three big iron ore companies, to which the mining tax applied, increased their profits by 81 per cent last year. In Western Australia alone, BHP's profits were up 20 per cent. Let's put to bed this myth, perpetrated by coalition, that this is a profit-killing tax. It simply is not true. We should have fixed the original proposal. We should have made sure that we put in place the original proposal. The current MRRT takes only 1.5 per cent off the companies' profit margins, but the government thinks even that is too much. Instead of fixing it—and making sure that we do get a fair share of revenue from our resources and a proper revenue from superprofits made from the mining tax—the government wants to hand back billions to the mining companies that should be put into our revenue stream so that we can look after the most vulnerable, so that we can provide a universal health system, so that we can make sure that we index our pensions and our Newstart payments and our income support payments properly so that we do support the most vulnerable members of our community. But no. Instead, the government is looking after their big business interests mates.

I come from the state of Western Australia. I have heard told many times that this is killing jobs and killing profits in Western Australia. But as I just articulated, funnily enough, profits from mining have gone up in Western Australia. Yes, Western Australia has benefited from mining and we have benefited from the boom. I will come back to that in a minute. We do employ slightly more people in mining in Western Australia than we do in the rest of the country. However, about 92 per cent of Western Australians are not involved in mining in Western Australia—as opposed to about 98 per cent for the rest of the country. But in Western Australia we have had a two-speed economy. I had some work done on this a while back in my office and it clearly showed that if you are working in the mining industry, you are doing okay and getting higher wages. But if you are working in hospitality or retail or in the public sector, for example, you are not doing as well as those in the mining industry. But you are still expected to pay the high house prices that we have in Western Australia. You are still expected to pay the high rent prices we have in Western Australia—because, I will tell you, trying to find a house to rent in Western Australia is like finding hens' teeth. You are still expected to pay the higher cost of living in Western Australia. You still have to be part of a health system that is cracking at the seams. You still have to live in an economy that is geared towards those high-end earners and pay the prices they are paying. If you are in aged care, you still have to be finding workers to work in the aged care, because they are all going off to work in the mining industry. If you are working in farming, it does not take very long before people working in agriculture realise that they can make more money out of working in the mines. After they have been trained, off they go to the mines.

If you fall out of mining, then—because you have been used to the high payments in mining—it is very difficult to make those hire-purchase payments and things like that. Also, a lot of younger people who have gone into mining have not completed their technical training, because they have been enticed into mining, and then, when they fall out of mining, it is very hard to get a job without any other qualifications—I know that because I have spoken to a lot of people who work with people who have come out of mining without the adequate training and skills to find work elsewhere.

So, in Western Australia, yes, we benefit, but we also have the downside, which is a two-speed economy. And that issue has not been adequately dealt with.

Of course, as we have touched on, and as some other members in the chamber contributing to the debate have touched on, this bill also repeals some very important supports for families, for communities and, particularly, for people who are on lower incomes. For example, the Income Support Bonus is gone. I acknowledge that it is not a lot of money; it is about $105.80 if you are single, and it is paid twice a year. As I pointed out, I think we worked out that it was a cup of coffee a week. But when you do not have much money, every dollar counts. And that money is important when you are on a low income.

Then there is the schoolkids bonus, and that is extremely important to people on low incomes. It is extremely important to single parents, because—and we have traversed the debate on this issue a number of times in this chamber—the successive cuts that have impacted on single parents make it even harder for them to survive. The schoolkids bonus provides a little fill-up, just when they need to get their kids into school or to buy them new school uniforms or buy them necessities, and I have had single parents talk to me about the fact that it has actually helped make ends meet after school holidays, or just as their kids are going into school—because we all know that that is a very expensive time. Also, remember, they threw single parents onto Newstart, and, when they did, a number of single parents told me that they were advised by people at Centrelink to use their schoolkids bonus as a top-up, because they had lost so much money through being dumped from single parent payments onto Newstart.

Then of course you have the low-income superannuation contribution, the loss of which is going to disproportionately impact on women. It is outrageous of this government. It has not fixed the high-end super contribution issues. It picks on the most vulnerable members of our community. Great job! While you look after your top-end-of-town mates, you impact on the most vulnerable members of our community. The low-income superannuation contribution was designed to help those on low and fixed incomes of under $37,000 a year, to help them build up even a modest retirement income. This is from a government that wants to make those same low-paid workers work until they drop, until they are 70, with no adequate super. And they are not doing enough to help them find work, either, when they fall out of work as older workers because they are being discriminated against. They cannot take a trick, these people. They are impacted every single way you look at it, and now you are going to add another hit to them. This cut disproportionately affects women, and Industry Super Australia has said that axing the rebate will affect around two million working women, including 80 per cent of female part-time workers. Older workers—in particular, women—already face discrimination in the workforce, and they have a variety of obstacles to improving their superannuation. It has been well known for a long time that there is a group of women who have very significantly low superannuation, and now you are going to give them another hit; now you are going to give them another cut. Well done! I hope you feel proud of yourselves! While you are looking after your vested interests and your mates at the big end of town, you are impacting on the most vulnerable of Australians. It is outrageous.

This government is clearly running to the calls of the mining industry. We supported the concept and the principles of a strong, effective mining tax, because we know that it is important that the resources of Australia help to contribute to the wellbeing of all Australians. We will not be supporting the repeal of this mining tax. It should be improved, not taken away. And we will not, as I said, support it. We have amendments before the chamber to make sure that these important components of the mining tax are retained. We will not be voting yes to get rid of this mining tax.

We will not help the Treasurer to undermine the budget—because that is what he is doing. The ridiculousness of him going on radio this morning and saying, 'I'm going to have to make more cuts because the Senate has torn holes in our budget,' when he himself is proposing to get rid of two effective generators of revenue for this country, the carbon price and the mining tax! Billions and billions of dollars he and his government are cutting. Well, we will not be aiding and abetting that. We will not be supporting the repeal of the MRRT.