Jenny McAllister (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I certainly will. It is hard, you have to observe, to move forward if you're always looking back over your shoulder at who's sitting behind you. I think it's the case that the only policies that he can put forward are the ones that no-one—absolutely no-one—in his party room can possibly disagree with, and we know that the only thing that really unites the coalition party room is attacking unions, attacking the representatives of working people. Or perhaps his ministers think that the purpose of government is to deliver for the rent seekers who show up for the meetings rather than for ordinary Australians. But it doesn't matter what the reason is; the result is the same: the government has no economic vision for Australia.

The government should be embarrassed that it has left policies like our reform on dividend imputation sitting in the desk drawer. Treasury and experts have been calling for this reform for years. In 2009, the NAB chairman and former Treasury secretary Ken Henry called for reform as part of his review of the tax system. It has become clear that Treasury considered dividend imputation reform in the lead-up to Treasurer Scott Morrison's last budget, creating a dossier entitled 'Tax policy: dividend imputation'. A white paper on tax reform commissioned by Treasurer Hockey in 2015 found there were some revenue concerns with the refundability of imputation credits. And it's clear what they meant: the department was receiving lower tax revenues than it expected. The department said:

… it provides a greater incentive for shareholders of closely held companies to delay distributions until a time when individual owners are subject to a relatively low tax rate, to receive a refund of tax paid by the company.

The government have received the advice. They know this is a good idea—they've considered it in the past—but they lack the courage or the will to follow through. Their only plan is to deliver corporate tax cuts for their donors, and, in the meantime, while they thrash around on the hook of a rational policy that would restore the budget and provide $11 billion extra in budget repair over the next four years, they cry crocodile tears for low-income earners in their retirement years.

Well, I'll ask you this: where was the concern when the government was busily trying to cut the rate at which the pension was indexed? Where was the concern of those coalition frontbenchers who've been so eager to climb all over the idea of people who've been disadvantaged by this policy? Where was their concern when they did a deal with the Greens political party to kick a whole lot of people off the pension by changing the asset test? Where's the concern even today, when it's clear from the remarks made by Senator Fierravanti-Wells that those on the pension are in fact a burden on the Australian taxpayer? Where is the concern in the remarks made by Senator Abetz that the virtues we look for are thrift, savings and self-reliance? I've got some news for Senator Abetz: you can work hard all your life and exhibit the virtues of self-reliance and of thrift and you still won't have a very large superannuation balance at the end of it—and that is the experience of the majority of Australian women.

People know, when they hear this, how ridiculous it is to hear the coalition, who, at every budget, have tried to cut the pension, cry these crocodile tears. Labor's policy is fair. It is a fair way to pursue budget repair, and it's a policy that ought to have been adopted by the coalition.