Senate debates
Wednesday, 21 March 2018
Bills
Treasury Laws Amendment (Enterprise Tax Plan No. 2) Bill 2017; Second Reading
12:41 pm
Richard Di Natale (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source
As anybody who spends some time in this chamber will know, the Greens have steadfastly opposed the Treasury Laws Amendment (Enterprise Tax Plan No. 2) Bill 2017. There has been absolutely no question about our opposition. Our opposition is not conditional. We haven't been flip-flopping. There's no umming or ahing or sending conflicting messages. It's not our view that company tax cuts are affordable in any environment. Unlike Mr Bowen, who believes that there may be a set of circumstances under which these company tax cuts are justified, we are straight up opposed to tax cuts for big corporations, because they are bad policy. They would be terrible for our country and they would further exacerbate the intergenerational divide that is growing within Australia.
Company tax cuts are just another means of rigging the economy in favour of the big end of town. They're part of the same old, outdated neoliberal agenda that told us that if only we privatised anything that wasn't nailed down, if only we deregulated and attacked unions—if only we did all those things—then wealth would magically trickle down to everybody. Well, it is a failed agenda. The verdict is in: the Australian people just don't buy it. And nor should they buy it. The evidence is everywhere. We're seeing massive inequality, we are seeing wages flatlining, we are seeing skyrocketing corporate profits, we are seeing CEOs cream it with bonuses, and all the while ordinary Australians are being left behind.
We know from recent ABC reporting—the same reporting that the Prime Minister tried to shut down—that hundreds of corporations with an income in excess of $100 million are paying no tax, yet the government is still arguing the case for a tax cut. When it comes to corporations, the problem we have in Australia right now is that they are not paying their fair share. Let's fix that problem before we start a debate about what it means to have an effective corporate tax rate. We think it's time the companies finally paid their fair share so that governments can invest in what we do know is going to boost productivity in this country, so that we can invest money in infrastructure and services that we need—things like quality health and education systems, schools and hospitals, and a world-class National Broadband Network. That's productivity-boosting infrastructure. We need investment in our outdated electricity and transport systems so that we can make the transition to 100 per cent renewable energy, create jobs, ensure we've got reliability and bring down prices for consumers. Instead, what we have is a $65 billion handout—I'll say that again: a $65 billion handout—to the big end of town in some magical hope that they will pass this on to their employees. It is wishful thinking at its worst. We have to stop pretending that corporations are a vehicle for social change. They're not. Corporations exist for one reason only.
Debate interrupted.
No comments