Senate debates

Monday, 9 September 2019

Questions without Notice: Take Note of Answers

Answers to Questions

3:08 pm

Photo of James PatersonJames Paterson (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Question time today offers us the opportunity to engage in an interesting thought experiment. What would have happened if, on 18 May, instead of Scott Morrison and the Liberal and National parties winning the election, Bill Shorten and the Labor Party had in fact prevailed? Would they, having succeeded in an election a few months ago, right now be implementing the economic plan that they took to the election, or would they be abandoning it? In particular, would they be proceeding right now through this very chamber their plans for $387 billion of new and higher taxes on the Australian economy? Imagine the consequences for Australian families, workers and businesses if that were the case—if, in the face of the global economic headwinds that Australia and the rest of the world confronts, the Labor Party were piling on top of that $387 billion of higher taxes.

Helpfully, we have an insight into what the Labor Party might have done if they had been successful at the election, and it comes in the form of an interview conducted this morning by Andrew Leigh on Sky News. You might remember that prior to the election Mr Leigh was a key member of the economic team of the Labor Party, although I don't believe he is any longer.

The reporter, Annelise Nielsen, asked him the very reasonable question: 'What would Labor do if they were in government today? Would they have been proceeding right now with their election plans?' After some dancing around the question, Mr Leigh argued that what the Australian economy needed right now was higher government spending. Now, this could only be delivered in one of two ways. It could be delivered through their plan for higher taxes on the Australian economy, or it could be delivered with higher debt. Unfortunately, Mr Leigh didn't share with Sky News viewers or Australians exactly which side he came down on. Was he in favour of Labor's higher taxes or more debt delivered by the Labor Party for future generations to pay? So, unfortunately, we are none the wiser as to which side of the debate raging within the Labor Party at the moment Mr Leigh would fall on. Does he fall on the side of Wayne Swan, who says: 'Full steam ahead. No problems here. Nothing to see here. A great election policy platform that we took on the economy should be retained whole-heartedly'? Or does he fall on the side of Mr Butler, who says, 'Actually, guys, I think there might be good reason to review the policies we took to the election'?

The question the Labor Party is grappling with is: was it the economic policies they took to the election, was it the social policies they took to the election, or was it the leader they took to the election that cost them the election? The disturbing thing for those on the opposite side of the chamber is: the answer to that question may be 'all of the above'.

Of course, as Senator Cormann outlined in question time today, the government is very well aware of the uncertain global economic environment that we're operating in, and we have a strong economic plan that deals with that situation. It was outlined only a few months ago in the budget, and it was subsequently endorsed by the Australian people. Unsurprisingly, we are not going to be following the Labor Party's economic advice here. We're not going to be adopting either the policies they took to the election or the new policies they now advocate in light of the election result. We will be sticking to the strong economic plan we outlined.

It is important to put in context Australia's economic performance. The national accounts show the Australian economy has now completed its 28th year of unbroken economic growth. That is a world record and something which all Australians should be very proud of. It is a reminder that we do, in fact, have a remarkably resilient economy, and it is a repudiation of those who seek to talk it down. In advance of the release of the most recent national accounts, there were many commentators who said Australia would have a negative quarter of growth, and they were quickly proven to be wrong. Real GDP grew by half a per cent for an annualised rate of 1.4 per cent. In average year terms, real GDP in fact grew by 1.9 per cent through 2018-19.

The government is very proud of the economic plan that it took to the election and which has been endorsed by the Australian people. It includes immediate and meaningful personal income tax relief for the Australian people, which has been warmly received, judging by the record tax returns that have been submitted to the ATO, and the billions of dollars that have flowed into household family budgets around Australia. So we won't be adopting the Labor Party's plans in this instance.

Comments

No comments