Senate debates
Wednesday, 7 February 2024
Matters of Public Importance
Taxation
5:41 pm
Slade Brockman (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source
I, too, rise to speak on this matter of public importance. I congratulate Senator Smith for bringing this matter to the attention of the Senate.
I think it's telling, from the contributions we've heard, that those opposite seem to want to talk about a certain ABC TV show more than they want to talk about their own tax policy. At the heart of this change is a significant broken promise. The trouble for the Labor Party is they have form in this area—and not just over this government, the Albanese government. They've got multiple examples of form in this area. They've got form in this area on changes to superannuation taxation, where they said there would be no changes but they introduced an increase in taxation on superannuation for self-managed super funds—a particularly egregious change where balances of over $3 million face a new tax. We've seen examples where farmers have, under the then rules, put property into self-managed super funds, where property happens to be their chief asset in terms of their farming property, and that asset has gone over $3 million, and now, in the very near future, they will potentially face tax bills on the unrealised gains of those assets that they will have to potentially sell property to be able to pay, or they will have to find cash in their own pocket.
This is a government that has form in this area, and we saw it in previous governments as well. We saw it in the Rudd-Gillard Labor government—the carbon tax commitment, another broken promise there. We saw it in the rollback of the tax relief that was in the 2014 budget. We saw it in previous Labor governments—the infamous 'l-a-w, law' tax cuts under the Keating government, where we saw a broken promise from a Labor prime minister. We have a pattern of behaviour from this government. No matter how they want to justify it, when you look the Australian people in the eye and make a firm commitment—not just once but 100 times—and when you make it repeatedly and when you make it in the clearest possible language, that gives those on this side and the Australian people the right to then ask the question, to ask for definitive answers, about things like negative gearing and franking credits—which is the issue that Senator Dean Smith raised earlier—and, in the fullness of time, when the Labor government has looked at the books and decided it needs a little bit of extra tax revenue, whether those things won't come under the microscope. We've already heard from the crossbench that they want those things under the microscope and that they want those things to be considered.
You can understand the hesitation of the Australian people when they hear the rhetoric from those opposite and the constant references to a certain ABC TV show and to events and activities that happened years and years and years ago. Those opposite don't want to defend their own policy positions, policy backflips, policy changes and broken promises, because they have form in this area. The Australian people don't have a high level of trust in this government to say what it's going to do and to follow through.
We will continue to hold this government to account. We will continue to point out where they have said things very clearly on the public record dozens and dozens of times to the Australian people and then gone back on their word. We're not allowed to use a certain word in this place, apparently. We've been banned from saying it. But the fact is that mistruths will come back to haunt this government, and they should. A prime minister who says, 'My word is my bond,' should be able to be believed. This one can't.
No comments