Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Treasurer, Senator Conroy. Will the minister confirm that up to 60 per cent of farmers and tourism operators are unable to claim the so-called luxury car tax surcharge exemption? Will the minister further confirm that the government is introducing urgent legislation to try to overcome these and other problems resulting from Labor’s ineptitude?

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Abetz for his question. Those opposite, and their leaders are the only people in Australia who welcome difficult economic news because it suits their short-term political interests. Never forget that these are the people who think that the global financial crisis, which is buffeting advanced economies everywhere, has been hyped up. They are the same people who tried to smash the surplus we are now using to provide relief for families and to strengthen our economy.

Since the budget the luxury car tax revenue has been revised down by around $20 million in each of the forward estimates. This is not the result of the increase in the luxury car tax. The downward revisions are the result of two factors: firstly, the weaker economic outlook flowing from the global financial crisis is expected to result in fewer car sales; secondly, the increased luxury car tax threshold for vehicles with fuel consumption not exceeding seven litres per 100 kilometres.

Once again those opposite are using difficult economic news as an excuse to oppose our measures. Their usual political sniping will not deter us from the responsible decisions. And they can continue to try and campaign against this and show nothing but—

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise very reluctantly on a point of order of direct relevance. Can I preface my point of order by suggesting, with respect, that you not necessarily provide a ruling here and now, taking into account your comments earlier today as to making a final ruling at the end of the trial period. My question, Mr President, was directly related to whether 60 per cent of farmers and tourism operators are unable to claim the so-called luxury car tax surcharge exemption and also whether the government is introducing legislation to amend it. Senator Conroy has not strayed anywhere near those two aspects.

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, on the point of order: Senator Conroy was exactly on the question of the luxury car tax’s implementation and matters related to the revenue flow. Unfortunately, in two minutes he does not get a chance to go through it in as much detail as he might otherwise. But Senator Conroy was directly on the issue and directly relevant to the question. If Senator Abetz would allow him to finish I am sure Senator Conroy will be able to help him with more information.

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is no point of order. Senator Conroy, you have 40 seconds remaining and I ask you to address the question.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I repeat that those opposite are not interested in good government, they are not interested in responsible economic management, they have played both sides of the street on the luxury car tax every day in this chamber and they are here doing it once again. Those opposite are now asking me to speculate on what is possibly coming in a possible bill. Well, I am not in a position to play those irresponsible games. I am simply going to make the point that for those opposite to continue to walk both sides of the street— (Time expired)

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. I have got news for the minister: legislation has in fact been introduced in the other place, so there is no speculation in relation to my questions. But I will allow the minister to have a shot at these two questions: firstly, will the minister confirm that the proposed regulation specifying a four-wheel-drive vehicle eligible for exemption under these bungled amendments did not include the Australian-made Ford Territory; and, secondly—and try to answer—does the government stand by its MYEFO projections that the slowdown in the luxury car market caused by the luxury car tax surcharge will remove only $10 million from the luxury car tax revenue this financial year?

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As Senator Abetz has indicated, the legislation is in the other chamber. So why would you ask if we are introducing a bill? But perhaps Senator Abetz has got a cunning plan and we are waiting for the trap to pounce.

As I have already mentioned—and to prove my point that I was relevant previously—I was talking about the revenue forecasts of the luxury car tax. Senator Abetz is now asking about the revenue projection, so I will repeat what I said in the first answer that I gave. The weaker economic outlook flowing from the global financial crisis is expected to result in fewer car sales. Increasing the luxury car tax threshold for vehicles with fuel consumption not exceeding seven litres per 100 kilometres has led to a luxury car tax revenue that has been revised down by around $20 million in each of the— (Time expired)

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. I am sure honourable senators will have noted that Senator Conroy did not answer about the Ford Territory. Can I ask: is it a fact that with the decline in luxury car sales this financial year—at 20 per cent and growing worse—the government’s ill-conceived luxury car tax surcharge will raise tens of millions of dollars less than budgeted, exposing the MYEFO assessment as erroneous? Rather than trying to unscramble the egg—

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise on a point of order. My point of order is that the second supplementary question asks the minister to give the answer he gave 30 seconds before, which went through exactly that subject matter. I think this is the danger of senators writing out their supplementary questions and then reading them despite the answer given by the minister. The minister replied directly to that and provided that information in his last answer. I do not know if Senator Abetz was listening—clearly he was not. It destroys the whole purpose of supplementary questions if the supplementary question results from the questioner not listening to the earlier answer.

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, on the point of order: the difficulty with the Leader of the Government’s point of order is that he does not understand the issue. The simple reality is this: MYEFO has made certain predictions; the simple fact is that the collapse in luxury car sales now indicates that the MYEFO projection is clearly wrong, and it is that aspect that I am asking the minister about. I know it is embarrassing for the government and that is why a point of order was taken.

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is no point of order. At this stage you still have 27 seconds in which to complete the asking of your question. I will listen to the question in full.

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I cannot in the 20 seconds. But I invite the minister to consider: rather than trying to unscramble the egg, will the government instead simply dump their ill-considered and clumsy luxury car tax surcharge, which is hurting Australian farmers, Australian tourism operators and the Australian car-manufacturing sector?

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As Blackadder would say, ‘A cunning plan, Baldrick.’ As I have already said—and I will now repeat it for the third time in a row—the luxury car tax revenue has been revised down by around $20 million in each year of the forward estimates. This is not the result of the increase in the luxury car tax. The downward revisions are the result of two factors: the weaker economic outlook flowing from the global financial crisis is expected to result, surprisingly, in fewer car sales, and—

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is a blame game.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The blame game! And increasing the luxury car tax—

Nick Sherry (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Superannuation and Corporate Law) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Sherry interjecting—

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Sherry, shouting across the chamber is disorderly. Senator Conroy is entitled to be heard in silence.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The second factor is increasing the luxury car tax threshold for vehicles with fuel consumption not exceeding seven litres per 100 kilometres. So once again— (Time expired)