Mark Bishop (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to be Minister for Small Business, Senator Sherry. Can the minister outline to the Senate how the Gillard government is giving Australians a fair share of the mining boom through the minerals resource rent tax? What would be the consequences of a later government reversing the MRRT and the carbon price?

Nick Sherry (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Minister Assisting the Minister for Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government is using—and I have outlined in some detail—what the $11-plus billion in revenue from the mining tax over the forward estimates will be used for. It will be used to boost retirement savings in the form of superannuation and to fund tax cuts for small business and companies. About one-third of the proceeds will be used to fund the tax concessions that follow the increase in the super guarantee, which lifts the retirement income for millions of Australia and cuts the contributions tax for low-income earners. Some 3½ million Australians will receive a tax cut on their superannuation from the mining tax revenue.

On the weekend we had a rare outbreak of honesty from Mr Hockey, the shadow Treasurer. He confirmed that the Liberal-National Party, if they ever get into government, are going to reverse the mining tax. They are going to pass $11 billion in revenue back to the mining companies. And I might say that this $11 billion is tax the mining companies have agreed to pay.

At the same time, the Liberal-National party has to come up with money to make up for the $11 billion in tax revenue they are going to pass back to the mining companies. In order to make up for the $11 billion, they are going to have to increase tax on small business by reversing the new write-off provisions and they are going to have to increase the superannuation contributions tax on the 3½ million Australians who currently pay. Also, the standard tax deduction, which will benefit 6½ million Australians— (Time expired)

Mark Bishop (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. How will the government's tax reform package, funded through the MRRT, provide tax relief for small businesses and companies?

Nick Sherry (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Minister Assisting the Minister for Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I have mentioned, the government is effectively providing a tax cut to small business by increasing the instant write-off of goods purchased from $1,000 to $6,500. This means an increase of $1,500 in cash flow to over two million small businesses as a reward for those businesses as they invest. This is one of the measures to be funded by the $11 billion in revenue from the mining tax, which the Liberal Party is now going to give back to the mining sector. It is going to give that $11 billion-plus back to the mining sector. At the same time, the Liberal Party has decided it is going to have to increase taxes for small business to pay for this handing back of $11 billion in mining tax. At the same time, the Liberal Party will not be able to proceed with the company tax cut for small business, because that is funded from the mining tax. (Time expired)

Mark Bishop (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I have a further supplementary question. Is the minister aware of any alternative policies to ensure that Australians get a fairer return for the resources they own?

Nick Sherry (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Minister Assisting the Minister for Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I have said, the Liberal and National parties decided to hand back the $11 billion-plus in revenue from the mining tax. Quite extraordinarily, as I have mentioned, the mining companies have agreed to pay this tax. I cannot recall a time in Australian history when a political party bidding for government has decided to hand back a tax that the companies have agreed to pay and at the same time increase tax on superannuation and increase tax on small business, at a time when these mining companies are making very, very significant—indeed, record—profits. Look at BHP's $23 billion net profit announced last month. It is no wonder these mining companies agree to pay increased tax, but it is so extraordinary that the Liberal and National parties want to hand back the $11 billion they have agreed to pay. They want to give it back to them and at the same time increase superannuation taxes and increase— (Time expired)

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for the Murray Darling Basin) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Treasurer and the Minister for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, Senator Wong. I refer the minister to the new partially leaked Treasury modelling of the government's carbon tax and ask the minister two very specific questions. Firstly, has this modelling been completed? Secondly, does this modelling still assume that real wages will adjust to offset the impact of the carbon tax so as to maintain full employment?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I love the way the tactics committee sees the word 'modelling' somewhere and then decides they want to talk only about modelling for the entirety of question time. It is a pity the senator did not listen to my response to Senator Bernardi, wherein I pointed out that the Treasurer had flagged the release of this modelling this week. I am not sure how the senator comes to suggest that there has been a leak. Some aspects of it, and the fact of it, were released in the Treasurer's economic note. That is hardly a leak.

The coalition cannot come into this chamber pretending to actually care about the economic costs of action on climate change when its own policy has been so poorly costed and will lead to a doubling of the economic cost of achieving the five per cent target. But you do not have to believe me. It is what the Treasury says. It is what the Business Council of Australia has referenced.

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

I draw the minister's attention to the question.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question goes to the modelling and the economic cost. Those on the other side, if they are interested in the economic cost, should perhaps look at some of their own policies. Again, I refer the good senator to the note released by the Treasurer. He made reference to the fact that the modelling will be released this week, as previous modelling has been—unlike anything on the opposition's side when it comes to both the economic and the fiscal cost of this policy.

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for the Murray Darling Basin) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. I again ask the minister if she can confirm whether the modelling to which the Treasurer has referred has been finished yet. Further, can the minister explain why the government claims that the carbon tax has no impact on employment when—unless they have reversed their previous approach—the government's modelling starts with the assumption of there being no impact on employment? Will the minister inform the Senate how much lower real wages will be in 2020 under the carbon tax?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I again say to the good senator that this modelling will be released when the government releases it, and I am not going to be drawn into a discussion of modelling that the government has not released. I would make the point that the modelling the government has released to date shows that with a carbon price we can grow our economy, we can grow our incomes and we can increase the number of jobs in Australia. The economic cost of our policy is far less than the economic cost of the policy that the opposition says it would implement. It is a joke to come in here and say, 'We don't believe that incomes will continue to grow' when the opposition's policy will cost the economy more and will cost Australian taxpayers more.

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for the Murray Darling Basin) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Does the government believe it appropriate that this modelling be subject to scrutiny by the joint select committee established to consider the government's carbon tax legislation? If so, will the full modelling be released before Treasury fronts that committee on Wednesday morning of this week? If so, how many hours or minutes beforehand can we expect to see it?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Firstly, in relation to the committee, the functioning of the committee is a matter for the committee. In relation to the release of the modelling, I have answered that question previously. But I will make two points. Firstly, does anyone in this chamber believe that the coalition cares about the content of this modelling or the content of this policy? They do not care about it, because they only have one answer to anything that comes into this chamber or the other place: 'No, no, no, no, no.' That is the entirety of the coalition's policy, whether on climate or on anything else. No-one listening to this debate would be under any illusion that you actually care about the substance.

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for the Murray Darling Basin) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise on a point of order on relevance. I asked two questions related to the joint select committee that is looking into the carbon tax legislation about whether this modelling would in fact be presented in time for that committee to ask the Treasury about it. If the minister could address those direct questions, she might have some chance of being directly relevant to the matter.

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

The minister is answering the question. The minister has 10 seconds remaining.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This government has released an extraordinary amount of information in relation to the economic cost of its policy. It is a pity that the opposition cannot do the same.