Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Finance and Deregulation and Minister representing the Treasurer, Senator Wong. I refer the minister to statements made by her on Insiders on Sunday morning and by the Treasurer on Radio National this morning that the government has not prepared 10-year costings of the RSPT and MRRT revenue estimates. Are these statements true—yes or no?

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

I am happy to take the question about—

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

How gracious of you!

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

I am gracious—something many on that side are not. This is true. I am very happy to take the question from the senator. Given his reference to those two interviews, he is obviously talking about revenue projections for the minerals resource rent tax. I am always interested that Senator Cormann is so anxious to know what a tax he will oppose will raise, given that he has already said no, and continues to say no, to everything, including the tax breaks for small business. The government has published the MRRT net estimates in the midyear review released last year, which was $10.6 billion over the forward estimates period to 2014-15. We also have factored into the budget bottom line not only this revenue but the expenditure for the sorts of policies that we have been talking about—the tax cuts for small business, the instant asset write-off, tax cuts for the broader economy, investment through the increase in the superannuation guarantee levy and so forth. Those things are factored into our budget bottom line and that shows a budget surplus in 2012-13. I have a recollection, Senator—and I will come back to you if I am wrong—that you yourself FOIed some working figures from Treasury. I am sure you would be more across that than anybody in the chamber because you FOIed it, if I am correct—if I am not, I apologise.

I would refer you to comments by the former head of Treasury, Ken Henry, regarding 10-year forecasts. He indicated that there was doubt as to whether they were worth producing given that they were simply too unreliable. Dr Henry, of course, advised your government and Mr Costello.

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Were the minister and the Treasurer really unaware that Treasury released its 10-year costings of the RSPT and MRRT revenue estimates under FOI on 14 February 2011 when they made those claims and that those costings show a $60 billion drop in revenue over 10 years? Shouldn't a competent Treasurer and finance minister be aware of those costings, or was the denial that they exist another attempt to mislead the public?

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

I am having a bit of a deja vu moment here. Didn't I just say in answer to the first question that I had a recollection that under FOI—because we are a more transparent government than they ever were—the senator had in fact obtained some Treasury costings? I also made the point that Dr Henry said he did not think 10-year forecasts were sensible for publication because they are too unreliable. I also made the point that, unlike those opposite, we have factored in things like—

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, on a point of order: the minister is being asked about her awareness of the existence of a document. In her answer to the primary question she talked about working figures. Now, in her response to the first supplementary question, she has not responded to the charge that Senator Cormann has made in his question. Either she was aware of it or she was not. If she was aware of it, she misled the public. If she was not aware of it, she was incompetent. Which is it?

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, to assist the minister I seek leave to table the Treasury revenue estimates of the MRRT and RSPT over 10 years—

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

Senator Cormann, we are on a point of order. The minister has been answering the question for 31 seconds. I draw the minister's attention to the question. There are 29 seconds remaining. Senator Cormann.

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, a second attempt: in order to assist the minister I seek leave to table the Treasury RSPT and MRRT revenue estimates over a period of 10 years released on 14 February 2011.

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

Senator Cormann, it is not a point of order.

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am not raising a point of order; I am seeking leave.

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

Leave is not granted.

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

Mr President, on a point of order: question time is a time for people to ask questions of ministers. Senator Brandis says that they are laying charges, and Senator Cormann wants to pull a stunt. I suggest to you that you only give them the call if they are prepared to ask a question in accordance with standing orders.

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

There is no point of order. I am going to go to the minister. The minister has 29 seconds remaining.

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

It is the case that the government does not generally publish 10-year projections for individual measures, just as Mr Costello never did for the GST. But I will take the attempted point of order from Senator Cormann because I think what he wants to table in the chamber is what Treasury has put on their website. It is hardly secret information, because it was publicly released. But what we rely on is what we published in our budget. (Time expired)

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Why do the Treasurer and the Minister for Finance and Deregulation continue to mislead the Australian people about everything, whether it is about the minister's mismanagement of important Future Fund appointments, the government's dodgy mining tax revenue estimates, the impact of the world's largest carbon tax on the cost of living or her disastrous record as finance minister, having presided over a $25 billion blow-out in the government's deficit during her first year in the job?

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

The minister need only answer that part of the question which refers to her portfolio.

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

The significant difference between those of us on this side and those on that side is: we cost our policies, we fund our policies and we publish a budget bottom line. Senator Cormann beats his chest in here in an attempt to look better than Senator Sinodinos. One wonders: are you even on the ERC? The Expenditure Review Committee has had Senator Sinodinos added to it because your colleagues do not trust you, Senator.

Honourable Senators:

Honourable senators interjecting—

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

Order! I need order on both sides! The minister has 29 seconds to complete her answer. Minister, I said you need to address those parts of the question that apply to your portfolio. The other matters you can ignore.

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

The difference between us and them is: we use Treasury and Finance for costing; they use catering companies and accountants who are fined for breaching professional rules. The difference between us and them is: they have a—

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

Order! Senator Wong, I draw you back to the question.

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

Mr President, with respect, the question was fairly broad, and I would make this point: with $70 billion worth of savings that they have to find, four years of Medicare is what you would have to cut—and you are hiding it from the Australian people.

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

My question is to the Minister representing the Treasurer, Senator Wong. Can the minister outline to the Senate the importance of spreading the benefits of the mining boom to all corners of the economy? How is the government acting to ensure the mining boom benefits all Australians?

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

The government are acting to ensure that the Australian people get a fair share of our resources and we are acting to ensure we spread the benefits of the boom across Australia to all corners of this nation. Last night, we saw the Senate, in what was a historic vote, vote to support the minerals resource rent tax—a great Labor reform and a reform where we really saw what the values were of those opposite. Labor senators and the Greens on this side voted to ensure that Australians got a fair share of the benefits of our resources. Those opposite voted to increase the profits of wealthy miners. We on this side voted to ensure we could give tax breaks to small business. Those over there said no and voted against it. We on this side voted to ensure we could give a company tax cut with a head start for small business. Those over there voted no. We on this side voted to ensure we can fund more superannuation for working Aust­ralians and also better benefits for low-income Australians, particularly women. Those opposite, again, voted no.

All they can say, in the face of these sorts of reforms, is, 'No, no, no, no.' The only thing they say yes to is higher profits for already profitable miners. I look forward to the senators on that side going back to their electorates, going back to their constituencies, and telling every small business owner in their state: 'I am voting against a tax cut for you. I'm voting against a tax break for small business. I know I'm from the party of Howard and Menzies, but I am going to vote against a tax cut for small business.' That is the new Liberal Party—the Liberal Party turning its back on small— (Time expired)

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

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question to Minister Wong. Can the minister advise: what is the role of tax cuts for small and large businesses in spreading the benefits of the mining boom to all corners of the economy?

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

The minerals resource rent tax ensures that Australia's largest and most profitable mining companies will pay their fair share of tax. Consider what it is—

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They always have!

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

I will take that interjection, Senator Abetz. 'They always have,' he says, because all he is interested in doing is standing up for the interests of a fortunate few—standing up for higher profits for already profitable miners. What he is not interested in standing up for is things such as the $6,500 instant asset write-off for small businesses, something that all small businesses could be entitled to whether they are incorporated or not. This is a tax break for small business that those opposite are opposing.

As you know, Mr President, we on this side are also committed to cutting the company tax rate and we have released a draft of the legislation to reduce the company tax rate to 29 per cent, which includes a head start for small business with a tax cut— (Time expired)

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

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Can the minister advise if the government remains committed to using cuts to the company tax rate to spread the benefits of the mining boom to all corners of the economy? Is the minister aware of any alternative approaches?

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

This government is committed to delivering tax cuts for small business and for the broader economy. We have been consistent about that. We have released legislation which reflects that commitment to help Australian businesses right across the economy—to help Australian businesses not in the mining boom fast lane that are struggling with challenges such as the higher dollar. A company tax rate cut is good policy. But I just say this: the contrast could not be clearer. Those opposite have moved on a number of occasions when it comes to company tax cuts. First, Mr Abbott said last year, when he told the West Australian that they would support company tax cuts, 'We support company tax cuts.' Subsequently, Mr Abbott has not only announced that coalition MPs will be whipped to vote against tax cuts but also refused to recommit to the 1.5 per cent business tax that he promised at the last election, so he has changed position yet again. (Time expired)