Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Brandis. Australians are getting sick of hearing about tax dodgers setting up elaborate schemes to avoid paying their fair share of tax in Australia and elsewhere. British Prime Minister David Cameron is hosting a first-of-its-kind anticorruption summit in London on 12 May. This is a first opportunity for world leaders to meet to discuss the scams exposed in the 'Panama papers' and to discuss the scourge of multinational tax evasion in general. Will Prime Minister Turnbull be attending this summit and will he 'shirt front' David Cameron over failing to crack down on some of the worst tax havens on the planet—the UK overseas territories of the Cayman Islands, Bermuda and the British Virgin Islands—and, if not, why not?

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

Senator Whish-Wilson, it is a very important issue you have raised. It is a very important issue that is not underestimated, I dare say, by anyone in this chamber. The government expects all taxpayers to pay their fair share of tax, and that applies to multinational companies as well as it applies to domestic companies as well as it applies to any taxpayers. The Prime Minister, in fact, addressed the LNG18 conference in Western Australia last week and he told them that we have to ensure that our taxation system encourages investment, entrepreneurship and job creation but, at the same time, continues to ensure that every business, large or small, pays their fair share of tax in accordance with the law.

Senator Whish-Wilson, you should be aware that Australia has some of the strongest tax integrity rules in the world and we are committed to addressing multinational tax avoidance. We have made progress on many of the recommendations of the OECD G20's final report on the base erosion and profit shifting action plan.

Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise on a point of order. I thought I would raise this halfway through the question. Specifically, will the Prime Minister be going to the UK to Prime Minister Cameron's summit, and will he raise the issue of their poor performance around tax havens?

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Brandis has been answering the question. I think the preamble to his answer has married in with the preamble to your question. He has just under a minute to go.

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

Senator Whish-Wilson, I did think your question went to broader issues than merely whether the Prime Minister would be attending a particular international meeting. As I was saying, Australia has made progress on many of the recommendations of the OECD G20's final report on the base erosion and profit shifting action plan. We have passed legislation which, I am pleased to say, you and your colleagues from the Greens party supported, but which, to their undying shame, the Labor Party opposed, to crack down on multinationals artificially avoiding a tax liability in Australia. We have doubled penalties for multinationals avoiding tax—

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Pause the clock. Senator Whish-Wilson, on a point of order?

Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, with 10 seconds to go I raise a point of order on relevance. It is a yes or no question. Will the Prime Minister be going to the UK to attend this first-of-its-kind summit on tax evasion?

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I remind the Attorney-General of the element of that part of the question.

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

I was going to finish on that, Senator Whish-Wilson. I am not aware of the Prime Minister's future travel plans. They are usually not announced that far in advance. But I will take that matter on notice.

Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. In the wake of the Panama papers, when will Australia include designated non-financial businesses and professionals, such as lawyers, accountants and corporate services, in our anti-money-laundering and counter-terrorism laws, as recommended by the Financial Action Task Force in April 2015, or does the government want to go against international pressure and make it easy for businesses to establish and hide their shady shell companies?

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

In the first place, anti-money-laundering laws and counter-terrorism financing laws apply to individuals as well as to corporations. An individual who engages in terrorism financing and defined money-laundering activities is already subject to various criminal sanctions under the existing Australian law.

Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What about lawyers and accountants?

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

You are a banker, Senator Whish-Wilson, so I will share this with you: lawyers and accountants are people, too, just as bankers are people, too. They are all subject to the same laws, including criminal laws dealing with counter-terrorism financing and money laundering.

Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. The Four Cornersepisode on the Panama papers exposed that Wilson Security has a holding company located in the British Virgin Islands in the same building as the shady lawyers Mossack Fonseca. Four Corners also exposed that the director of this shell company was Thomas Kwok, who was recently jailed for bribery for five years. How can the government justify issuing contracts worth hundreds of millions of dollars to a company so dodgy that they go to such lengths to avoid paying their fair share of tax? Shouldn't it be a government policy that there are no government contracts for tax dodgers?

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

As I said in answer to your primary question, neither the government nor, I daresay, any political party or shade of opinion represented in this chamber, condones international tax avoidance or tax avoidance of any form. The sincerity and the commitment of the government to deal with the problem is to be measured by the steps that we have already taken. I mentioned to you before the final report of the OECD on the base erosion and profit shifting action plan. The government, on the basis of that report and other considerations, has taken strong action against multinational profit shifting by passing laws that introduce a multinational anti-avoidance law, which delivered on a 2015 budget commitment, to ensure that where companies make sales in Australia but book the revenue offshore they will be subject to Australian tax—

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Pause the clock. A point of order, Senator Whish-Wilson?

Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise on a point of order. I asked the Attorney General whether he felt that Australian governments should be giving significant multimillion dollar contracts to companies that have been shown to be avoiding tax

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I remind the Attorney General of the question.

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

My answer to you, Senator wish Wilson, is that no Australian government, and neither you nor I nor anyone, here condones the avoidance of tax by multinational corporations or anyone else— (Time expired)