Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Social Services, Senator Fierravanti-Wells. Yesterday the minister was forced to correct her misleading statements made in the Senate on Tuesday and Wednesday about the impact of Labor's sensible reforms to dividend imputation cash refunds. Given it is the government's entire argument that is misleading and not just her confusion between earnings and taxable income, when will the minister withdraw her misleading statement in its entirety?

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Minister for International Development and the Pacific) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I certainly take issue with Senator Sterle's use of 'sensible' in relation to your policy. Can I just say, as you should be aware, Senator Sterle, I represent the Minister for Social Services, so I will deal with your question insofar as it relates to my portfolio responsibilities. Labor's policy will take money from the pocket of—

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Wong on a point of order?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is a well-established precedent, Mr President, that ministers can be questioned about statements they've made.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Wong, as you know, the minister can choose to answer the question in any manner she sees fit, as long as it is directly relevant. The question is in order.

Senator Jacinta Collins interjecting—

Senator Collins, can you let me conclude before I get some advice? A minister is allowed to say they will answer part of the question. The question was in order, as I have outlined. I cannot instruct the minister how to answer the question.

Jacinta Collins (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Point of order, Mr President. The free advice you were referring to was making the point that she has been asked to withdraw her misleading statement in its full. Leaving a statement that is misleading in the Senate is a different issue to what you are referring to.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Collins, you were interjecting on me while I was providing a ruling from the chair. That was what my comment about free advice was about. The question is entirely within order, as ministers can be questioned about their statements. The minister is also able to answer parts of the question, and I am not allowed to instruct the minister as to how they answer the question. That is a matter for debate.

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Minister for International Development and the Pacific) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I refer to the statement that I made yesterday in this place, and I suggest that Senator Sterle go and have another read of it. As I indicated yesterday, on this issue, insofar as it relates to pensioners—and I will deal with that in a moment—Senator Sterle, you need to understand that these questions in relation to this issue should be directed to the—

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Sterle, on a point of order?

Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question was completely about the senator's statement. I asked her whether she's going to withdraw her statement in its entirety.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Sterle, your question had a substantive preamble to it and commentary around it. The minister is being directly relevant. I cannot instruct the minister how to answer or what parts of the question to answer when it was of such length.

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Minister for International Development and the Pacific) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I gave a statement to the Senate yesterday. That statement deals with the issue. Go and have a look at my statement, Senator Sterle.

Now I will deal with that part of your question that is pertinent to my portfolio, and that is that Labor's policy will take money from the pockets of 230,000 pensioners and part-pensioners. It is clear from the way Labor has designed this policy that it is to take money out of the pockets of pensioners. We know this. When the policy was introduced by the Howard government, with the support of those opposite, it was deliberately designed to put money into people's pockets. Pensioners with shares who will be negatively affected by this policy include age pensioners, war widows and war widowers, veterans, disability support pensioners and carers.

Can I break that down for Senator Sterle a little bit more. In Western Australia, there are 21,011 pensioners who are affected by this. So you go and explain to them the money that you're taking out of their pockets, Senator Sterle—21,000 of them! (Time expired)

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Sterle, do you have a supplementary question?

Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, I do. While making the misleading statement on Tuesday, the minister claimed in relation to Labor's proposed reform of dividend imputation cash refunds, 'It's a bit like The Castle.' Is the minister's understanding of Labor's proposal based on legal advice from Dennis Denuto? Is it Mabo? Is it the Constitution? Or is it 'the vibe'?

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Tell him he's dreaming!

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Minister for International Development and the Pacific) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That's right—'Tell him he's dreaming'! Thank you, Senator Cormann. As I've indicated to Senator Sterle, there are 21,011 pensioners with shares in Western Australia who will be negatively affected by Labor's policy. I now share with the Senate the figure in my home state of New South Wales—84,569. In Victoria, it's 60,956. In South Australia, it's 18,294. In Queensland, it's 42,721. And, in Tasmania, it's 6,091. So you are robbing pensioners. You are taking thousands of dollars out of the pockets of pensioners at the same time as you are exempting groups associated with your union mates. That shows your priority, Senator Sterle.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Sterle, do you have a final supplementary question?

Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I do. Rather than trying to use misleading information put forward by the Prime Minister and Treasurer Morrison, why doesn't the minister reject their misleading scare campaign and, to quote the Leader of the Government in the Senate, Minister Cormann, tell them they're dreaming?

Government senators interjecting —

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order on my right! Senator Cormann, is this a point of order?

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's a very important point of order. I think that Senator Sterle needs to work on his accent.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In the spirit of Thursday afternoon, I won't rule on that. Senator Fierravanti-Wells.

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Minister for International Development and the Pacific) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In the spirit of Thursday afternoon, Senator Sterle, in relation to this issue, Senator Cormann's sitting right here. He represents the minister for financial services and the Treasurer, and so there you are—

Opposition Senators:

Opposition senators interjecting—

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Minister for International Development and the Pacific) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Scared of asking? Why don't you ask him the question? Are you scared of asking Senator Cormann a question? Are you scared of asking Senator Cormann? My, my, my, Senator Cormann's ferocious reputation is scaring Senator Sterle from asking a question.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Fierravanti-Wells, please resume your seat. Senator Collins.

Jacinta Collins (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Point of order: once again, we are simply asking the minister to be relevant to the question. The question relates to her previous statements where she prosecuted this argument in relation to pension cuts.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Collins, I think it would be unreasonable of me to try and apply an incredibly strict definition of 'direct relevance' to that question, as asked; in fact, it would be very difficult to do so. Senator Reynolds.

Linda Reynolds (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise on a point of order. It relates to debate yesterday, and we've heard that behaviour from those opposite again today. Several comments from those opposite taken in isolation are one thing, but we've heard again an exchange about 'cats' and 'she'—the discussion about the 'cat's mother' and 'she'. Yesterday the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate referred repeatedly, in a very derogatory way, not to 'the minister' but to 'she'. The Hansard will show that you've also made comments about the minister being a joke. Again, this is a pattern of behaviour and language that I find highly insulting and inappropriate. It is very reminiscent of the shameful behaviour from those opposite towards Senator Fiona Nash, in terms of the language and the inappropriateness.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Reynolds, I've heard your point of order; please resume your seat. I'm happy to rule, but would you like to say something, Senator Wong?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm happy to withdraw 'she' if that assists. I would also make the point that the 'cat's mother' reference was made by the minister herself.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Collins.

Jacinta Collins (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I too am happy to withdraw—

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would like to rule on Senator Reynolds' point of order first. Do you want to withdraw? My apologies, Senator Collins.

Jacinta Collins (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would like to withdraw reference to the word 'she', if, indeed, the minister finds that offensive. But—well, I won't say anything further.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A number of the issues Senator Reynolds made towards the end of her contribution are actually matters for debate, not matters for the standing orders. I will however remind senators of the rules around parliamentary language, particularly around language that other senators find offensive, and also imputations.

Senator Wong interjecting—

Senator Wong, can I be heard in silence at least? I don't think there's a point of order. We have had a couple of withdrawals. I do ask all senators to keep the standing orders and courtesies towards their colleagues in mind. Senator Fierravanti-Wells, to conclude her answer.

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Minister for International Development and the Pacific) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You can go on and on as much as you like, but, in the end, the fact is that you are taking money out of pensioners' pockets—pensioners all over this country. Two hundred and thirty thousand pensioners and part pensioners are going to lose out under your policies. You're going to have to go out and explain yourself to all those people and explain why you are taking money out of their pockets.

Richard Colbeck (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Trade, Tourism and Investment, Senator Payne. Can the minister outline the importance of an internationally competitive corporate tax rate for attracting investment and supporting Australian workers?

Marise Payne (NSW, Liberal Party, Minister for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Colbeck for his question. Indeed I can, because we in the coalition understand that investment in this country supports economic growth and supports the creation of more and better-paying jobs for Australians. The Minister for Trade, Tourism and Investment, my colleague Minister Ciobo, has been in Hong Kong this week at the 2018 Credit Suisse Asian Investment Conference. He's been speaking with global investors and regional business leaders about investment opportunities in Australia.

The Turnbull government appreciates that, when investors are making decisions about where to invest, there are a number of factors to consider, and corporate tax rates are a significant one. We know the global economy is very competitive. It's clear that the US, for example, are a more attractive investment proposition today than they were before their own business tax cuts. For example, Mr Anthony Pratt, a great Australian with businesses here and in the United States, has said:

(The Trump tax cuts) lead to a tremendous amount of investment, an avalanche of investment, it certainly has for us, encouraged us to increase the rate of investment and it is also going to lead to tremendous job growth—and wherever there is tremendous job growth that means demand for people exceeds supply and wages go up …

There are real, tangible benefits that flow from company tax cuts.

Investment in Australia not only drives economic growth but drives job creation. We know that reducing company tax rates will make Australia a more investable proposition. It's disappointing that those opposite refuse to back Australian workers and back Australian jobs by supporting the government's proposed company tax cuts. Given their previous positions, it is a very perplexing situation.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Colbeck, a supplementary question.

Richard Colbeck (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister, how are the Turnbull government's policies helping to create certainty and drive investment in Australia, which in turn supports the creation of more local jobs?

Marise Payne (NSW, Liberal Party, Minister for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We are absolutely focused on delivering policies which support economic growth and create jobs for Australians. We've already delivered tax relief for small and family businesses around Australia, giving those businesses the freedom to grow and to invest in their own success.

Our free trade agreements with major economic partners are making it easier for companies to invest in Australia. They recognise the importance of investment in creating jobs and raising our standard of living. The government's enterprise tax plan will deliver policy certainty for companies that are looking to invest, and it will consequently increase our attractiveness as a destination for investment.

We on this side of the chamber have always been in favour of lower company taxes, because we know the benefits will flow to workers and we know the impacts that it will have on our economy.

Senator Cameron interjecting—

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order, Senator Cameron.

Senator Cameron interjecting—

Senator Cameron! We only have one question to go.

Senator Cameron interjecting—

Senator Cameron, the third time in a row! Senator Colbeck.

Richard Colbeck (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the minister aware of any risks to Australia's reputation as an attractive and competitive destination for investment?

Marise Payne (NSW, Liberal Party, Minister for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It happens that I am aware of risks, unfortunately, and they come in the form of those sitting opposite: the Australian Labor Party. They're standing in the way of company tax cuts, which means that they're standing in the way of more jobs and more investment in Australia.

But it's not just their opposition to the government's tax plan that poses a risk to our global reputation as an investment destination; it's their absolute policy inconsistency. I don't often quote Mr Shorten, but let me have a go at this one from the Leader of the Opposition, who said:

Reducing the corporate tax rate … sees more capital flowing into our domestic economy, which will then flow on to workers in the form of higher wages - thereby improving standards of living.

We all know that investors look for certainty, and the only thing that is certain about the Australian Labor Party is that they do not have a plan for jobs in this country.

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper.