Chris Ketter (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Cormann. I refer to the letter from big business to senators advocating for the Turnbull government's $65 billion tax cut for big business. Can the minister confirm that less than eight per cent of the BCA's member CEOs are prepared to increase investment in Australia if the Turnbull government is able to pass its $65 billion tax cut for big business?

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

Firstly, I thought that was a very important intervention by some of the most senior business leaders and some of the biggest employers around Australia. The Labor Party doesn't seem to care about jobs. We on this side of the parliament care about jobs. We understand that some of our biggest employers in Australia started as small businesses. Take Qantas, for example. Qantas started with three employees in Longreach, in regional Queensland, and today employs 30,000 people and is engaged in a fiercely competitive industry globally. It is an iconic Australian brand. With your decision to oppose business tax cuts, you are deliberately putting this business at an additional competitive disadvantage.

Murray Watt (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They don't pay tax.

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

The ignorant Senator Watt says that they pay no tax. They made $3 billion worth of losses, and you don't pay tax when you make a loss. What Labor doesn't understand is that investment decisions today are based on your expectations of future opportunity to make a profit.

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise on a point of order going to relevance. The question went directly to the proposition that eight per cent of the BCA's CEOs are prepared to increase investment. The minister was asked a direct question on that and has come nowhere near that. I'd ask you to ask him to return to the question.

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

The minister, in my view, is being relevant to the terms of the question asked, which included reference to another document.

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

Alan Jones is one of the signatories to the letter. Alan Jones and his management team have been able to turn the situation around at Qantas, and they are now profitable again—and, of course, they will pay tax once the accumulated losses of the past have been paid down. But, if we put them at a competitive disadvantage, it will directly impact on the job security of 30,000 Qantas employees and directly impact on the opportunities for the 3,000 small- and medium-size businesses that supply goods and services to Qantas. It would also directly impact on the job security of the many Australians who work for the 3,000 businesses that supply those goods and service to Qantas. Qantas are one of our champion businesses, and you want to make it harder for them to be successful. You want to put the job security of employees in businesses such as Qantas at risk. That is the implication of your decision to stand in the way of big tax cuts.

Doug Cameron (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, on a point of order: can I ask you to have a look at the ruling that you just made that, if the opposition mentions a letter and a specific part of the letter, the specific question is then not relevant because it was in a letter. Surely that is not an appropriate position.

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

I am happy to review the Hansard and come back to you, Senator Cameron. But a reference to an external document is incorporated in part of the question, so the minister may address that part of the question as well. Senator Ketter, on a supplementary question.

Chris Ketter (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Can the minister confirm that, of the 10 CEOs who signed the letter, five lead companies did not pay company tax last year?

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

I'm really shocked at how ignorant the Labor Party is in 2018. Senator Ketter is from Queensland. So let me go back to my Queensland example of Qantas. Qantas started with three employees in Longreach, and today they employ 30,000 people.

Murray Watt (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They pay no tax.

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

'They pay no tax,' says the other big champion for Queensland. That's because they made $3 billion worth of losses.

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

Senator Collins, on a point of order.

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

Again it's on relevance. This question could not be more clear and direct, and the minister is going nowhere near it. The question asked the minister to confirm that, of the 10 CEOs who signed the letter, five lead companies did not pay company tax last year. Can he confirm that or not?

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

Senator Collins, on the point of order: I was listening very carefully to the minister and, at least in my listening, he seemed to be addressing that very point with respect to one particular organisation. I'm listening carefully.

Senator Jacinta Collins interjecting—

Senator Collins, you know that I cannot instruct a minister how to answer a question.

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

The reason that company tax cuts are important for the future success of even businesses that are making a loss today or which did so yesterday is that businesses will make investment decisions on their expectations of future profitability. They will assess their future opportunity to make a profit. They will consider the future opportunity of after-tax profits, and they will make investment decisions today on that basis. They will make decisions today on whether or not they will expand their business, which could go to whether they will hire more Australians. As they make decisions to hire more Australians, they put more competitive pressure on wages—and that is how wages go up. These are basic fundamentals. (Time expired)

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

Senator Ketter, a final supplementary question.

Chris Ketter (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'll try again. What guarantee have these 10 CEOs provided that, if the Turnbull government succeeds in giving big business a $65 billion tax cut, their workers will get a pay rise? In what form has this guarantee been provided?

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

I can give you two guarantees. One, if there is additional investment, which is, of course, the result of lower company taxes—not if but when—

Doug Cameron (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If! If! If!

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

There will be if you pass the tax cuts in full. Additional investment is contingent on the Senate passing our business tax cuts in full. If the Senate passes the business tax cuts in full, there will be more investment into Australia, which will generate more jobs and drive stronger wages growth. I can absolutely guarantee that. Do you know what else I can guarantee? If we continue to put businesses at a competitive disadvantage, particularly bigger businesses, there will be less investment, fewer jobs and lower wages. When there are fewer jobs, the unemployment queues will increase and there will be less competition for workers; and when there's less competition for workers, business only has to pay less to secure their services. We want business to have to pay more to secure their services.