Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek leave to move a motion relating to the Albanese Labor government's betrayal of Australian taxpayers, as circulated.

Leave not granted.

Pursuant to the contingent notice standing in my name, I move:

That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent me moving a motion to provide for the consideration of a matter—namely, a motion to allow a motion relating to the Albanese Labor government's betrayal of Australian taxpayers—to be moved and determined immediately.

I ask this Senate to give time to debate a matter that has been on the tips of Australian tongues for the last few weeks and, indeed, in doubts that have been in the back of Australians' minds for the last few months and couple of years. That, of course, is the Albanese Labor government's betrayal of taxpayers. They are killing off reform of our income tax system. They have trashed the aspirations for millions of workers to get ahead without facing bracket creep. They have demonstrated that, when it comes to what they say on tax, they simply cannot be trusted.

Australians are all well aware of the old saying, 'lies, damned lies and statistics', but now, for many of them, it's 'lies, damned lies, and the Albanese Labor government'. Time and time again, Mr Albanese, Mr Chalmers, Senator Gallagher—those opposite—reassured us that stage 3 tax cuts would be delivered as legislated. Do you know why they were asked time and time again whether they stood by the stage 3 tax cuts? It was because people never believed them. People had doubts about whether the commitment was genuine.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Henderson, I ask you to withdraw that comment.

Sarah Henderson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I withdraw.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you. I ask the chamber to listen in respectful silence.

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

People didn't believe or trust the weasel words that were coming from those opposite. But, of course, they said them again and again: 'We stand by, we will honour, what was legislated. We have no plans to change.' Prime Minister Albanese was still saying those words just a few weeks ago, even when he knew that the government was limbering up to break its election promise—to break yet another election promise when it came to the taxes Australians pay. They'd already broken their promise when it came to changing taxes on superannuation and they had broken their promise again when it came to imposing taxes on transport. They've broken promises again and again, but this one they solemnly kept standing by. Ultimately, they chose to break it, and you can't help but think they always intended to break it; that Mr Albanese and all of his ministers said one thing before the last election while thinking, 'When we get the excuse, when we can create the opportunity, we're just going to trash this promise anyway.' That's because they never liked the reform.

What their approach demonstrates is the treachery, trickery and timidity of the Labor Party. It's the treachery of saying one thing pre-election and then doing the opposite thing afterwards. It's the treachery of saying it on more than a hundred occasions—that's for the Prime Minister and Treasurer alone—and then doing the opposite. It's the treachery of continuously reassuring the parliamentary chambers, the media and, through them, the Australian public that they would stand by this and then trashing it. The trickery in what Labor's doing is the real sleight of hand of these changes, which sees Labor pursuing tax changes that will give them $28 billion more in revenue over the years ahead.

So whilst they dress it up and want to focus on the small amount that Australians will receive relative to the huge amount by which they will be worse off—$8,000, the average Australian will be worse off by, under your government—they are giving a bandaid to the gaping wound in terms of household budgets in Australia. Then there is the timidity of a government that has completely abandoned income tax reform in this country—

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Hughes! I've called you to order. As I was calling you to order, you continued to interject. I've called you to order twice already. Senator Birmingham, please continue.

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They are keeping the 37c-in-the-dollar tax bracket, rather than having it abolished, thereby ensuring that bracket creep remains an ongoing problem which would have been abolished. The real reform of these tax changes was to abolish that tax bracket and ensure that for the vast majority of working Australians bracket creep was a thing of the past. But thanks to the lies of the Albanese Labor government, thanks to their trickery—

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Birmingham, please withdraw.

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I withdraw.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you.

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thanks to the treachery of the Albanese Labor government, to the betrayal they have shown, they are keeping that bracket creep in place. They are out to grab more dollars for the long term that no doubt they will spend in typical Labor big-spending ways, and Australians will ultimately pay the price of this in terms of extra taxes in the future, a weaker economy, poorer productivity and the abandonment of reform for Australians. (Time expired)

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Do you know what this is all about, President? This is all about a distraction from the fact that they're about to roll over and vote for these tax cuts, because they know it's the right thing to do, and they're hoping no-one will notice that even the coalition knows that this is the right thing to do for the country. That is what this stunt is all about. It's not about cost of living. It's not about the tradies and the nurses and the schoolteachers, who will be better off under this tax package. It's about the opposition hoping that they can continue a political attack while Mr Dutton is standing up, as we speak, to say, 'Actually, we're going to fold on it.' I mean, what a joke they are! If they really thought this was—let me read this—'a betrayal' that 'killed reform' and 'trashed aspiration', if they really thought this was treachery, they would have the courage of their convictions and vote against it.

But you're not going to, are you? This is the little fiddly bit of outrage beforehand, because you know that this is the best thing for working Australians that is on the table. That is what is happening. You know that every taxpayer will get a tax cut under this package, and you know that 84 per cent—

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Hughes, withdraw.

Hollie Hughes (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Climate Change and Energy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm not sure what I'm withdrawing—

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Hughes—

Hollie Hughes (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Climate Change and Energy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I withdraw.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I remind senators that when I ask you to withdraw I don't want the offensive word repeated. And Senator Hughes, I remind you that I've called you to order three or four times, and you continue to shout across the chamber. You are being disrespectful to my orders and disrespectful to the chamber. Minister Wong, please continue.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If there was one point at which Senator Birmingham reminded us just how out of touch the Dutton opposition actually is it was when he talked about the 'small amount'. Well, he and his colleagues might have forgotten what it is like to be on an average wage. Maybe he and his colleagues haven't spoken to the people they profess to represent about the cost of living. They might not be aware of how important this tax change is for the many Australians who are struggling with the cost of living. What has been demonstrated here, again, is that the Dutton opposition only ever want to score political points and create division. Even when they are forced by the inexorable logic of economics to support our tax package, on the way through they have to engage in these sorts of political tactics because they have to have a hit.

I am reminded of the fact that Ms Sussan Ley has said, 'We'll roll the changes back.' It's gone very quiet over there, hasn't it? She said, 'We'll roll them back.' That's what she said. It's very quiet, isn't it? Is that the position still? Are you going to roll them back? Are you going to go to the next election with a roll-back policy? If you really thought all of the things that are in this pathetic motion, you would have the courage of your convictions to not only oppose the legislation when it comes to the chamber but go to the next election with your roll-back policy. But you know you won't.

Do you know why you won't? Because actually you know it's the right thing to do. That's the problem with your political position. You want to have a go at us for doing this, but you're going to vote for it. It's a fundamental problem with your political position, and you know it. You think making a lot of noise in this chamber and using a lot of words in this chamber are going to distract Australia's attention from the fact that you're backing in Anthony Albanese's tax cuts for working Australians. Fundamentally, you are having to back them in because you know they are the right thing to do.

You know that 100 per cent of Australian taxpayers will get a tax cut. You know that 84 per cent will get more of a tax cut. You know this will benefit people on average wages. This will benefit working families. This will benefit middle Australia. This will benefit teachers and nurses and emergency workers and police officers and tradespeople and so many more. You know that, we know that and the Australian people know that. And they know that this motion is just a political stunt to try and hide the fact that you do not have the courage of your convictions and that you, in your heart of hearts, know that the Prime Minister is right, the Treasurer is right and the finance minister is right, and that this is the right thing to do for the country and for the Australian people.

Nick McKim (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Australian Greens will not be supporting the motion that is currently before the chair. It's important that all senators and folks listening to this debate understand how we have got to where we are today. The Liberals when in government put in place a massively regressive tax package. They legislated it. It was regressive for a range of reasons, including the fact that it massively flattened out the income tax regime in this country. It was legislated because the Australian Labor Party gutlessly voted for it at the time. Now the Australian Labor Party has come with a proposal that will make this massively regressive tax plan—legislated because the Coles and Woolworths of Australian politics supported it in the last parliament—slightly less regressive. Let's be clear about that. Labor's proposal doesn't make Australia's tax system more progressive than it currently is; it simply ensures that after 1 July it will be less regressive than it otherwise would have been. The fact that it would have been massively regressive is on the shoulders of both the LNP and the ALP in this place.

What Labor could have done is, for example, come into this place with a package that meant that no high-income earners received a tax break, and they could have used the savings that that policy would have generated to improve much-needed social services in this country. For example, they could have used the savings to help put dental care into Medicare. We've had a massive celebration from Labor about 40 years of Medicare, and rightly so. It's a great social reform in this country. But, if Labor were serious about celebrating Medicare, it would do things like put dental and mental health into Medicare, because, last time I looked, the mouth and the brain were actually parts of the human body.

What we have seen is Labor quite rightly saying, 'When economic conditions change, so should government policy.' Big tick on that! I couldn't agree more. So let's talk about negative gearing and the capital gains tax discount. What those obscene taxpayer subsidies to property investors mean is that people who are currently renting in Australia, who are getting smashed by high rents and who desperately want to buy their first home are going into the market and being outbid by property investors because those property investors have pocketed—and will pocket into the future—massive subsidies from the public purse in the form of negative gearing and the capital gains tax discount. It is a grossly unfair and inequitable system, and it is stopping hundreds of thousands of young Australians fulfilling their dream of owning their first home because the property investors, many of whom are racking up their fifth, 10th, 20th or 100th investment property, have got those public subsidies in their pockets, ready to use to outbid young people, who are getting smashed in the rental market and who desperately want to be able to afford their own home.

Economic conditions change; so should government policy. The Labor Party should reform the negative gearing and capital gains tax policy settings to give young Australians a fair crack at buying their first home and not have so many young Australians being outbid by wealthy property investors who are able to outbid them because of the massive, obscene taxpayer subsidies that they get through negative gearing and the capital gains tax discount.

We won't be supporting this motion today for all of those reasons. In addition, the Liberals have got it listed as a matter of public importance for later on in the day. They'll get plenty of chance to have their say. So will we. So will the government. So will other crossbenchers. But, for now, let's just get on with the job of the Senate.

Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Let's be very, very clear about what's happened over the break. It's very, very clear what's happened. The Labor Party voted for stage 1, 2 and 3 of a very carefully calibrated tax package a few years ago. They voted for it. They took it to the election. They promised over a hundred times not to trash it. The PM campaigned on trust: 'Trust me; I won't trash it.'

What has happened over the break? If they fervently believed this was a cost-of-living measure that needed to happen for Australians doing it tough, why wasn't it part of their October budget in 2022? Why wasn't it part of their May budget in 2023? Why wasn't it part of their MYEFO considerations at the end of last year? What's the only thing that's changed? Australians have been struggling with cost of living because of this government for 18 months. As Senator Birmingham made very, very clear, Australian households are 8,000 bucks worse off as a result. Some $24,000 a year in additional mortgage payments have to be found by the average mortgage holder in this country. Why? It's because this government can't get the fundamentals of economic management right. They can't get their spending under control. They can't lift productivity. So we have had inflation higher than it needs to be and prices going up more than people's wages. That is not Australian small businesses' fault. It is your government's fault because you cannot get your own spending under control and get inflation under control.

What is the only thing that's changed since two budgets and a MYEFO? They could have brought this forward. They could have done their triple-pike backflip. What would it be, Senator Birmingham? What would it be? Oh, I know! A Dunkley by-election. The Prime Minister has trashed his reputation to bribe voters in a by-election. That's the only reason. And why? It's because they did the internal polling. They went: 'Mate, we're going to have to do something pretty drastic here. They don't believe us. They don't trust us. They know we're not on their team. They know we've been focused on a voice referendum that no-one voted for. We spent 450 million bucks on that. How do we win their trust back? I know: we'll lie to them.'

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator McKenzie, withdraw.

Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I withdraw. 'We will completely trash and tear up our previous commitments, our previous voting records, because you know what? We disrespect Australians so much. They'll take the money and forget we backflipped and lied to them.'

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator McKenzie, withdraw.

Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I withdraw. They have actually chosen to bet on the fact that Australians don't vote on character, that Australians don't care about the character of their Prime Minister and their government. That's what they're backing. But I tell you what: Australians love to keep more of their hard-earned cash rather than give it to the government. Every day of the week, Australians, when you ask them that question in a poll, on the street or at an election, will say: 'Thank you. I work pretty hard for my money. I want to keep more of it so I can spend it on the things that my family and I need to spend it on.' So, yes, two-thirds of Australians might think that this is a good idea by the government. But I tell you what 100 per cent of Australians don't like: being lied to. They hate being lied to. And that's exactly what this government has done.

So here we are, the first day of parliament—another day, another broken promise by Anthony Albanese's government, counting on the fact that Australians will forget the betrayal. 'Fake it till you make it' was their proposition heading into the last election. And it turns out they did fake it, they made it and now they've exposed themselves as the absolute fakes that they are because they've betrayed themselves. If they really believed that this was the policy Australians needed, and they really believed that this was the policy that the economics needed to be achieved, then it should have been in MYEFO. It should have been in your budget, but you're too distracted by your own ideology. You say Australians are going to feel it. They're not. They are not buying what you're selling, and if we went to any kitchen table in the country they would know you don't have their backs. They know you've lied to them, and they're going to make you pay. (Time expired)

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator McKenzie!

Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I withdraw.

Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Well, it looks like we're starting the year as we left last year, with the opposition opposing, with no positive plans, with no policies, with no ideas other than to come in here and disrupt the Senate and complain as the government gets on with providing cost-of-living relief to Australian households—so, nothing new. If that's the best they've got, then we're in pretty solid territory. We are here, and we have spent the summer looking at ways that we can further assist Australian households who are doing it tough with cost-of-living pressures.

I note that the motion moved by Senator Birmingham today talks about everything other than the proposal we are putting forward in legislation. It talks about a whole range of things, but as we hear them crab-walking away from their initial hysterical response—and we won't forget it. We won't forget when the deputy opposition leader went out and, before she'd even seen the legislation, before it had even been released, said that she opposed it and that the opposition would be against it. Then they did see it, and they said that they would reverse it and that they would roll it back; we remember that. And we remember the crab-walking away as they went: 'Oh, actually, we'll have a look at it. It does look pretty good. It does mean that 100 per cent of taxpayers get a tax cut. It does mean that 84 per cent of Australians get a bigger tax cut. It does mean that 11½ million Australians will get a bigger tax cut. Hang on a minute; maybe we shouldn't have gone out and said we should reverse it and roll it back.' And they started crab-walking away. That's what we're seeing now, and we've seen it from the Leader of the Opposition this morning. We see the talking points: 'We won't stand in the way of this, but we're going to take up all this time in the Senate to come in here and complain about something that we are now going to support'—for real! If you were to stick to your convictions, as our leader just said, then you would vote against the proposal, but you want it both ways. You want to say, 'Oh, actually, it is a much better deal, and we will vote for it, but we're actually going to be against it.'

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Ruston, seek the call and stop interjecting.

Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Come on! Do you think the Australian people don't see what you're doing? We've at least fronted up and said, 'We have changed our position, and this is why.' We have done every interview, and we have spoken with everybody we can, and our government—all of us—are out there talking with Australians about what this means. And they get it. When the economic circumstances change, when inflation remains high and when we've had interest rate increases that started under your watch when inflation was highest in the quarter during your final term in government, they understand that. If there is something that the government can do to provide cost-of-living relief, they expect us to do it, which is what we have done with this proposal that you're now going to actually back in while you say, 'Everything about it is wrong.' We know that, unless you vote against it, all this bitching and moaning—

Honourable senators interjecting—

all of this complaining that's going on over there is just politics.

Honourable senators interjecting—

I will withdraw.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I remind senators to seek the call if you think something has been said that is disorderly. Stop interjecting.

Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I've withdrawn it.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Gallagher has withdrawn. Please continue.

Sarah Hanson-Young (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You're all whingeing and moaning about it.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Hanson-Young, that is not helpful.

Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Hanson-Young. All the whingeing and moaning that's happening over there is all just politics. You actually support the policy, but you want to run the politics. Well, we are putting people before politics. We took this decision. We knew there would be consequences in changing our position, but we went in because we knew it was the right thing to do—not the easy thing to do and not the convenient thing to do. We knew you would run around and try and run scare campaigns and cry in your teacups and carry on. We knew that. But it's the right thing to do, and the Australian people know it. They expect their government to do the right thing for the right reason. That's why we are doing this.

The Australian people expect their governments to do this. They don't expect us to take the easy option just because we might face a motion in the Senate because the opposition doesn't like it. That's not what being in government is about.

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Can I just make really clear the reason we are supporting the changes. It's not because we support the Prime Minister and the deceitful action that he has taken in the face of Australians but because we won't stand in the way of support for hardworking Australian families. That's because we are the party of lower taxes, and we will always support lower taxes. You are in here doing this right now because everything else you've tried to do has failed. In fact, despite what Senator Gallagher just said, the Prime Minister actually admitted on Sky that he'd run out of ideas. Nothing else was working, so this was the last resort.

Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That's not true.

Anne Ruston (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Maybe you should go and have a look at it. Maybe you should also be a little more careful about what you come in here and say. If you want a truth check about whether 84 per cent of Australians will be receiving a tax break, I think you'll find that that's actually not correct. As I said, we stand up for lower taxes, and we will never be a party that stands in the way of Australians keeping more of their hard-earned money in their pockets. That is why we negotiated with you, and you supported a very comprehensive three-stage tax process of which this was the last stage. Of course, because convenience, not consistency, comes past in the guise of a Dunkley by-election, you're prepared to trash a third of an integrated package just so that you can buy some votes in Dunkley.

The Australian public aren't that stupid. They will remember this—I was going to use the word 'lie', but I'm sure I'll have to retract it. They will remember that this government stared them down over a hundred times and told them that the tax breaks that hardworking, aspirational middle-class Australians were going to get will no longer be available to them. They will remember that, just like they remember Julia Gillard saying, 'There will be no carbon tax under the government I lead.' They will forget about a tiny bit of money in their pocket as a result of this move today, but they will remember that they have been deceived.

Make no mistake; the amount of money that the average Australian family is likely to receive because of the tax breaks that are going to be delivered to them when this goes through will not even touch the sides in comparison to the damage you've done to the family budget since you have been in government. As the shadow Treasurer said, this is a bandaid on a bullet wound, but, if you've got the bandaid, you might as well use it.

You guys have trashed aspirational Australians. We know that every Australian family is worse off by multiple times what you're proposing to give back to them, because of the actions of your government. Your own Prime Minister was prepared to stand on national television and say that they'd run out of ideas, and so this was the last thing left, and that is to trash a promise that they had agreed to, they'd voted on and they took to two elections. You think it's okay to be convenient in the eyes of a Dunkley by-election. The Australian public won't forget your deceit.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the motion as moved by Senator Birmingham be agreed to.