Mike Kelly (Eden-Monaro, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

It gives me great pleasure to rise in support of the shadow Treasurer's amendment to the Income Tax Rates Amendment (Working Holiday Maker Reform) Bill 2016 and related bills, in particular because my region is one of the epicentres of this problem. I have a large number of fruit growers on the South West Slopes, I have wine growers in the Yass Valley, and there are many other enterprises that are affected in the tourism sector in my region. Yes, I am a regional Labor member and, yes, I am stepping up to the plate right now, because there is no bill that this parliament has seen that better bells the cat on this government for its dissembling and denial or better gives the lie to its claim to be the best representative for the bush. As you know only too well, Mr Deputy Speaker Coulton, as the member for Parkes in New South Wales, people in the bush are abandoning the Liberal Party in droves because of what they are inflicting upon people in regional Australia.

This tax was created by the government. I heard the member for Cowper claim: 'This problem of backpackers and the guest worker situation was a developing one before the tax was introduced.' Yes, it was, so why did they multiply that problem by 32.5? It is like saying, 'We've got a bushfire here, so let's bring in the fire tenders,' only to see the fire tenders turn up loaded with kerosene instead of water. The growers are already in a situation where backpackers have deserted us in droves; they are having that problem now. The tax has made the problem much worse.

Of course, those opposite talk about the need to speed this through. Where was this bill last week? Why has it been introduced only now? Where was the urgency last week? It is amazing to me that those opposite can come in here bald-faced and say, 'Don't you make this a problem, Labor!' They created the problem! It is like saying: 'Look, we've taken four wheels off this car and we're prepared to put one back on. Now you guys have to come along and help us push-start it.' The bald-faced, brazen approach that this government is adopting in relation to this legislation is unbelievable.

I note that we wound the situation back to 19 per cent from 32.5 per cent and that the National Farmers Federation have come on board with this proposal. Of course, it would be really nice if the National Farmers Federation actually fought the good fight to make sure that all of these impacts do not apply to farmers, instead of being just a stepping stone for people who want to enter parliament for the National Party. I understand they have had a gun held to their heads about this issue, but it is not true to say that farmers are saying, 'Let's just get this done and move on.' In evidence of that, I would like to read out an email that I received from one of my farmers, a Batlow fruit grower on the South West Slopes. He said:

Mr Kelly

I am writing to you about the recent announcement on backpacker tax. I manage our family apple orchard in Batlow. We are a vertically integrated business. We grow the rootstock, apple trees, pick pack and have a wholesale business in Sydney Markets. We supply all major supermarkets and independent retailers and are currently opening up new export markets.

Our reliance on overseas workers is crucial for the survival of our business especially in Batlow. We have a constant problem wondering if we will have workers available to complete our daily tasks. Due to the location it is especially hard to find people available to meet our work requirements. Transport and accommodation add to the problem. Now to add to this equation an increase in tax from the first dollar earned and what I think is highway robbery, they the government are suggesting to take 95% of superannuation when they leave. Now I don't think I am wrong in calling this another tax grab …

We have gone from a tax rate after the threshold of 15% to now a tax from dollar one of approximately 27%. How is this going to help us attract workers?

That is the voice of a farmer who has written to me. So, let's not talk about what is in the best interests of the farmers. We know what is in the best interests of the farmers, and that is consulting with them when you take a measure; that is doing the modelling of the effect of a taxation measure. Clearly, the government just raced into this without understanding what that effect would be. On the one hand, of course, they need to offset the $50 billion tax giveaway to big businesses and big banks—who my farmers complain to me about on a daily basis—and on the other they need to try to claw back $540 million in this place, which hurts farmers. The real fallacy of this, of course, is that that $540 million is a complete myth. It is exactly like killing the goose that lays the golden egg. If there are no backpackers coming, you will not earn $540 million. It simply will not be there. It is an approach to doing taxation in this country that shows that the government completely lacks any understanding of creative taxation policy.

We hear those opposite talk about Labor's history of tax management—they always say we are high taxing, high spending. The truth is that the recent Labor government had a lower tax-to-GDP ratio and was a lower taxation and spend government than both the Howard government and the current government. When this government wants to give away billions of dollars to big banks and big overseas corporations at the expense of farmers, sure, we will fight that—we will fight it all the way. Our approach to budget repair is to create new growth, new economies, and to ensure that jobs are there for Australians and that our farmers are supported. This bill does not do that. The first measure did not do that—it hurt them terribly. We want to make sure this goes off to a quick review that does the modelling, that consults and that has the input from stakeholders so we can decide whether or not this whole 19 per cent tax measure should be revisited as well, whether we should go back to first principles on a measure like this so that we do not kill off this labour force and this industry.

The government also does not look at the welfare issue of backpackers. If you want a backpackers to come here it is not only an issue of attracting them because of what they can gain when they get here, the experience that they can have; it is a matter of their welfare while they are employed. If the word goes back to young people overseas, who are highly networked on modern social media, that you will be mistreated while you are here as well, then that is also a turn off. Those are issues we need to turn our attention to as well.

We know the numbers are declining; we know this government has slugged this industry. It has hurt our tourism industry and also wants to make it a double whammy by adding this tax to travellers as an offset. The government admits that Treasury modelling shows that backpacker numbers will continue to decline with tax at this 19 per cent rate. That is why we want this measure to be reviewed, why we want to have a closer look at it. While we want it reviewed, Labor will expedite the passage of the bill through the House but we will seek to protect our farmers through the Senate inquiry process. This should have been debated last week, and it should have been with the Senate right now.

This is part of an assault on rural and regional Australians particularly in New South Wales. I know there are many members—people I am happy to call friends—on the other side of this chamber who represent regional areas who understand what is going on in New South Wales at the moment. They will admit that there is a strong sentiment among people all around rural and regional New South Wales that they have been let down. It goes back to Gonski. Gonski was a program that was going to deliver rural and regional loadings, which are so important to schools in my region. I have noticed huge improvements from the early-stage implementation of Gonski, and that needs to be sustained. The removal of those loadings, Indigenous kids loadings and the like, is hurting our rural and regional schools.

I get bombarded by people in the bush who are complaining about the way the NBN process is being managed by the government. This was the great potential means we had in rural and regional Australia to unlock our human potential and to enhance and improve our business operations, including farming, with the modern use of technology that the NBN would provide. They are not happy with how it is being handled. There have been forced council mergers in New South Wales. You will know well, Mr Deputy Speaker Coulton, how that has gone through New South Wales like a brush fire. People have resented the way they have been treated—these bulldozer tactics of Mr Baird and his government. They have failed to consult effectively, and bureaucrats have been sitting in Sydney drawing big red crayon lines across a map without regard for the communities of interest or the geography. People in Tumbarumba, in my electorate, are absolutely red-hot angry at how they have been treated, as are the people of Bombala. The great mayor down there, Bob Stewart, has been a wonderful advocate for his community, and he first found out he had been sacked when he heard it on the radio. He did not even receive a phone call from the state government. He was in tears about how he had been treated. These people in these communities have not forgotten. They have signs all over their areas warning of what is coming from this state Liberal government.

In addition, we have seen the greyhounds decision. I know a lot of my National Party friends in New South Wales fought a good fight on that and finally got Mr Baird to see reason. This person, who claimed to be the great moral leader of New South Wales, trampled over an industry of rural and regional Australians. He trampled over it unjustly, without due consultation and consideration of how the issues—issues that are certainly there in the industry—could be managed with people in the industry still being employed, still keeping their livelihoods.

We have also seen in New South Wales Mr Baird talking about the privatisation of some of our rural hospitals. I do recognise that they have been put in a difficult position by the fact that the coalition government has cut funding in support of the state health system, but they are seeking to triage their issues in health in New South Wales rural and regional areas. The wonderful South East Regional Hospital in Bega, built through the use of Labor's Health and Hospitals Fund, is a magnificent facility but everyone is deeply concerned that the services that should be getting provided through that facility are not being provided because the state is not providing support for those services. This lack of services, with cuts to funding and privatisation of hospitals such as Goulburn, just north of here, is causing deep concern in our rural and regional communities.

What did electricity privatisation do? Exactly what we said it would do. We said electricity would cost more and that many jobs would be lost in rural and regional Australia. In my region hundreds of jobs have been lost through electricity privatisation. We also said it would lead to security issues, as we have seen with Ausgrid. People are also telling me that the government did not consult with Defence in that process until it was too late and they had to pull the pin on the project at the last minute. In addition to that we have seen services wound back in Centrelink and veteran support. They are asking veterans who live in rural areas to go online to get help, removing the face-to-face support they used to get. Services in Centrelink are grinding to a halt because of the continuing application of unsustainable efficiency dividends and cost cutting.

These all add up to a massive assault on rural and regional New South Wales and Australian rural and regional areas more generally. And I am inundated by communications on a daily basis as to the effects of these cutbacks—the human cost of these cutbacks and the human cost of what the coalition government in New South Wales, suffering from the impacts of federal decisions, is doing and what that means for our community.

We are not going to put up with it. They will pay a price. I remember very vividly the massive wooden sign, that was hand-carved, that was put up in Tumbarumba during the last federal campaign, and it said very clearly: 'If Tumba falls, goodbye Peter Hendy.' They have now replaced that with a similar sign talking about 'goodbye Liberals'. You can go and drive out there and read those signs. I am not making this up. That sentiment is strong. It is palpable. And I believe that, when the time comes, not only will we see that reflected again in the federal sphere but this state government in New South Wales will feel the voters' wrath from treating rural and regional New South Wales as some peripheral area that can be neglected without cost because they are traditionally safe seats.

But people are learning that the good old days, of Bill Sheahan and Terry Sheahan in south-west New South Wales, of Eddie Graham down Wagga way, of Allan Fraser and Jim Snow—these people who were good regional rural Labor people who always looked after them and always cared for them—are coming back again as we see strong country Labor people putting their hands up to be a voice to defend these communities. They are not getting their voices heard at the moment by current representation in the coalition, and it means they have to look elsewhere. Well, we are there for them. We will defend them. We will continue to defend them. And we will make sure that the effects of this tax are eliminated in terms of the viability of their businesses.

See this speech in context