Zoe Daniel (Goldstein, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. Will the government consider implementing tax indexation to reduce the corrosive impact of bracket creep on hardworking Australians?

Jim Chalmers (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you to the member for Goldstein for her question, and I also say thank you to the member for the way she has engaged with her community about Labor's cost-of-living tax cuts for middle Australia. Right across the crossbench, the way parliamentary colleagues have engaged on this with their own community and with the arguments for our bigger tax cuts for more people to help with the cost of living has been a very good thing. I also want to thank the member for Goldstein for the opportunity to engage with her about it in the last day or so.

When it comes to bracket creep, we do acknowledge the impact that bracket creep has on take-home pay. What the parliament also needs to acknowledge and recognise is that there is more than one way to return bracket creep to hardworking Australians. There is the way that the member for Goldstein asks about. There is the way that was legislated five years ago by the previous government, and there is the way that this government is going about it. We acknowledge that there are a number of ways to go about it. We're not proposing to index the thresholds as the member for Goldstein is suggesting. But we think we have found a very effective way to return bracket creep to more people. What the parliament needs to understand—I'm confident that the crossbench does and I know for a fact that our side of the parliament does but I'm not so sure that those opposite do—is that you can return bracket creep in a number of ways. It doesn't just have to be returned disproportionately to people who are already on the highest incomes. What the Treasury advice makes really clear—the Treasury advice that we released at the same time we announced our position and our policy—is that what we are doing is returning bracket creep where bracket creep does the most damage, and that's through the middle incomes.

One of the motivations for the design of the tax package that we released almost a couple of weeks ago is that, as the average tax rates of people on lower and middle incomes climb faster, and as their incomes rise, bracket creep does the most damage, so our responsibility and our objective is to return more bracket creep to middle Australia. That's why, I think, from memory, average tax rates go, as a consequence of what we're proposing, from 25.4 per cent to 23.9 per cent. Getting those average tax rates down is an indication that we're doing something about bracket creep, even if we're not doing it exactly the way that the member for Goldstein proposes.

Zaneta Mascarenhas (Swan, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Resources and Northern Australia. How will Labor's tax cuts benefit those living in northern Australia and those in the resource sector?

Madeleine King (Brand, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Northern Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Swan for her question and for her ongoing support and enthusiasm for the resources sector and resources workers. On the first of July, Labor will deliver a tax cut for every Australian to deal with the cost of living. We're delivering a tax cut for everyone living in northern Australia and for everyone working in the resources sector. There are a select few that have invested and taken risks and created hundreds and thousands of jobs in the sector, and they have received great reward. But the average income of resources workers is $144,000. They will get a tax cut of over $3,700. There is a wide range of salaries in the resources sector. CEOs get paid in the millions, with salary and company stock options, but that is far from the case for most hardworking blue collar workers in the resources sector.

From coal country in the Hunter to the iron ore mines in the Pilbara, there are trades assistants, haul truck drivers, diesel mechanics, heritage advisers, cleaners and cooks and they all earn between $75,000 and $95,000 a year. Each of them will get a tax cut of between $1,500 and $2,000 a year. All of these resources workers, and many more, will receive bigger tax cuts under Labor's cost-of-living tax cut plans.

Those opposite don't really want to talk about the average resources workers, their rights, their conditions or their well deserved tax cuts. They don't really want to talk about the truck drivers, the mechanics, the cooks and the cleaners that make our mines run and keep the economy humming. I mean, they might like to jump in a private charter and go to a party in the Pilbara or maybe even Bali. Good on them. That's really top stuff, I suppose. But what we care about are the workers in the resources industry that will get a tax cut. Every single one of them will get a tax cut, and it will be bigger than they might have expected before.

Then, when I go to northern Australia, every person living in northern Australia will receive a bigger tax cut. They have received an average income of $70,000 across northern Australia, and everyone earning that average will get an average tax cut of $1,400.

Only Labor supports all the communities across northern Australia. We don't pick and choose who we support. This will be extra money in people's pockets—people who are doing it tough in northern Australia, where it is tough. There are more expensive items, a lack of competition and transport issues which all add up to making the cost of living even more challenging for those in northern Australia compared to the big cities. Labor's cost-of-living tax cuts will help everyone in northern Australia and every single worker in the resources sector.

Aaron Violi (Casey, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister and other ministers have committed to supporting the stage three tax cuts in full on over a hundred occasions. For example, on 29 August 2022, the Prime Minister said: 'Parliament made a decision to legislate these tax cuts and we made a decision that we would stand by the legislation.' How can Australian families ever trust this government on taxes again after he repeatedly lied to them?

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Casey will withdraw the last part of the question, as that is unparliamentary.

Aaron Violi (Casey, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Withdraw or rephrase? The last bit or the whole—

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The last part of the question. You just withdraw.

Aaron Violi (Casey, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I withdraw.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Member for Casey.

The member for Bruce will cease interjecting. The Prime Minister has the call.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Casey for his question. He should be pretty enthusiastic about the government making the decision to look after low- and middle-income earners, because in his electorate 87 per cent of his electorate will get a bigger tax cut—87 per cent! And every single one, 100 per cent, will get a tax cut—100 per cent!

He asked a question about the government changing its position, and, yes, we have, because economic circumstances have changed. But you've changed your position. You now say you are going to vote against the Morrison tax cuts. That's what you're going to do, or maybe you're going to go back to saying that you'll roll it back. You couldn't make this up, Mr Speaker. They need to make up their minds.

Sussan Ley (Farrer, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Women) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A hundred times!

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You can either come in here and say you are—

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The Deputy Leader of the Opposition!

Sussan Ley (Farrer, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Women) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We've got a better plan.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! There is far too much noise on my left. The member for Casey was heard in silence. The same courtesy is going to be shown to the Prime Minister or people will leave. The Prime Minister has the call.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thanks, Mr Speaker. There are two options here. One is—

Ted O'Brien (Fairfax, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Climate Change and Energy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The truth?

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The—

Ted O'Brien (Fairfax, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Climate Change and Energy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Don't you like that option?

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Fairfax will leave the chamber under 94(a).

The member for Fairfax then left the chamber.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

One is that those opposite can say that the Morrison tax cuts should be kept: they come in here, they vote against it—our changes—and they promise to roll it back. The second is that they agree with us that our package is better. If our package isn't better, why are they saying they're going to vote for it?

Mr Speaker, the member for Casey wasn't a part of the last circus that we've seen out there on Nemesis for the last couple weeks. Some people asked me last night why, of all the Jack Nicholson movies, I picked The Shining. Well, it couldn't be A Few Good Men

Honourable members interjecting—

and it certainly couldn't be Terms of Endearment!

Honourable members interjecting—

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The Prime Minister will pause while the House comes to order.

Josh Burns (Macnamara, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No career in comedy after this, Albo!

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Macnamara will cease interjecting.

Member for Barker, I'm trying to hear from the member for Wannon. If you could assist me, it would be appreciated.

Dan Tehan (Wannon, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Immigration and Citizenship) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My point of order goes to relevance. You can't handle the truth, and that's what the question was about.

Honourable members interjecting—

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Resume your seat. Resume your seat and keep walking out of the chamber.

Opposition members interjecting—

Order! This is question time, not the Academy Awards. The Prime Minister has the call, and he's going to be heard in silence.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Our changes are so bad that they're going to vote for them! Nemesis is like a reboot of Fight Club, except on Fight Club no-one could talk about it. But they can't talk about anything else but fighting themselves. They can't talk about anything else. The fact is they have no credibility. If they want credibility and to defend their position, they need to do what the Deputy Leader of the Opposition did and roll back these changes.