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

At the risk of repeating myself, we are going around and around in circles, where Senator Milne attacks our government for doing certain things and reducing funding available for research and development as a result of this measure. I would just say again: this is a Labor Party budget measure. It is a measure that has been initiated and banked in the 2013-14 budget by the Gillard Labor government, with Mr Swan as Treasurer and Senator Wong as the finance minister. That is what happened. And I have already read into Hansard the justification by former Treasurer Mr Swan at an Australian Business Economists breakfast—and I will quote it again for your benefit—when he said:

We said we would remove the R&D tax concession for large companies with a $20 billion Australian turnover or more, to ensure innovation spending is directed to where it will have the biggest benefit.

He also said that this was 'a down payment on the repair that the budget needs'.

Now, we can go around and around in circles, and Senator Carr has tried his best to come up with one red herring after the other to keep the filibuster going, including mixing up the various budget measures. He was trying to pin this government for a Labor government budget measure. All we are doing here is seeking to legislate a budget measure initiated and banked in the 2013-14 budget by the previous Labor government. I understand that Senator Carr has stared down his leader, Mr Shorten, in relation to this matter, to get him to change the position compared with the position of the Gillard and Rudd Labor government before the last election, as reflected in their economic statement before the election and the Pre-election Economic and Fiscal Outlook. The fiscal impact is broadly the same. That is the truth of it. Actually, it is going to be less now, because we are starting a year later.The Labor measure was supposed to start on 1 July 2013. If the Senate passes the Palmer United Party amendments, it will now start a year later, so there will be a loss there in terms of the beneficial impact on the budget bottom line because of that delay. I am intrigued as to why Senator Milne did not ask these questions of the previous Gillard Labor government which initiated and banked this particular measure, so I am not going to continue to go round and round in circles with you.