House debates

Wednesday, 31 May 2006

Tax Laws Amendment (Personal Tax Reduction and Improved Depreciation Arrangements) Bill 2006

Second Reading

1:10 pm

Photo of Tony WindsorTony Windsor (New England, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

I am introducing amendments to that legislation, although I am hopeful that the minister will recognise the error of his ways and change that. I cannot believe that the ‘New Liberals’ have allowed that particular area of the legislation to even get into the document. I would have thought that they would have been part of the process of determining legislation. Hopefully, under their new arrangements, they can actually be part of the progressing and formulating of legislation, because it is pretty obvious that they have not been in this particular case. Or could it be a stunt, where the ‘Old Liberals’ actually put up an issue, knowing full well that the ‘New Liberals’ will want it changed? I am hopeful that it will be changed.

The other issue that relates to taxation matters is the removal of the Fuel Sales Grants Scheme as of 1 July and the impact that that will have on the personal expenditure of country motorists. The minister would be aware that the Fuel Sales Grants Scheme was put in place to equalise the impact of the goods and services tax back in 2000. I applauded the government, as a state member of parliament, for doing that. And our good friends, the National Farmers Federation, applauded it at the time as well. That has been removed now—$270 million—and country motorists will bear the costs of that at the bowser. Contrary to the view that many in the government have put that the government are incapable of doing anything about fuel prices, that it is all a global matter and out of their hands, I believe that there is a lot that they could have done. This is a case where they are actually putting up fuel prices for one sector of the community. And that sector will be country people, who will have to pay an extra 1c to 3c a litre.

The great tragedy in this issue is that the ally of the ‘New Liberals’, the National Farmers Federation, actually came out and said that the scheme was not working and was used as an organisation to suggest that it should not be in place, that it needed to be replaced, and supported the government’s initiative. The one thing that the National Farmers Federation president, Peter Corish, did not say at the time was that farmers do not pay it. It was all very well to embrace this issue, knowing that the normal motorist in country Australia could pay it. His members were not going to pay it, but he was endorsing the removal of it so that the rest of country Australians would have to pay that additional tax.

I urge the minister to listen to what people are saying on those matters. I think he has the capacity to listen to people. I wish him well in his new job. But I also urge the parliamentary secretary, who I am sure now is fully on top of these taxation matters. He is well known for his diversity of view on tax and entitlements. He is working very hard on the state ownership of water and the transferability of water, so I am sure he should be well on top of that.

Comments

No comments