House debates

Tuesday, 19 October 2010

Superannuation Legislation Amendment Bill 2010

Second Reading

8:01 pm

Photo of Joe HockeyJoe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Hansard source

No, there was no tender. Why would there be a tender? It is Medicare. Medicare is a government owned monopoly. It is so obviously the case that they would make Medicare the only clearinghouse for superannuation. This is Labor writ large. Remember, they promised ‘not one jot, not one tittle’. In that unique Rudd-like language in 2007 they promised not to touch superannuation, and then the tentacles of socialism wrapped around the superannuation system at the behest of the government as they sought to deliver for their union mates in the industry funds but also, more significantly, as they sought to get their hands on Australians’ money. Of course, this is not just in superannuation. Not only does the Labor Party want to get their hands on Australians’ super, they want to get their hands on Australians’ income. That is why Labor increased so many taxes, from tax on alcopops to taxes on cars. And that is why the Labor Party has played around with a range of different concessions to ensure that Australians end up paying more tax, not less, to the government over the course of this government’s two terms.

Typical of the Labor Party, they do not want to admit that they have broken a promise—oh no, they would not admit that they have broken any promises. Obviously there has been a sea of promises. Today we had another illustration of a broken promise when the Prime Minister said that they were going to open some new detention centres, after having said before the election that they were unnecessary. It is not just the present Prime Minister or the previous Prime Minister who has chosen to break promises made by the Labor Party; it is the Deputy Prime Minister and Treasurer who, in May 2009, said:

The government will reduce the generosity of some superannuation concessions for those with greater private wealth.

The cap on concessional super contributions will be lowered and the matching rate of the superannuation co-contribution will be reduced temporarily.

That was 2009. In April 2010, the Deputy Prime Minister and Treasurer said:

We certainly didn’t breach any promise that we made about superannuation.

He lives in this different paradigm, this different universe, old Swanny. He is out there in his own little orbit going around in his own little planet, where he says there is no breach of any election promise—they didn’t breach any promise because the words of the former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd meant so little. They meant not one jot, not one tittle—all those changes they made to super never really happened. Well, they did. They are in the budget. But still they say they never really happened. He went on to say, and this shows the absurdity of his claims:

We certainly didn’t breach any promise that we made about superannuation. It is true that we changed the caps because the caps were excessively generous, and in changing them we did not breach any promise.

That is your Treasurer. Are you proud of this man?

Comments

No comments