Craig Emerson (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Trade and Competitiveness) Share this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Makin for his question as a proud South Australian. Of course the mining industry and Australian industry more broadly would be assured that they have a political party that does not want to, nor does it have plans to, increase the company tax rate. Indeed, the Australian Labor Party, the government, has a plan to reduce the company tax rate, thwarted by the Leader of the Opposition and the coalition, the so-called 'party of low taxes'. But there is a proposal to increase the company tax rate, and that proposal comes from none other than the Leader of the Opposition and the coalition. The purpose of this 1½ percentage point increase in the company tax rate is to pay for the extra paid parental leave scheme that the coalition took to the last election. Indeed, everyone knows about that.

Everyone knows about the 1½ percentage point increase in the company tax rate, except that the Leader of the Opposition came to the dispatch box yesterday afternoon seeking a personal explanation, saying that he was misrepresented by the Treasurer and that there is no policy to increase the company tax rate by 1½ per cent. Well, why is it in the documentation? Why did the Leader of the Opposition, when asked by Greg Cary, 'It's still a tax, though, isn't it?' say, 'Well, it's a levy'? It is a levy; it is not a company tax rate increase—it is a levy. Greg Cary said, 'That's a tax.' The Leader of the Opposition said:

I accept that it is going to raise the costs for those businesses with taxable incomes in excess of $5 million a year …

That sounds like a tax to me, yet the coalition come in and say: 'We never said it. We weren't here. It wasn't us. We've been blamed. It's the Treasurer's fault.'

We heard yesterday one of the most sensational, phenomenal performances that we have ever seen, ever witnessed, when the Leader of the Opposition came in to the 7.30 report and he blamed the carbon price and the minerals resource rent tax for the decision on Olympic Dam. He was asked by Leigh Sales:

Have you actually read BHP's statements?

And his answer was no. Across the table, he said, 'I never said that.' It was on national television. He said, 'No, no, I never said that I hadn't read it.' And then today he was asked to clarify and he said, 'Yes, I had.' So, between the 7.30 report last night and today, he has changed his story. Between 3.45 yesterday afternoon and 7.30, he read it, then he forgot he read it, then he said he had read it, then he said he had not read it. I will tell you what he has been reading. He has been reading soft porn books. He has enough time to read soft porn books—

See this speech in context