Scott Morrison (Cook, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Hansard source

Standing orders should not be suspended because the opposition is just simply seeking, once again, to try and delay and frustrate and wreck. The government is getting on with delivering our program, some $21 billion and more, including the measure that was just passed by the House, in relation to the 15 per cent backpacker tax—now on its way to the Senate—which ensures that the government has legislated more than $21 billion worth of budget improvement measures since the last election.

Those opposite continue their seek-and-destroy mission on the budgets, constantly trying to frustrate the efforts the government is making to consolidate the budget to ensure we protect our AAA credit rating. Those opposite vote against these measures. Those opposite seek to delay and frustrate these measures. Those opposite actively seek, in their calls for chaos, to deny Australia the opportunity to protect its AAA credit rating. That is why standing orders should not be suspended. This is another attempt from the opposition to undermine Australia's strong position in advocating and making the case for why we should retain that rating. And we have a strong case for that because $21 billion and more have been passed in budget improvement measures since the last election. We want to keep getting on with that job and that is why we do not think things should be delayed here.

The only reason I can think of, as to why Labor would not want to commit to not increasing the passenger movement charge over the next five years, is that if they were to win the next election they might want to increase it again. It is true that there are precedents for the types of bills that are the subject of this debate, in relation to the passenger movement charge. It is a valid measure seeking to ensure that the rate of the passenger movement charge is not increased for five years from 1 July 2017.

Previous parliaments have validly considered and passed bills that contain restrictions seeking to bind future governments. One example is subsection (3) clause (2) of the Flags Act 1953—well-known, I am sure, to the member for Grayndler—which provides that the Australian national flag is not to be changed. Something I heartily agree with. It says:

(a) a new flag or flags, and the flag referred to in subsection (1), are submitted in each State and Territory to the electors qualified to vote for the election of members of the House of Representatives; and

(b) the new flag, or one of the new flags, is chosen by a majority of all the electors voting.

That is just one example of the type of a bill that would seek to bind a future parliament. But if those opposite—God forbid—are elected at the next election and want to rush into this parliament and up the passenger movement charge, that would be a matter for them. And they would have form because, when they were last in government, they increased the passenger movement charge from $38 to $55—they increased it by 48 per cent.

This is a modest change since 2012 of just $5, which takes into account the movement in indexation on inflation over that period. But the other thing it takes into account is not once, over the course that we have been in government, have we gone to the passenger movement charge to fund the very significant works that we have done to improve border management and national security, which is benefited and funded by these types of measures. We have, since the 2015-16 budget, provided $26.6 million to establish the permanent border-clearance services at Townsville and Sunshine Coast airports to support regular international services and $93.7 million for the Seamless Traveller initiative, which includes rollout of automatic biometric processing at major air and sea ports. Since 2012-13 there has been an increase in funding provided to the Department of Immigration and Border Protection due to an increase in international passengers being declared.

Mr Albanese interjecting—

And as the member opposite interjects, I think, seeking to be helpful—which would be a record in this place—

See this speech in context