Chris Bowen (McMahon, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Hansard source

It does. It says, 'Decisions taken as a result of Senate positions'—that is, no change of values, no change of priorities, no change of heart; an acceptance of reality. We know what they want to do, because they admit it. They admit they still think these things are good ideas.

We saw its most spectacular example this morning when the Minister for Social Services came into the House and moved that they be discharged from the House. Now, for newer members of the House, that is a very rare thing. Only once or twice since Federation has a bill been discharged from the House. Normally, you get an explanation as to why this is happening. Not only did the minister not provide an explanation, but he did not even want to utter the words. It was like Harry Potter: there were words that could not leave his mouth. He could not say them. He sat there, through the entire debate, and would not even properly move that they be discharged, because, at its heart, this government still believes in those measures. Well, we are still opposed to them because we believe they rip away at the social fabric of this country. We are still opposed to them because we believe that they are bad policy motivated by the wrong values, and we will continue that fight.

I also want to detain the House briefly on the personal credibility of the Treasurer—I am sure the House will forgive me! Whatever credibility he started with at 7.30 last night was gone by eight o'clock, when he sat down. This is a Treasurer who came to the post talking the big talk. He told us what we was going to do. He told us what his priorities were. He was going to do so much better than his predecessor, whom he undermined and white-anted at every single opportunity, because he was going to deliver big personal income tax cuts. That was his big agenda, the Morrison plan. He told us all about it. I am not going to run through all the quotes, but I will give you the highlights: large personal income tax cuts, significant personal income tax cuts, big income tax cuts, very big income tax cuts, bigger income tax cuts, and strong income tax cuts. That is what he told us he was going to deliver. Remember, he also told us that he would not raise taxes either. He said that quite recently, on 17 February 2017, on The Ray Hadley Morning Show. Remember the Hadley show? Those were the days, when the Treasurer was on the Ray Hadley show. He addressed this on 17 February, when he said, 'We don't want to raise taxes, Ray.' Last night, the Treasurer raised taxes by $20 billion, including $8.2 billion, from almost every single taxpayer in this country, on the Medicare levy. Perhaps we need the member for Higgins to explain to us why a tax rise is actually a tax reduction. She should help the Treasurer out. The Treasurer was patting himself on the back in the last budget for modest income tax cuts, which he has taken back in the very next budget in their entirety in terms of the total tax take. We have seen the highest tax-to-GDP ratio since John Howard was the Prime Minister, and the highest increase since John Howard was the Prime Minister. Just last year, at the dispatch box, in his budget speech, the Treasurer said—and it was very moving:

This is not a time to be splashing money around or increasing the tax burden on our economy or on hardworking Australians and their families.

Apparently, that was not the time—this is the time! This is the time that we should be doing this; the next budget. And the Treasurer told us there was no revenue problem. I would hate to see what he would do if he thought there was a revenue problem. I knew last night when the Treasurer was saying something he did not believe in, because his lips were moving whenever that happened. This is a Treasurer lacking credibility entirely.

Then we come to the bank levy. I know a thing or two about bank levies, if I may share with the House. There are two treasurers who have introduced one: me and him. When we introduced the bank levy, when I was Treasurer, we were told it would be the end of Western civilisation and it would bring pestilence and locusts upon our country. It would curdle the milk, and the curtains would fade if we had a bank levy. The Treasurer explained this. He said, 'Oh, this bank levy's different,' and I give him some credit. It is different: it is 10 times bigger than the bank levy imposed when we were in office. And didn't you hear the backbench go wild last night as he announced the bank levy? They were very difficult to control.

So we have a Treasurer lacking in credibility, and in no area is that more stark than when the Treasurer is talking about fairness. When it comes to tax, he has increased tax—we have the bank levy, and we have the Medicare levy—but he has also reduced tax. On 1 July, somebody earning half a million dollars will receive a tax cut of $4,000, and somebody earning $1 million will receive a tax cut of $16,400. Now, the Prime Minister dealt with this in question time, and he said, 'Oh, well, that was the deficit levy.' Yes—and there is still a deficit and it is bigger than it was projected to be at this point. The government tell us they are making choices and they are: they are making the wrong choices. These tax rises would not be necessary if the government were not so insistent on a $50 billion corporate tax cut. These tax rises would not be necessary if we had a government that was not so insistent on giving a tax cut to people on over $180,000 a year. These tax rises would not be necessary if the government actually had the courage to deal with negative gearing and capital gains tax—if they had the ticker to engage in some reform.

These tax rises would not be necessary if we had a government that actually believed in fairness and was not inspired by a focus group but inspired by a vision for our country which involved every single Australian having some stake and ownership in the future of our country. They would not be necessary if we had a government that recognised that we are stronger when we work together and that, when we have growth that is inclusive, every Australian can share in that growth. We have a government which simply does not believe that.

See this speech in context