Michael Sukkar (Deakin, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister to the Treasurer) Share this | Hansard source

It's good to see I engender such excitement with the opposition! It is a great honour to be able to speak on this MPI, discussing the role of Western Australia in our Commonwealth, as described by the member for Perth. Western Australians don't have to think back too far to remember what the vision for WA is from the Labor Party. All they have to do is look back to see what the Labor Party in government did to the Western Australian economy. The two stand-out achievements from the Labor Party's perspective, from their glory years—the absolute glory of the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd years—were the mining tax and the carbon tax, those absolutely fantastic policies for your constituents, Member for Perth! That's why they turfed you and that's why they keep returning so many fantastic Western Australian lower house members of parliament—because they remember what the vision of the Labor Party is for Western Australia, and that is just to milk it a bit more, milk a bit more tax out of the Western Australians, through the resource super profits tax, as it started, and the MRRT, as it ended up. They ultimately capitulated on the minerals resource rent tax. They said it was going to raise $16 billion, and it didn't even raise a fraction of that. We know that they felt that the carbon tax was somehow going to be strong for an economy like Western Australia's, rich in mineral resources. But the Western Australians sent the Labor Party a message, and they turfed them. They unceremoniously turfed them because they don't agree with the vision that the Labor Party has for Western Australia.

We know why Western Australians have entrusted so many good, hardworking, solid members to the lower house: because ingrained in Western Australians are the values of this party, ingrained in the Western Australian economy are the values ingrained in us—aspiration, hard work, entrepreneurialism. That is the essence of the psyche of the Western Australian public. I was there only a matter of weeks ago. As a Victorian visiting Western Australia, may I say it reinforced my understanding of why they repudiate the Labor Party and why they repudiate this waffle from the member for Perth. And it was absolute waffle—a pretty good comedy routine but not much substance.

I must say, I was watching Sky News yesterday and I saw a bit of a train-wreck interview with the member for Perth. He's normally pretty good on TV—the hipster beard; the sort of cool attitude—but it was a train wreck of an interview. The member for Perth was crowing about some so-called additional funding for Western Australia. Who knows where the funding's coming from? Here's an extract of the interview. Sam Maiden: 'How are you going to fund the $1.6 billion?' Hammond: 'It's been backed in by shadow cabinet.' Maiden: 'That doesn't explain how you're going to fund it.' Hammond: 'It's been assessed by Chris Bowen.' Sam Maiden is very persistent—a great interviewer. She wanted an answer and she wasn't getting one. She said, 'Okay, but how are you going to fund it?' Hammond: 'It's funded. It will be funded.' Maiden: 'How are you going to fund it?' Hammond: 'Out of general consolidated revenue.' Maiden: 'So taxes will have to go up. Which taxes are you going to put up?' I could keep reading through it. The poor old member for Perth stammered on. There's not really a complete sentence that I can read out. In the end, Sam Maiden, in her wonderful fashion, said, 'Mate, this is the biggest magic pudding argument I've ever heard. You're smarter than that.' I'd say to the House and I'd say to Sam Maiden: I'm not sure whether the member for Perth is actually smarter than that, because he's been unable to explain how the Labor Party is going to address these problems.

We've seen recognition from the government, through the Productivity Commission review. We want to ensure, to the greatest extent possible, that the distribution of GST is fair for everyone and we want to ensure that it doesn't hurt jurisdictions or states like Western Australia which do show that entrepreneurial spirit—using their natural resources. Let's be frank, other states do not utilise them properly. Look at the socialist Labor government in Victoria which has locked up all of our gas reserves—conventional gas reserves, as much as anything else. So why should the Western Australian economy be punished? That is why we announced in May this year an additional $1.6 billion for infrastructure in Western Australia. This additional infrastructure funding will support projects, including $792 million towards the METRONET proposal to upgrade and expand the Perth metro rail link, and a tick over $760 million towards priority new road projects to address safety and congestion at a number of key locations. There's quite a large laundry list of projects, but they are funded. We know where that money is coming from. It is funded in the budget. We know how it is being met.

The Labor Party's proposal, ruthlessly flushed out yesterday by Sam Maiden, is a magic pudding. There's no money behind it. Where is the money coming from? Well, the money is coming from a litany of new Labor taxes that have been spoken about in this House. We've had discussions about the Labor Party thinking that small businesses with a turnover of $2 million should be treated like Apple and Google and shouldn't be entitled to things like accelerated depreciation, lower company tax or ordinary structures that small businesses use in family trusts, with their new trusts tax. We know the Labor Party has a housing tax masquerading as a housing affordability policy. I say to the Labor Party and the member for Perth, when he's trying to make his magic pudding numbers work: when you talk about your housing taxes, how do taxes on commercial properties help housing affordability? Why is it fair to allow a surgeon with investment income to negatively gear a property, but not to allow a nurse, a teacher, a fireman or a police officer to negatively gear against their PAYE salary and wages? How is that fair?

So there's an absolute litany of new taxes that will fund this. But just come clean, member for Perth. Just saying, 'It's consolidated revenue. Oh, Sam, it's consolidated revenue' is not going to cut it until you can say where that money is coming from. Western Australians know there's no money coming from the Labor Party—and that's why you've been consigned to where you are. You're going to come under a bit of heat because your state counterparts have made a big deal out of this issue, and we'll see if they're able to deliver. I suspect they're going to find it difficult to deliver on the very lofty objectives they stated before the election. So I'd say to the member for Perth: that was a pretty funny little comedy routine in this MPI. I laughed, I laughed, I found it very amusing, but there was no explanation to Western Australians as to how you were going to fund what you purport to fund. Therefore, you've not even met what the government has announced and, until then, you don't have a leg to stand on. So I'd say to the member for Perth and I'd say to all the members over there: until you have a vision that matches the entrepreneurial spirit of your constituents, they will continue to consign you to where you are in Western Australia. I hope that following speakers on the opposition side can say where the money is coming from. Where is the money coming from? Otherwise, it's just a magic pudding. (Time expired)

See this speech in context