Madeleine King (Brand, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Solomon for his fine contribution. As always, he is a great contributor to the debates in the House. I rise to speak on the Australian Grape and Wine Authority Amendment (Wine Australia) Bill 2017. This bill will enable the Australian Grape and Wine Authority to implement all the program activities under the wine support package. It will also enable the authority to administer grants for wine, including the cellar door grant. It will change the name of the authority from the Australian Grape and Wine Authority to the much catchier Wine Australia. The newly named Wine Australia will administer two funds which have been created as part of the wine equalisation tax rebate reforms.

I'd like to take some time to reflect on the journey of these reforms, and what a tortured path it has been. I thank the member for Hunter for reminding those opposite of the history of this reform for the wine sector. Yesterday he took us through the jagged path of reform for the sector that he has personally witnessed as the able member for Hunter since 1996. I know he is very proud of the wine producers in the Hunter, and so he should be. They produce some beautiful wines.

Many if not all of us here will remember the introduction of the GST, the goods and services tax. The 29 per cent wine equalisation tax came to be as the Howard government acknowledged that taxes on wine would have fallen significantly, creating an economic distortion, and would have been socially irresponsible. With a mind to helping out cellar door sales of small vineyards and promoting more activity and growth of small and family owned vineyards and wineries, the Labor Party in opposition moved amendments that would provide for a cellar door exemption from this wine equalisation tax. The always courageous Mr Costello, the Treasurer of the day, rejected our suggested reforms. As the legislation went through the other place, Labor kept up its efforts on behalf of the industry and Mr 'All tip, no iceberg' eventually conceded it was a good idea for small wine producers and such an exemption would in fact help at the cellar door.

But, always up for letting poor policy decisions get in the way of a good idea, the Liberal government, instead of introducing an exemption, in a rotten deal with the Democrats to introduce the GST, which in the process destroyed the Democrats, brought in a rebate and so developed a situation where loopholes in the wine equalisation tax and the rebate processes allowed bulk wine traders to exploit the market and take advantage of the $500,000 rebate, which has sometimes been claimed several times for the same wine. Ultimately what we have seen with this arrangement is bulk producers gaming the system and getting the rebate when it was never intended they receive it. But that is what happens with bad policy and poor implementation—unscrupulous rorters game the system. We all agreed reform was needed.

Let's fast forward a bit to the 2016 budget. What a gem that was! Without warning, the government announced reform of this system. There was no consultation with industry and no consultation with stakeholders. There was just the announcement of, 'By the way, we'll take $300 million out of the industry and pocket that.' It's just like what the government are hoping to do to students in this country. Let's hope the other place can put a stop to that. This government has upped the fees students pay to attend universities by 7.5 per cent. You might think those funds will go to helping improve the student experience, such as through improving infrastructure, funding teaching and learning development, more lecturers themselves or assisting the programs at universities. But, no—they are just hitting up students for cash and pocketing these fees to fix their budget mess, just like they've tried to do with the wine industry.

So the wine industry, quite rightly, opposed the changes. Ultimately, there was a backdown. Common sense prevailed and the government changed tack on the tax rebate cap. The industry group Wines of Western Australia were opposed to the original budget proposals and came out strongly against them. They've been quite generous in their assessment of the backflip. A representative from Wines of Western Australia said: 'I don't call it a backdown. I call it doing the process properly.' That's an industry group having to congratulate this government for getting the process of legislative development right.

You've got to remember this is their constituency. You might reasonably think most vineyard owners or winery owners are probably Liberal voters. Take the seat of Forrest in the south-west of Western Australia. It covers a magnificent part of the world. It's a pretty sturdy Liberal seat. Some figures recently showed it was in some trouble, but I'm sure it's not for the Chief Government Whip. This is their constituency, so you might assume that a Liberal government would consult with their own constituency when they were going to bring in some changes that would affect their constituency's bottom lines, lives and industry. They rail on about small, family owned businesses in this place, saying they're the only ones that seem to understand them. Yet, in this attack—well, I don't think it was an attack; it was negligence—on the wine industry, they've strolled on in and made an announcement without any consultation with these small, family owned businesses that most likely have voted for them for a long time. Maybe they'll reconsider their position after this exercise.

See this speech in context