Jim Chalmers (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Special Minister of State (House)) Share this | Hansard source

I withdraw. I consider that the commentary made by the member over there was stupid, and it was stupid for so many reasons. Principal amongst the reasons that it was stupid was that central to anything that should be proposed in this parliament is how we pay for it. I'm talking about how we pay for this measure of company tax relief for small businesses, and the point I'm making—and the point I will continue to make—is that the budget is not in especially good nick. That's a fact; it's in the government's own budget papers. Net debt has doubled. Gross debt is over half a trillion dollars for the first time in Australian history, and stays above half a trillion dollars every year for the next 10 years and is higher at the end of those 10 years than it is now. I would have thought that that was pretty central to our considerations. I will continue to make that point and those opposite can take as many points of order as they like.

Our Australian Investment Guarantee, as I have said, is all about targeting business tax relief. It's got a lot of support from the business community. We're very heartened by the support that our alternative has received, because it goes hand in hand with the measure that we're discussing. The $20,000 instant asset write-off in conjunction with the Australian Investment Guarantee is a superior way to give Australian businesses the support that they need to invest in our local economy. We've had modelling done by the Victorian University Centre of Policy Studies, which found that our policy is more effective in stimulating investment than the company tax cuts proposed by those opposite. The modelling found an investment subsidy like ours, compared to the company tax, is 'three times more effective as a stimulus to investment'. The authors of that report said:

... we strongly recommend that policy-makers consider an investment subsidy instead of a cut to company tax as a better value-for-money policy initiative to increase both investment and domestic material welfare.

That's a ringing endorsement. It didn't stop with the economic modelling performed by that university. The Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry said:

... the government should adopt the Opposition's proposed enhancements to accelerated depreciation.

The CEO of ACCI, James Pearson, welcomed the commitment from the opposition and said it was good policy. From the Council of Small Business of Australia, Peter Strong, said:

Labor's announcement is a welcome one as it would make it easier for Australian businesses to invest and grow.

The Australian Industry Group supported it, as did the Property Council and the Energy Efficiency Council. The list goes on and on.

The reason we can afford to do the Australian investment guarantee hand-in-hand with accelerated depreciation for small businesses is that we wouldn't be proceeding down the path that those opposite proposed, which is to give the multibillion-dollar tax handout to multinationals and the big banks. We've also made some other difficult decisions and announcements in other areas of the budget to make sure that we can pay for our commitment.

We support this bill. We do it enthusiastically. We agree with much of what the member for Forrest said about it and what contributions on this side have said about it. This has the capacity to make a genuine difference, so we support the bill. We're proud to be the original authors of the instant asset write-off. I support the amendment by the member for Kingsford Smith, which says:

... unlike the Government's company tax cut plan, the Opposition's Australian Investment Guarantee will provide targeted tax relief for businesses that invest in Australia and Australians, and guarantees new investment.

(Time expired)

See this speech in context