Brendan Nelson (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. I refer the Prime Minister to his last answer, where he emphasised the importance of honouring pre-election tax commitments. Given that this budget increased taxes by $20 billion with no electoral mandate, will the Prime Minister guarantee there will be no new taxes in next year’s budget?

Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Again the Leader of the Opposition puts a question to the parliament based on an entirely false premise—that taxes have increased under this government as a proportion of gross domestic product. The only effective measure of the tax impact on the economy is tax as a proportion of GDP, and tax as a proportion of GDP has gone down this year relative to last year, relative to the year before that, relative to the year before that and relative to the year before that as well. I suggest that the Leader of the Opposition study his statistics and work it out.

Sharon Grierson (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Finance and Deregulation. How will moves to block key budget measures in the Senate impact on the government’s plans for the future?

Lindsay Tanner (Melbourne, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Newcastle for her question. Today we have seen the first instalment of the Liberal Party’s smash-and-grab raid on the government’s surplus in the Senate after bungling it yesterday. That first instalment is highly symbolic, because the Liberal Party are seeking to relieve the tax burden on the purchases of Porsches, Lamborghinis, Ferraris and other such vital modes of transport for ordinary working people. At the same time as they are seeking to relieve the tax burden for purchases of such vehicles, they are also seeking to keep the tax burden for middle-income working families arising from the Medicare levy surcharge—something in the vicinity of $1,000 plus, which the government is seeking to remove and they are seeking to retain. In effect, their message to these working families in that middle- to upper middle-income bracket is: ‘Don’t worry; it’s okay. We will allow you to get a tax break on your next Ferrari or your next Lamborghini.’ While they will still have to suffer the Medicare levy surcharge, if they are out buying a Lamborghini, a Ferrari or a Rolls-Royce they will be okay.

It is interesting that the member for Hume today had the gall to ask a question about battlers selling cars on the side of the road. It appears to me to be rather odd that the policy response from the Liberal Party on the cost-of-living challenges facing working people—the first big policy position they put forward in this parliament—is to cut the taxes on luxury cars like Ferraris and Lamborghinis.

Alby Schultz (Hume, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I take exception to making comments in this House on behalf of working people and being denigrated for it by a member on the opposite side of the House.

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is no point of order.

Lindsay Tanner (Melbourne, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is good to see, finally, that the opposition have a policy with respect to the cost of living. It is: ‘Let them drive Ferraris!’ Given the shambolic performance of the Liberal Party yesterday and the fact that their positions on what they are going to do in the Senate, and indeed on their leadership, have moved around over the past few months, we can be forgiven for not being entirely sure about how this is all going to unfold. I would urge the opposition again to rethink their position. We could actually get a change of heart. But we know that one thing will not change with the Liberal Party, and that is that their core priority is to stand up for the interests of high-income, wealthy Australians.

We do not know who their leader is going to be. We have seen over the past few months the member for Higgins appear on the horizon as a would-be saviour for the Liberal Party. You can see them huddled in corridors around parliament discussing this—the Messiah is potentially on the horizon for the Liberal Party.

Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. How could this possibly be relevant to the question asked?

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The minister will respond to the question.

Lindsay Tanner (Melbourne, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I am concerned about the future behaviour of the Liberal Party in the Senate and the prospect of a leadership change. We have seen over the past month or two, courtesy of the member for Higgins, the longest striptease in Australian history. It is a very peculiar striptease.

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Minister for Finance and Deregulation will bring his answer to a conclusion.

Ms Julie Bishop (Curtin, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Don’t mention scores. You wouldn’t want to mention scores, would you?

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Deputy Leader of the Opposition is warned!

Lindsay Tanner (Melbourne, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have come into possession of the member for Higgins’s budget report to his electorate.

Chris Pearce (Aston, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Correct me if I am wrong, but you have just asked the Minister for Finance and Deregulation to bring his answer to a conclusion. Referring to some newsletter is not concluding his answer.

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will listen carefully and I will expect this to be the completion of the answer.

Lindsay Tanner (Melbourne, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I just want to draw attention to one particular point in this newsletter—

Tony Smith (Casey, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Education, Apprenticeships and Training) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Hold it up.

Lindsay Tanner (Melbourne, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will table it too, if you like. The first item of attack on the government is to criticise the government for failing to deliver the coalition’s tax cuts to high-income people on the highest tax rate, above $180,000 a year.

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

Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I ask that the minister table the document, please.

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Has the minister concluded his answer?

Lindsay Tanner (Melbourne, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Not yet.

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The minister will conclude his answer and then I will ask him whether he wishes to table any documents, which is the usual practice.

Lindsay Tanner (Melbourne, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yet again, this indicates the true priorities of the Liberal Party. It does not matter whether they change jockeys; the horses will still be the same—

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

Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I ask if he will table the document.

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Was the minister quoting from a document?

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

Yes, he was.

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Excuse me! The member for Cook will resume his seat. He cannot ask for things and then answer!

Lindsay Tanner (Melbourne, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Finance and Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I table the document.

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The minister has tabled the document.

Bob Baldwin (Paterson, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister Assisting the Shadow Minister for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Baldwin interjecting

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Paterson is warned!

Roger Price (Chifley, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Just to understand proceedings: given your earlier remarks, are you indicating that requests for the tabling of documents should be made at the conclusion of an answer or are we going to see this new practice of interrupting an answer to ask for a document to be tabled?

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The chair indicates that the preferred action is that requests for the tabling of documents arising from a minister’s answer be done at the end of the answer.