Joe Hockey (North Sydney, Liberal Party, Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. Does the Treasurer recall receiving this brief from the Treasury on 17 May last year advising him, at page 8, that Western Australia was proposing to raise the royalty on iron ore fines? I therefore again ask the Treasurer: in light of this, does he still stand by his statement last Friday that he did not know Western Australia would increase its iron ore royalty on fines?

Wayne Swan (Lilley, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the shadow Treasurer for his question because it is very welcome. This is a very important topic for the national parliament to talk about. I wonder whether the shadow Treasurer stands by his statements that the mining industry has been taxed too high, or does he stand by all of his statements of last year that there should not be more taxation on the mining industry? Those on that side of the House have egg all over their faces, for one very simple reason: they have argued in this House that the mining companies pay too much tax, and now that the Western Australian Liberals want to increase their royalties they say that is just fine and dandy. The fact is that we on this side of the House stand for putting in place a decent resource taxation system which will provide funding to reduce taxes for companies—

Government Members:

Government members interjecting—

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

The parliamentary secretary—the Deane's buses timetable awaits.

Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Education, Apprenticeships and Training) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, on a point of order: the Treasurer was asked a very serious question which contained no argument or debate. He has completely refused to even attempt to answer it. He is obfuscating and sliding around. I ask you to draw him back to the question.

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

The Treasurer must be directly relevant to the question.

An opposition member: Hear, hear.

I appreciate the support, but one of the difficulties in adjudicating is that everybody wants to talk at once. Whilst the characteristic of the response would have been in order under the previous relevancy rule, it is stretching it that this is directly relevant. I ask the Treasurer to directly relate his material to the question.

Wayne Swan (Lilley, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I was asked about royalties, I was asked about the taxation of iron ore fines compared to the lumps in Western Australia. I stand by all the statements I have made on this matter. The fact that we have got here is the acute embarrassment of both the Western Australian Premier and all of those on that side of the House who one year ago were arguing that we were taxing companies too much, and when the Western Australian Premier puts up his royalties they say that is just fine and dandy. When he does it in a way which is going to deprive Western Australians—

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

The Treasurer will bring his response to a close.

Wayne Swan (Lilley, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

of vital infrastructure money, they say that is fine and dandy as well. They have deserted the people of Western Australia and the people of Australia.

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

The Treasurer will conclude.

An opposition member: Sat down by the Speaker!

There will be plenty of people sat down when I get the chance to sit them down but if they could sit here quietly it would help and improve things a lot.