Bert Van Manen (Forde, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is with some regret that I rise to speak tonight, at a time when there are numerous consequences from global financial turmoil and equally from the effects of the poor economic and financial management of this Labor-Greens government. It is only going to get worse once we start to see the full impact of the carbon tax, which is like a cyclone bearing down on our economy, businesses and consumers, who are already beginning to feel some of the effects and are beginning to batten down the hatches. We are seeing this in reduced retail trade and poor business sentiment survey figures.

The Labor-Greens government has, over the course of the past four years, presided over waste and mismanagement on a scale never before seen in the history of this great nation, and now they wish to finish the job by introducing a carbon tax at a time of great global economic uncertainty. It is important to consider in this context the principles that allow a market economy to function effectively. These principles include protection of private property rights, freedom of contract, personal responsibility, open and fair markets, monetary flexibility and a steadiness of economic policy.

It has been well demonstrated globally that countries with a well-defined system of laws that protect private property rights have prospered, and it is concerning to note the doubt being placed in the agricultural industry due to the rights of mining companies under their mining leases. The doubt that is created in one of our nation's most important industries is a grave concern, as it flows through to other areas of the community as people begin to wonder about the security of food supplies and other agricultural products in the future.

Freedom of contract is an essential component of a well-functioning market economy and means that individuals and businesses are free to negotiate the terms and conditions of their own contracts free from government interference. A current example of the government's failure to adhere to this principle is in respect of the changes proposed under the FOFA reforms, particularly in relation to opt-in provisions. Clients of financial planners have always had the option to move to another financial planner at any time that they see fit, and there is no necessity for the government to add to an already large body of red tape and regulations swamping the financial planning industry by applying onerous opt-in provisions. If the government wish to truly improve the future outcomes for the community, they would do far better to focus on the corporate governance issues affecting the industry, as has been clearly outlined by the Cooper review, and seek to make the product manufacturers more accountable for the products that they bring to market.

Personal responsibility, as we frequently discuss, is something that over the past several decades has been increasingly on the wane. We as a nation seek to have other people solve our problems for us and, unfortunately, over the past few decades increasingly the government has been seen as a saviour for people's problems—and that is irrespective of what side of politics we are on. That devalues the notion of personal responsibility. It is time that we again value the notion of personal responsibility and be prepared to be held accountable for our actions and accept the consequences thereof. It is not good enough for people to go cap in hand to governments to solve their problems, as this ultimately leads to bigger governance with more legislation to administer, the end result being an ever greater bureaucracy and a growing loss of freedom.

Open markets are the cornerstone of our economy, and the ability to trade both internally and externally is vitally important to the future economic prospects of this country. It is important that we continue to pursue new free trade agreements and also to prosecute the argument for removal of subsidies and tariffs globally, which distort our global trade markets. Distortion of subsidies and tariffs results in an obscuring of price signals that indicate to companies what goods and services are actually required. In addition, governments who provide these subsidies are in actuality redistributing the nation's wealth to industries that would not survive without the subsidy. This does not provide the basis for sound economic policy.

One of the greatest problems we have in the world today is that of monetary and financial stability. Since 1971 we have had a global financial system which has developed into a debt based fiat money and inflationary model. This has resulted in a perceived increase in wealth, when in reality it has lead to a decrease in real wealth, increasing inequalities in wealth and income and a general loss of income for the future.

The principles that I have touched on ultimately should all lead to a steadiness of economic policy and activity. It is therefore instructional to look at the current results being generated under the guidance of the current Labor-Greens government. In the four years since Labor came to power, they have squandered a surplus of over $20 billion and succeeded in racking up a net debt of some $107 billion—and growing. These funds have been spent on a variety of projects which may in the initial concept have been sound, but the execution has left a lot to be desired—projects such as the pink batt insulation scheme, which was rorted and resulted in many homes being burned and lives being lost, and the BER school halls program, which in some areas resulted in buildings that were grossly overpriced, were not what schools wanted or were a combination of both. That program lacked consultation with schools and communities to determine what those schools and communities actually required—although that was not across the board; there were areas that were very successful. The NBN has the potential to cost far more than the allocated $36 billion, a cost far in excess of any other similar program globally and one which, despite assurances to the contrary, does not appear to be providing any cost savings in services. It is a project whose magnitude should be reviewed. A cost benefit analysis should be completed to ensure Australian taxpayers are getting value for money. We can touch on many other programs. The set-top box program and the immigration program are other examples of failures of this current Labor-Greens government.

On top of this we have the spectre of a carbon tax, which, according to my investigations at this point at least, will provide no practical on-the-ground environmental benefit. It will however provide us with some of the most expensive power in the world and significantly damage our small to medium sized businesses, which are the majority employers in this nation. That will provide a consequent flow-on to the impact on jobs. In addition, government wishes to seek to implement a mining resource rent tax, which will impact on the sole successful industry in our economy at present.

It has been ably demonstrated over many years that bigger government and higher taxes or higher fees and charges is not the solution to future economic growth. It is actually lower taxes and less regulation, a sound financial system, that provides the framework for businesses to grow and prosper and for our economy to grow and prosper for future generations. It will always be the case that capital being retained by business for future growth will be used far more effectively and thoughtfully than that dollar of capital being in the government's hands for purposes of taxation, government spending or redistribution of wealth. It is those avenues, through capital being retained in business, that will fund the future growth of our economy to prosper into the future, not through the new and higher taxes and regulation imposed by a government that appears to have little if any economic understanding, despite their protestations to the contrary.