House debates

Tuesday, 27 March 2018

Questions without Notice

Taxation

2:27 pm

Photo of Tanya PlibersekTanya Plibersek (Sydney, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition) Share this | | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. This morning the finance minister twice refused to endorse the Prime minister's claim that a $65 billion big business tax giveaway will increase wages. Why won't the Prime Minister admit that his $65 billion of handouts is for the benefit of big business and not for the benefit of workers?

Photo of Malcolm TurnbullMalcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | | Hansard source

I thank the honourable member for her question. I want to be very clear about this. The analysis that shows that the result for wages will be an average $750 more in the pocket of Australian workers as a result of these company tax cuts is exactly the same analysis that was done back in 2010 when the member for Lilley, as Treasurer, boasted that the increase that would come from the cut in company tax in the 2010 Labor budget would put an extra $450 a year into the pockets of workers on average earnings. This is the most conventional economic analysis, which has been recognised again and again, not least by the honourable member's leader, the member for Maribyrnong, who in 2011, standing right here, said:

Cutting the company income tax rate increases domestic productivity and domestic investment. More capital means higher productivity and economic growth and leads to more jobs and higher wages.

They were his words and the Treasury's analysis. They are the conventional economic consequences of reducing business taxes.

You talk about surveys. If you did a survey of past Labor treasurers, beginning with the member for McMahon and continuing with the member for Lilley, you would find they would all be on a unity ticket agreeing with exactly what the Leader of the Opposition said when he was in government in 2011. It reminds us why you simply cannot trust the Leader of the Opposition. He says one thing one day, another thing the next. One thing, in 2011, makes very plain what the consequences of cutting company tax are: more investment, more productivity, better wages, more jobs and so forth. Now, of course, they're all in denial about that. It is about time the Labor Party stopped trying to deceive and delude the Australian public into thinking that the laws of economics have been suspended. They haven't. The fact is, we know. That's why Paul Keating cut company taxes, it's why Peter Costello did, it's why the member for Lilley sought to do so in 2010, it's why the member for McMahon wrote a book about it—so enthusiastic was he to do that. The reality is our company tax cuts will deliver more jobs and better-paid jobs, and the cuts we have in place already are part of the reason we are seeing the highest jobs growth in Australian history. The Labor Party wants to campaign on less investment, fewer jobs and lower wages. That would be a disaster for Australian workers. (Time expired)