Mark Butler (Port Adelaide, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Climate Change and Energy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. On ABC radio this morning Malcolm Turnbull warned that giving in to the threats of the member for Hughes to go to the crossbench would be the worst and weakest option, saying:

Giving in to threats of this kind is really, I mean it is the antithesis of good government, giving into threats of that kind.

Why does this Prime Minister always choose the worst and the weakest option, including on government policy?

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

The premise of the question is false. No such threats were ever made. But, when it comes to the weakest option, he's sitting right there—that's who it is. When it comes to our economy, the weakest option is the Labor Party, because only the Labor Party wants to put $200 billion worth of higher taxes on the Australian economy. Only the Labor Party thinks it's a great idea that, when the housing market has softened, you go and hit it with a great big tax when it comes to abolishing negative gearing as we know it and increasing capital gains tax by 50 per cent. Only the geniuses that thought it was a great idea to impose the mining tax at its peak level of vulnerability think it's a great idea to pose a housing tax when the housing market is at its peak level of vulnerability. When it comes to weakness, when it comes to vulnerability, its name is Labor when it comes to the economy.