Arthur Sinodinos (NSW, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to take note of answers by ministers to all of the questions of the opposition today. May I say, I am disappointed that Labor live in the past. They continue to think of this year's budget as a replay of last year's budget, so all they can do is reheat and replay the rhetoric of last year. This is a budget which has had a wonderful reception because it has done things to promote greater investment in child care. It has done things to promote greater investment in small business through the instant asset tax write-off and the tax cut to small business.

I am disappointed that Labor cannot come onboard. In fact, there is a real dissonance here between Labor's rhetoric and Labor's actions. Today, Labor have agreed with the coalition to pass the indexation of fuel excise, which is an important reform, which will stop the real price of fuel going down and which will be a compensation measure as well as a revenue-protection measure.

Labor should stand up and admit what their actions actually betray. We have had budget issues in this country. You have a government that is moving to address those budget issues. We thank Labor for the fact that today they have agreed to support the reintroduction of indexation of fuel excise. We just want them to come on board and embrace the bipartisanship of fixing Australia's problems. Simply admit it. They are not prepared—ever—to talk about spending cuts. They are always talking about where they will raise more tax. We want lower, simpler and fairer tax where possible. Labor should get on board and admit what their actions today indicate. They know in their hearts there are budget issues that have to be addressed.

There was discussion today about the forthcoming white paper on reform of the federation. We face real issues with our federation. There are many services provided by the states but the states do not have the revenue to meet those service needs—whereas we as a federal government have access to income taxes. We raise the goods and services tax, which we pass onto the states. We have much more resilient tax bases than the states. There is where we need to have a debate. That is what the white paper on federation reform is all about. The fact that we have raised options about what may happen with health and education is an indication—not that any particular option will get up, but we need to have the discussion about how we best rearrange roles and responsibilities so that those who raise the revenue have responsibility for delivering the service and vice versa. As you know, if the revenue comes from somewhere else you may not have the same responsibility for rolling out the service as efficiently and effectively as possible.

It was the coalition that introduced the goods and services tax and the proceeds from that go to the states to fund essential community services. This is what the debate is all about. This is the debate about resilient tax bases to help, among other things, fund an appropriately sized public sector. Senator Cameron, sadly, is wrong when he talks about government policy being captured by ideologues and others. It is captured by pragmatic consideration of what we need to do to make the federation sustainable and, at the state level, for governments to be able to do their jobs.

There are some state governments on the other side of politics—in this case, South Australia, led by Jay Weatherill—who had something to say about the forthcoming white paper on federation reform. It is only a discussion paper. Mr Weatherill said: 'We've been asking them to canvas the broader range of options.' He added: 'There's a broad debate going on about Commonwealth-state relations, which is a good thing.' I was in South Australia over the weekend with some of my colleagues. It is clear that South Australia faces particular issues and concerns. They know they have to front up to more radical reform than may have been necessary in the past, and they are prepared to do things that are radical in order to bring about an improved economic performance.

It is important for us as the federal government to be open to doing what we can to bring about that better performance. Ultimately, Labor—to be electable again—will need to have a genuine reform agenda and not simply say 'no' to everything that the coalition puts up.