Sue Lines (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I too rise to take note of answers given by Senator Cormann and Senator Brandis to questions asked by Labor regarding taxation. It is really hard to keep up with the daily flip-flopping of the Turnbull government. Its approach to tax has been nothing short of shambolic. Look at the rhetoric and rubbish we have heard from those opposite today. They must think that, if they yell really loudly, suddenly that makes it all right or that it is so loud we cannot hear anything. We heard ancient history from the Nationals in relation to tax, and do you know why that is? Because they have absolutely nothing to say—nothing to say.

The government are busily contradicting themselves all over the place—left, right, centre. They have no idea what is going on in terms of tax, and we have caught them napping. When Labor came out with its very sensible negative gearing policy, they were caught napping, because they have nothing left in their tax portfolio because one minister or another has ruled it out, although some have ruled things back in. But those opposite, the members of the Turnbull government, seriously think the Australian dream is to negatively gear your seventh house! Labor knows that actually the dream is being able to afford your first house. Sure, Senator Back might go on and on about those who negatively gear, and I put it on the record here today that I am one of them. But that does not mean that I do not think the system needs change. Of course it needs change. I am certainly more than willing to pay my fair share of tax and I do not resile from that. I want to see housing at an affordable level in this country. But those opposite do not see that. As usual, they are looking after the big end of town.

The best we have heard from the Treasurer was talk about unicorns! That is really what we heard from the Treasurer. Yesterday we saw Mr Abbott—sorry, Mr Turnbull, the Prime Minister. Actually, they are interchangeable these days, so who would know? Mr Turnbull was channelling his inner Mr Abbott, as within just 48 hours we saw the government consider making the superannuation guarantee an opt-out for low-income Australians, and then, last night, reports revealed the government has a secret plan to halve the current 33 per cent capital gains tax discount for super funds.

This latest leak comes after the Prime Minister yesterday in question time channelled his inner Mr Abbott and attacked our policy—Labor's sensible policy—of halving the capital gains tax discount for individuals and trusts. What Mr Turnbull said in question time yesterday was:

… I can say to the honourable member opposite that increasing capital gains tax is no part of our thinking whatsoever.

That is what is in the Hansard. He cannot get away from that statement. It is clear as anything: it is no part of their thinking whatsoever. But what happened then? Senator Cormann quickly came to the Prime Minister's defence, when he said:

… the Prime Minister never just makes comments on the fly, there are very carefully considered judgments …

Well, they caught everyone out, because later on yesterday afternoon we had the bizarre occurrence of the Prime Minister's office—his own office—briefing newspapers that, despite Mr Turnbull's declaration on capital gains tax, the government was in fact looking at options to change the capital gains tax. Australians are not fooled by this, and voters have quite rightly started to see Mr Turnbull in his true light, as he channels Mr Abbott.

What happened yesterday was, again, an attack on workers by the Turnbull government. They have done a lot of things to hurt workers. They want to scrap penalty rates, they froze the super benefits for workers with the help of the crossbenches and they took away the superannuation low-income guarantee. So you have to wonder, when the Prime Minister is contradicted not just by his own ministers but by his own office: is he going to be replaced? Seriously, is he going to be the Prime Minister that leads us to the next election? Who would know. (Time expired)