Senate debates

Wednesday, 23 November 2016

Bills

Income Tax Rates Amendment (Working Holiday Maker Reform) Bill 2016; Second Reading

12:14 pm

Photo of Peter Whish-WilsonPeter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

and very important for tourism. So why are we penny pinching, trying to raise what is essentially a couple of hundred million dollars from some of the lowest-income workers in this country? What we should be doing—and let us be totally frank about this—is raising revenue by real economic reform.

We just debated and passed a super bill that will raise us some revenue. But, if we had actually taken more money off the super wealthy in this country that rort superannuation to pay their tax, we could have got billions of dollars more to help pay for services in this country and balance the budget. Instead, Senator O'Sullivan's National Party are trying to put agricultural producers at risk and take money off backpackers. How pathetic! How dangerous! This bill is stupid. It has been poorly thought through. It has been hanging around like a bad smell for 18 months—and it raises no money.

One agricultural producer who gave evidence in Tasmania said: 'If it ain't broke, why fix it?' Absolutely. Why are we supposedly fixing this system? Why are we changing the tax rates for backpackers? I can tell you why: it is because of this government's obsession with what they call deficit repair. I do not even buy that argument in this case, because they are virtually raising no money. They are taking money off backpackers who, on an average, earn $14,000 when they are in Australia, when what we could be doing is getting rid of the diesel fuel rebate that we give to the big, dirty mining companies in this country—$25 billion.

What we could be doing is making the deficit repair levy on the highest income earners in this country permanent. There are a couple of billion dollars that would well and truly cover our poor backpackers. What about other areas of significant reform where we could raise money? We could get rid of negative gearing and capital gains tax concessions that allow wealthy Australians to invest in real estate and not pay tax.

Senator O'Sullivan interjecting—

There is another $11 billion or $12 billion, Senator O'Sullivan. Why on earth are we trying to take money off backpackers? I cannot think of a good explanation—I really am stumped—except for the stubbornness of this Treasurer. I know, Senator O'Sullivan, from discussions with your side of the chamber, that a number of Liberals and Nationals do not like this bill. They are vehemently opposed to it. Yet here we are debating this bill with no compromise at all from the government.

We have taken a clear, strong, unambiguous position on this bill from the day it was raised. We said no to a tax on backpackers. We want backpackers to pay the same tax as Australians. A tax on backpackers puts at risk our agricultural producers, and it is not the way that we should be raising revenue in this country. We have never wavered from that position from day one. It is good to hear the Labor Party are considering amendments, but I have been disappointed with their stance on this bill as well.

Comments

No comments