Kristina Keneally (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Treasurer, Minister Cormann. Last week the Treasurer said that 'government has never entertained' changes to cash refunds of dividend imputation. Will the minister guarantee to the Senate that the government never has considered changes to cash refunds for dividend imputation?

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The short answer to that question is yes. What I would also say to you is that I've got in front of me a document called 'A fairer tax system with no GST.' Do you remember it? It was embargoed to 2.30 pm on 27 August 1998. These were the glorious days of Kim Beazley.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is this the best you can do? 1998! Is that the best you can do?

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No. Because we had the shadow Treasurer and the Leader of the Opposition coming out: this was a bit of handout from the Howard government. Let me quote to the Senate point No. 5 of 'A fairer tax system with no GST.' This is what it says:

Labor Will:

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Wong, on a point of order.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Cormann has a little bit of an obsession with the 1990s, it appears, Mr President. As much as that might extend to his musical taste, I raise a point of order of direct relevance, which is: this has nothing to do with the question that was asked.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On the point of order, Senator Cormann?

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have to say that Senator Wong is misleading the Senate: 99 Luftballons was in the 1980s, not the 1990s.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On the point of order, I heard the minister directly answer the question at the beginning of his answer. He is allowed to add further relevant information to the question.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's not relevant to the question.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is relevant to the content of the question asked.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, perhaps you would enlighten us as to how an opposition policy in 1998 is in any way relevant to the question asked. We would be interested in that information.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On the point of order, the minister directly answered the question asked by Senator Keneally. He is then adding further information he considers relevant—that I consider relevant—to that answer. He directly answered the question at the commencement of it.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We'd like to understand why, Mr President.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Wong, I will talk to you after question time. I've ruled that it's relevant.

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question by Senator Keneally goes to the heart of the modern Labor Party. The reason this is relevant, Mr President, is that I'm comparing and contrasting the Labor Party under Mr Shorten with the Labor Party of old under Mr Beazley. What we can see is that Mr Shorten is all about putting his hands into the pockets of pensioners and self-funded retirees, whereas Mr Beazley understood the cost-of-living pressures that pensioners and self-funded retirees were facing. Our government has not considered such a proposal. We are not prepared to put our hands into the pockets of pensioners and self-funded retirees. Bill Shorten's two-card trick these days is to run a vested-interest-type attack against the so-called undeserving rich, to run the— (Time expired)

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Keneally, a supplementary questions.

Kristina Keneally (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the minister for going back to 1998. I wasn't even a citizen then, so I appreciate the history lesson. How can the Treasurer's comments be correct, given that it has now been revealed that Treasury did in fact prepare a dossier entitled 'Tax policy: dividend imputation' in the lead-up to the last budget? Did Treasury do any work on options to limit access to cash refunds in the lead-up to last year's budget?

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Nothing that Senator Keneally has just put is in any way inconsistent with the answer that I gave to the primary question. We've got 167,000 public servants. From time to time some of these public servants will feel the need to do some work on certain things that—

Senator Wong interjecting—

You know what? From time to time, people consider various things, because they're part of the public debate that is pursued, including by the Labor Party. But that does not mean that at any point this was—

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This has nothing to do with us. This is Treasury.

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This does not mean that at any point the government either considered or asked for or made a decision to support such a policy. I can assure you, and I can assure the self-funded retirees and the pensioners of Australia, that a Turnbull-led Liberal-National party government will not put its hands into the pockets of pensioners and self-funded retirees with a policy like this of changing the— (Time expired)

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Keneally, a final supplementary question.

Kristina Keneally (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Why doesn't the government have any tax policy other than to give multinationals a $65 billion tax cut?

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We stand on the side of Australian workers. Nine out of 10 Australian workers work for private sector business, and we don't want the businesses that employ them to be disadvantaged compared to businesses in other parts of the world who pay substantially less tax. We want Australians to have the best possible opportunity to get ahead and be successful. We understand that, for that to happen, the businesses that employ them have to have the best possible opportunity to be successful and profitable in the years and decades to come.

Now, Labor may think this is a joke. That is actually what the Labor Party used to think. That is what Bill Shorten used to say, that is what Chris Bowen used to say and, indeed, that is what Senator Wong very succinctly and eloquently argued for in years gone by. If we want Australians today and into the future to be the most successful they can be and to get ahead, we need the businesses that employ them and that pay their wages to be more profitable into the future. That is why we don't want our businesses to be disadvantaged compared to businesses in other parts of the world.