This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/live/2018/may/10/federal-budget-tax-turnbull-defends-tax-plan-as-shorten-prepares-response-byelection-politics-live
The article has changed 18 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 9 | Version 10 |
|---|---|
| Question time: 'shifty' the new slogan as government goes on attack | |
| (35 minutes later) | |
| Julie Collins to Ken Wyatt: | |
| My question is to the Minister for Aged Care: Before the budget, Australians were told the Government would axe the cut to the energy supplement, announce 20,000 new home care places, and invest billions more in aged care. Given none of this happened, hasn’t the Minister perpetuated a cruel hoax on older Australians? | |
| Wyatt: | |
| “I would suggest that the member, firstly,read the Portfolio Budget Statement in respect of pages 193. That identifies...over the forward years. It is a $5 billion investment. Now, when we consider - and let me go to another issue in this answer - a rolled-gold Treasurer had responsibility for setting the budgets in home care packages under the Living Longer Living Better legislation. Had he looked at the Australian population pyramid, he would have made a different judgement in respect to the amount that was required. So,the member for Lilley needed to take that into consideration. What we’ve done is we have invested in aged care to the tune of $5 billion. We’ve increased the number of residential care beds. We’ve increased the number in the forward years of home care places. We are providing programs and services to regional Australia that has a better outcome for people living in the bush. Our budget figures are accurate. They are not zero. I would suggest to the member for Franklin you read both my statement yesterday and the budget papers. Because we are making a serious commitment to senior Australians in this nation, across Commonwealth Home Programs, Home Care Packages and residential care, plus those supporting measures which give them the quality of life that they deserve, for the work that they have done for this nation. To scaremonger, to fearmonger and create angst in senior Australians is not appropriate. I have people who have now said they are not going into aged care because of the politicking that is occurring. Start to consider the needs of those who have the pathway into support services. But our budget measures are increasing. If you look at each year, we increase by approximately$1 billion per year, and over the last four years we’ve increased the budget by $1 billion to make up for the deficit that was there when we came into Government from a Labor government. There is a need for us to focus on their needs, and to ensure that they are given the opportunities.” | |
| We move on to Paul Fletcher, for a dixer but a moth just flew into the office and I got distracted. | |
| Wait - he brings me back in with a mention of “Team Queensland”. According to emails which went out today, Peter Dutton is the leader of Team Queensland. I thought it was Cam Smith, but apparently that’s changed since I left. | |
| Another dixer. | |
| The budget is great guys. All hail the budget. #deathtodixers | |
| Jim Chalmers to Malcolm Turnbull: | |
| Why was the Prime Minister willing to separately legislate different stages of the Government’s corporate tax cuts but is unwilling to do the same for tax cuts for low- and middle-income earners? Why is it always one rule for big business and another for low- and middle-income earners? Isn’t the Prime Minister the only person standing in the way of tax cuts for ordinary Australians from 1 July? | |
| Turnbull punts it to Scott Morrison: | |
| We’ve put the whole Enterprise Tax Plan to this Parliament. We put that in this House of Representatives and it was passed by this House. And we’ve done exactly the same thing here, Mr Speaker. And I say to the member - and if they give leave, we’ll be happy to debate this bill right now, Mr Speaker! Why don’t you give us leave and we’ll pass it now, the whole thing. Come on! Let’s have the debate. Let’s pass the bill! Shall I seek leave, Mr Speaker, to bring on that motion of business? | |
| “We’ll have that opportunity very shortly, if they so desire, Mr Speaker. We gave them that opportunity the other day, and the Shadow Treasurer scurried under the table there, Mr Speaker, like the little rat he is, Mr Speaker. He’s got under there...” | |
| He is made to withdraw the rat comment, and does. | |
| “I would hate to offend the sensibilities of the member for McMahon, Mr Speaker. We know what a precious flower he is, Mr Speaker. We know what a petal he is. But, Mr Speaker, when it comes to this issue, I have a question for the Labor Party, and I know the answer, so it’s rhetorical. They, Mr Speaker, do not want to act on bracket creep in this country. | |
| “That’s what they’re saying. They have been shifty all week on this, as shifty as the Leader of the Opposition. They’re hedging their bets, they’re saying, “We’ll support this. Maybe we’ll support that.” The Australian people just want a straight answer from the Labor Party. Do you support lower taxes for all Australians? Simple question. Or are you just gonna - are you gonna be stuck in your rut of envy and bitterness and want to punish Australians, who are just working hard and seeking to get on, Mr Speaker? The Labor Party, when it comes to tax, are rolled-gold failures. Absolute rolled-gold failures. And they’re led by a rolled-gold failure.” | |
| He delivers it in much the same way as I imagine Donald Trump yells at the television while watching Saturday Night Live | |
| Right, after a discussion in the office about what the convicts in chain gangs, as well as the Indigenous people and early immigrants, in particular the Chinese, would have thought about the statement that this country was “not built on envy and bitterness”, we get back to it. | |
| Bill Shorten to Malcolm Turnbull: | |
| Can the prime minister confirm that under his tax plan a nurse who earns $50,000 will have the same marginal tax rate as a lawyer who earns $200,000 a year? And how is that fair? | |
| Turnbull: | |
| I thank the honourable member for his question. Under the revised tax scales at the end of the seven-year plan, the 45c threshold comes in at $200,000, so the marginal tax rate there on is 45c in the dollar. Plus, of course, the Medicare levy. So, the 32.5c marginal rate goes from $41,000 to $200,000...” | |
| [Can I direct members to] ... the Grattan report, which they’ve quoted earlier. And I just note that this states here, once fully implemented, “the personal income tax plan doesn’t change the progressivety of the tax system much. Overall, those on high incomes will pay a similar proportion of total tax revenues, with or without the plan. | |
| Chris Bowen to Scott Morrison: | |
| I refer to Grattan Institute modelling into the government’s personal income tax scheme released a short time ago. Can the treasurer confirm that $15bn of the annual $25bn cost of the government’s scheme will come from collecting less tax from the top 20% of income earners? Treasurer, how is this fair? | |
| Morrison: | |
| In 2015-16, those on the top tax bracket paid 30.3% of all personal income tax collected. And under the government’s plan, Treasury estimates those on the top tax bracket will pay around 36% of all personal income tax collected in 2024-25. As the prime minister was pointing out before, someone earning $205,000 will be earning five times more but paying 13 times more tax, 13 times more tax, Mr Speaker. | |
| So, under this plan, under this plan, the progressivety of our tax system is well protected and well respected. | |
| Mr Speaker, the problem with the Labor party is they don’t understand that this country was not built on envy and bitterness, and our tax system shouldn’t be built on envy and bitterness either. Those opposite, the Labor party, think that the only way that people on low and middle incomes can do better is if they make people on other incomes do worse. This is the flat-earth thinking that chokes economies, Mr Speaker, and that’s why the Labor party cannot be trusted to run what will be estimated, over the next four years, a $2tr economy. | |
| I wouldn’t trust the leader of the opposition with $2, Mr Speaker. And yet he walks around here, thumping himself about on issues of rolled-gold guarantees. Well, he might think he’s the golden member of this parliament, Mr Speaker, but he’s a rolled-gold failure as a member of this parliament. | |
| The Grattan Institute has released its modelling of the government’s $140bn, seven-year, personal income tax plan. What did it find? When fully implemented $15bn of the annual $25bn cost of the plan will result from collecting less tax from the top 20% of income earners #auspol pic.twitter.com/sIgjpsEqC7 | |
| Opposition leader Bill Shorten in the eye of the rolled gold storm during #qt @AmyRemeikis @GuardianAus @murpharoo #politicslive pic.twitter.com/Jt99W1F8jq | |
| Tanya Plibersek to Malcolm Turnbull: | |
| Is the prime minister aware that on Sky News today, the CEO of the Grattan Institute said the government’s income tax scheme includes “a small tax cut for low income earners and a very large tax cut for high income earners”? Can the prime minister detect a pattern here? Is this why the prime minister won’t give a straight answer on the cost of his policies? | |
| Turnbull: | |
| All of the details of the impact of the personal income tax cuts on different levels of income and different households are all set out in the budget papers and accompanying documents. And it is very, very clear that tax relief goes, in the first instance, to people on low and middle income, and subsequently it goes to the broad range of income earners other than those, of course, the only rate – the rate that is not affected is the 45% rate and the threshold is lifted to $200,000 in seven years’ time. What will the cost - the 10-year cost has been given already by the treasurer. | |
| But the point is – the point is that their income tax system remains, in terms of the distribution of the burden, as it is today, where the largest share of the tax is paid by those on higher incomes. And I refer the honourable member to the answer I gave the member for Melbourne a moment ago. | |
| Peter Dutton is up next for his daily dixer - YOU ARE ALL REALLY, REALLY SAFE. | |
| Christopher Pyne diverts from his favourite dixer topic of how terrible unions and the Labor party are, to allow a dixer on how terrible Labor is at interpreting high court rulings. | |
| He finishes with this: “I’m afraid the leader of the opposition’s political career is starting to have the smell of death about it.” | |
| (That’s two dixers off the budget topic now, less than 48 hours after the budget was delivered) | |
| Tony Burke to Scott Morrison: | |
| Given the treasurer refuses to provide the updated costing of his corporate tax cuts, will he at least say whether it’s higher than the figure he stated last year? Is it $80bn? Is it below $100bn or above $100bn? Are we getting warmer? Does he know whether it’s an odd number or an even number? Or does he have a clue about a figure he could answer last year? | |
| Scott Morrison, who still somehow has a voice, despite having given Cardi B a run for her money in terms of the volume stakes, appears to have misunderstood what exactly Pharrell and Daft Punk meant about getting lucky: | |
| I can assure the member opposite that when it comes to economic management, the Labor party is as cold and as stone-cold as they come. They have not got any warmer in opposition than they were in government. | |
| When they were in government, Mr Speaker, they recklessly spent. And the thing about the Labor party is this – when they’re in government, when they’re in government, it’s always someone else’s fault. Despite the facts, they had $150-a-tonne iron ore prices and they had global growth running at higher rates, Mr Speaker, it wasn’t up to them that the revenue fell out. | |
| It was always someone else’s fault. But when it was the Liberal party and the National party in government back in 2007, the member for Lilley and others used to go, “Well, it’s only going so well in the economy because they’ve all just got so lucky. Terribly, terribly, terribly lucky.” And we have been hearing it from them again now when we’re talking about the stronger economy that’s been built under this government. And they’re saying it’s all about what’s happening overseas. | |
| They’re all just getting so terribly, terribly, terribly lucky again. Well, what I’ve noticed, Mr Speaker, is every time Australians vote Liberal and National, they get a lot luckier, the economy gets a lot luckier, Mr Speaker. I’ve got one response – vote Liberal and National and get lucky.” | |
| Bill Shorten again asks Malcolm Turnbull about the total cost of the company tax cut. | Bill Shorten again asks Malcolm Turnbull about the total cost of the company tax cut. |
| The prime minister again launches into something that is not about the company tax cut, and Tony Smith interupts: | The prime minister again launches into something that is not about the company tax cut, and Tony Smith interupts: |
| I have a ruling I’d like to make, if that’s OK. I have been listening very carefully to the prime minister. I listened very carefully to the question. And whilst that is a topic of the day, the question did not relate to it. And the prime minister needs to address himself to the substance of the question. | |
| We move on to a dixer where Christian Porter gets to read out the high court ruling on Katy Gallagher and say “rolled gold” a million times. | |
| You can’t trust him on the law. You can’t trust him on the economy. You can’t trust him on the budget. It is shifty, shifty, shifty. | |
| So now it’s confirmed - there is the Coalition’s campaign slogan. But it looks like even they have gotten bored talking about the budget. | |
| Scott Morrison gets the latest “this budget is as if a tiger and a lion had a baby and the resulting liger discovered a unicorn that vomited gold” dixer. | |
| You can hear him winding up to his “muppet” zinger, speaking as fast as you would if you had to complete a reading of Middlemarch to the class before you can get to the bathroom. | |
| Boom – we get there: “What we see in the leader of the opposition is a shifty character. He’s shifty as.” | |
| Adam Bandt has today’s crossbench question: | Adam Bandt has today’s crossbench question: |
| Australia has a proud history of egalitarianism and we can look after everyone in our community because of our progressive tax system, where people who earn more pay a higher rate of tax. But your new flat tax plan is the end of progressive taxation in this country. How is it fair that someone earning $200,000 a year pays the same rate of tax as someone who is just above the minimum wage? Why do you want to be the prime minister that killed egalitarianism? | Australia has a proud history of egalitarianism and we can look after everyone in our community because of our progressive tax system, where people who earn more pay a higher rate of tax. But your new flat tax plan is the end of progressive taxation in this country. How is it fair that someone earning $200,000 a year pays the same rate of tax as someone who is just above the minimum wage? Why do you want to be the prime minister that killed egalitarianism? |
| Malcolm Turnbull (using his “I was a lawyer, you should probably listen to me, because I’m right” tone of voice): | Malcolm Turnbull (using his “I was a lawyer, you should probably listen to me, because I’m right” tone of voice): |
| I want to thank the honourable member for his question, Mr Speaker. Because it gives me the opportunity to remind the honourable member that at the end of the seven-year personal income tax reform plan that we are setting out, which has been set out in the budget, it’s been introduced into the House in legislation by the treasurer, at the end of it, where 94% of Australians will not have to pay more than 32.5c for any additional dollar they earn, so the marginal tax rate, which he’s objecting to – yes, he doesn’t like it – from $41,000 up to $200,000 will be 32.5c. | I want to thank the honourable member for his question, Mr Speaker. Because it gives me the opportunity to remind the honourable member that at the end of the seven-year personal income tax reform plan that we are setting out, which has been set out in the budget, it’s been introduced into the House in legislation by the treasurer, at the end of it, where 94% of Australians will not have to pay more than 32.5c for any additional dollar they earn, so the marginal tax rate, which he’s objecting to – yes, he doesn’t like it – from $41,000 up to $200,000 will be 32.5c. |
| This is the outcome. At that time, someone on $205,000 taxable income, earning five times as much as someone on $41,000 taxable income, will pay 13 times as much tax. And that is the whole point. The tax system remains thoroughly progressive in the sense that the bulk of the tax is paid by people on higher incomes. | This is the outcome. At that time, someone on $205,000 taxable income, earning five times as much as someone on $41,000 taxable income, will pay 13 times as much tax. And that is the whole point. The tax system remains thoroughly progressive in the sense that the bulk of the tax is paid by people on higher incomes. |
| It remains the bulk of the tax, as it is now, will be paid by the few and not by the many. But, but what it will ensure is that constituents in his electorate, in every electorate in this House, who want to earn more, who want to get ahead, who want to do some more hours, who want to take on another promotion or start a business, will know that they will not be put off that or disincentivised by higher and higher marginal tax rates. It is an outstanding reform, and it speaks to the optimism, the confidence and the aspiration that underpins the strength of the Australian economy. We know what makes the Australian economy strong. It’s the optimism, the investment, the confidence of Australians. Of Australian businesses in particular. And we are backing them. | It remains the bulk of the tax, as it is now, will be paid by the few and not by the many. But, but what it will ensure is that constituents in his electorate, in every electorate in this House, who want to earn more, who want to get ahead, who want to do some more hours, who want to take on another promotion or start a business, will know that they will not be put off that or disincentivised by higher and higher marginal tax rates. It is an outstanding reform, and it speaks to the optimism, the confidence and the aspiration that underpins the strength of the Australian economy. We know what makes the Australian economy strong. It’s the optimism, the investment, the confidence of Australians. Of Australian businesses in particular. And we are backing them. |
| Tanya Plibersek: | Tanya Plibersek: |
| This morning, The Australian newspaper reports economist Saul Eslake said the total cost of tax cuts over 10 years, legislated and proposed to be legislated by this government, could be even higher than $80bn. Is he right? | This morning, The Australian newspaper reports economist Saul Eslake said the total cost of tax cuts over 10 years, legislated and proposed to be legislated by this government, could be even higher than $80bn. Is he right? |
| #theprimeministerdoesnotanswerthequestion | #theprimeministerdoesnotanswerthequestion |
| Moving on. | Moving on. |
| Chris Bowen to Scott Morrison: | Chris Bowen to Scott Morrison: |
| Given the treasurer has now had 24 hours to confirm the answer, I ask what is the total cost of the corporate tax cuts over 10 years from 1 July this year, both legislated and proposed to be legislated by the government? | Given the treasurer has now had 24 hours to confirm the answer, I ask what is the total cost of the corporate tax cuts over 10 years from 1 July this year, both legislated and proposed to be legislated by the government? |
| Morrison: | Morrison: |
| The unlegislated tax plan that the member refers to, the cost of that is $35.6bn over the period from 2016-17 to 2027-28. To 2027-28. It’s 10 years. Count them up. Mr Speaker, what the Labor party wants to know is what is the cost of increasing tax on small business. | The unlegislated tax plan that the member refers to, the cost of that is $35.6bn over the period from 2016-17 to 2027-28. To 2027-28. It’s 10 years. Count them up. Mr Speaker, what the Labor party wants to know is what is the cost of increasing tax on small business. |
| Now, we don’t have a policy to increase tax on small and medium-sized businesses up to $50m. I don’t have such a policy. The prime minister doesn’t have such a policy. | Now, we don’t have a policy to increase tax on small and medium-sized businesses up to $50m. I don’t have such a policy. The prime minister doesn’t have such a policy. |
| The only people who have a policy to increase taxes on small and medium businesses is the Labor party. So, if that’s their policy, Mr Speaker, they should tell Australians what it costs. | The only people who have a policy to increase taxes on small and medium businesses is the Labor party. So, if that’s their policy, Mr Speaker, they should tell Australians what it costs. |
| Because we don’t have such a policy. It’s their policy to increase taxes on small and medium-sized businesses. So, the shadow treasurer should be talking to the 3.3m businesses out there that have a turnover of less than $50m, and he should say to the 7.2 million Australians who work for those businesses, why you’re putting up the taxes on those businesses. | Because we don’t have such a policy. It’s their policy to increase taxes on small and medium-sized businesses. So, the shadow treasurer should be talking to the 3.3m businesses out there that have a turnover of less than $50m, and he should say to the 7.2 million Australians who work for those businesses, why you’re putting up the taxes on those businesses. |
| That’s your policy. You cost it. Do your own work. We’re getting on with the job of putting more than a thousand people in work every single day, under the policies of this government, Mr Speaker. So, it’s up to them to do their own work. | That’s your policy. You cost it. Do your own work. We’re getting on with the job of putting more than a thousand people in work every single day, under the policies of this government, Mr Speaker. So, it’s up to them to do their own work. |
| But, Mr Speaker, whatever they promise tonight from the leader of the opposition, whatever rolled-gold promises he makes to the Australian people, we know, Mr Speaker, that no one can trust the rolled-gold promises of the leader of the opposition, Mr Speaker. Even those on his own side of politics can’t trust the rolled-gold promises of the leader of the opposition. The workers he used to represent when he used to bargain away their penalty rates, Mr Speaker, they couldn’t trust the rolled-gold promises of the leader of the opposition. | But, Mr Speaker, whatever they promise tonight from the leader of the opposition, whatever rolled-gold promises he makes to the Australian people, we know, Mr Speaker, that no one can trust the rolled-gold promises of the leader of the opposition, Mr Speaker. Even those on his own side of politics can’t trust the rolled-gold promises of the leader of the opposition. The workers he used to represent when he used to bargain away their penalty rates, Mr Speaker, they couldn’t trust the rolled-gold promises of the leader of the opposition. |
| The leader of the opposition is shifty as. | The leader of the opposition is shifty as. |
| Having delivered it in the same tone of voice I imagine he uses after being cut off for the fourth time in a row, while running late for the NRL grand final, Morrison runs out of steam as he uses the millennial-approved “shifty as” insult. Bill Shorten stands with a point of order: | Having delivered it in the same tone of voice I imagine he uses after being cut off for the fourth time in a row, while running late for the NRL grand final, Morrison runs out of steam as he uses the millennial-approved “shifty as” insult. Bill Shorten stands with a point of order: |
| You know, the treasurer makes a mockery of doing personal explanations. We’ve dealt with that matter. He knows better. | You know, the treasurer makes a mockery of doing personal explanations. We’ve dealt with that matter. He knows better. |
| We move on to the latest THIS BUDGET IS AMAZING AND HAS GREAT SKILLS AND VOTERS LIKE BUDGETS WITH SKILLS dixer. | We move on to the latest THIS BUDGET IS AMAZING AND HAS GREAT SKILLS AND VOTERS LIKE BUDGETS WITH SKILLS dixer. |
| Where we left off yesterday – Bill Shorten wants to know what the total cost of the company tax cuts are. | Where we left off yesterday – Bill Shorten wants to know what the total cost of the company tax cuts are. |
| Malcolm Turnbull opens with a prepared bit on “rolled gold guarantees”: | Malcolm Turnbull opens with a prepared bit on “rolled gold guarantees”: |
| He is a guaranteed deliverer of Olympic proportions. He gave a rolled gold guarantee that all of his members, including the ones that have just resigned, were eligible to sit in the House! And he did so – he did so after – after the high court had made it abundantly clear last year – last year – that they were not eligible. Oh, yes! He did. He kept on saying they were fine. And, of course, he was backed up by that booming advocate, the member for Isaacs [Mark Dreyfus]. A reminder, Mr Speaker, I am reminded of the late Neville Wran, when he said, “Anyone can go to jail if they get the right lawyer.” | He is a guaranteed deliverer of Olympic proportions. He gave a rolled gold guarantee that all of his members, including the ones that have just resigned, were eligible to sit in the House! And he did so – he did so after – after the high court had made it abundantly clear last year – last year – that they were not eligible. Oh, yes! He did. He kept on saying they were fine. And, of course, he was backed up by that booming advocate, the member for Isaacs [Mark Dreyfus]. A reminder, Mr Speaker, I am reminded of the late Neville Wran, when he said, “Anyone can go to jail if they get the right lawyer.” |
| Tony Burke has a point of order: | Tony Burke has a point of order: |
| The question was very specific. If the prime minister wants to talk about what the high court will, so hold, he can do so in answer to a dixer. | The question was very specific. If the prime minister wants to talk about what the high court will, so hold, he can do so in answer to a dixer. |
| Turnbull gets back to it, by talking about Labor’s tax plan. | Turnbull gets back to it, by talking about Labor’s tax plan. |
| Burke objects again, and says the PM has defied the order to get to the point. The Speaker, Tony Smith, rules he’s not, because he has ben “comparing and contrasting” tax plans. | Burke objects again, and says the PM has defied the order to get to the point. The Speaker, Tony Smith, rules he’s not, because he has ben “comparing and contrasting” tax plans. |
| Christopher Pyne says something allowing the Speaker to indulge in one of his favourite QT activities – burning Christopher Pyne: | Christopher Pyne says something allowing the Speaker to indulge in one of his favourite QT activities – burning Christopher Pyne: |
| His interjections are regular but they’re not persuasive. | His interjections are regular but they’re not persuasive. |
| Turnbull gives the same answer he and Scott Morrison spent all of yesterday not answering. | Turnbull gives the same answer he and Scott Morrison spent all of yesterday not answering. |
| We move on to the first of “how awesome is this awesome budget” dixers. Tl;dr: Malcolm Turnbull loves this budget as much as Kanye loves Kanye. | We move on to the first of “how awesome is this awesome budget” dixers. Tl;dr: Malcolm Turnbull loves this budget as much as Kanye loves Kanye. |
| Tony Burke has announced that he has received the resignations from Justine Keay, Susan Lamb, Josh Wilson and Tim Hammond. | Tony Burke has announced that he has received the resignations from Justine Keay, Susan Lamb, Josh Wilson and Tim Hammond. |
| He’ll tell us later when the byelections will be held (probably 16 June). | He’ll tell us later when the byelections will be held (probably 16 June). |
| It’s that time again. The bells are ringing and I have a box of pizza shapes. LET’S DO THIS. | It’s that time again. The bells are ringing and I have a box of pizza shapes. LET’S DO THIS. |
| #QuestionTime is about to commence in the Chamber. Watch it live at https://t.co/8DB1X3AQDV | #QuestionTime is about to commence in the Chamber. Watch it live at https://t.co/8DB1X3AQDV |