Ms HALL (2:52 PM) —My question is directed to the Treasurer. Treasurer, do you stand by your claim, as set out in your original GST package, that the price of clothing will increase by only 6.8 per cent as a result of the GST? If so, why does Allan Fels's GST shopping list state that the price of clothing will increase by 9.8 per cent? If Allan Fels does not believe your GST price promises, why should ordinary Australians?

Mr COSTELLO (Treasurer) —In answer to the honourable member for Shortland's question, I certainly do stand by the distribution and the analysis which was put in the A New Tax System booklet put out in August 1998. There was modelling on over 130 industry sectors. The modelling which has been done by the ACCC has broken down numbers of those and has itemised subcomponents of some of those 134 or so ABS statistics. One of the most obvious areas where Labor Party intransigence has pushed up the price of clothing was when the Labor Party voted against the government's mandate in the Senate and forced a $3 billion hole to be belted through the revenue base. One of the things that the government had to do was delay for 12 months the abolition of financial institutions duty, and it had to delay for a number of years the abolition of the bank account debits tax. So, when modelling is now done on ANTS as amended, indirect taxes are still paid not only by clothing manufacturers, transporters and wholesalers but also by retailers.

One of the changes that the Australian Labor Party forced in the absolute genius of its opposition in the Senate was the continuation of indirect tax changes, which could have been abolished much earlier. That is one of the reasons why additional costs flow right back into the clothing sector. We would be more interested in the question if the questioner had said that she supported the abolition of financial institutions duty and bank account debits tax. If she supported the abolition of financial institutions duty and bank account debits tax, it would make clothing a lot cheaper, but she supports their continuation.

Mr Cox —Mr Speaker, on a point of order on relevance—

Mr SPEAKER —I believe the Treasurer has concluded his answer.