Mr ROBB (2:11 PM) —My question is addressed to the Treasurer. Would the Treasurer outline to the House the benefits from tax reform flowing to states? Would the Treasurer update the House on which taxes have been abolished and detail any roadblocks to cutting taxes further?

Mr COSTELLO (Treasurer) —I thank the honourable member for Goldstein for his question. Although it is a public document I can again table the intergovernmental agreement between the Commonwealth and the states which has as its objective the abolition of inefficient state taxes. It details the taxes that the states pledged to abolish in response to receiving GST revenue. Some of them, such as debits tax, they pledged to abolish by 2001 and the remainder they promised to review in 2005 in the light of collections to ascertain whether those collections would justify and fund the removal of the remaining taxes.

Since 1 July 2000, when the GST came in, the collections have exceeded expectations. In 2004-05, on the latest estimates given to heads of Treasury, New South Wales will get a windfall of $124 million, Victoria will get a windfall of $272 million, Western Australia will get a windfall of $252 million, South Australia will get a windfall of $160 million, Tasmania will get a windfall of $100 million and Queensland will get a windfall the dimensions of which would be embarrassing if I read it out to the House.

Government members interjecting—

Mr COSTELLO —No, it is embarrassing—no, no I cannot do it in all conscience! In response to those rising GST collections, there is now no excuse for the state governments not to abolish those taxes which were outlined for abolition in 1999. We will be holding state governments to the agreement that they signed in 1999 because we are going to stand up for the taxpayers and the consumers of Australia. The critical question, of course, is whether the other side of politics will stand up for the consumers and businesses of Australia. In an otherwise embarrassing interview on the Insiders on Sunday, the member for Lilley actually did say this—and I compliment him for saying it:

That is fair enough. There is the agreement. A few phone calls must have been made on Sunday night because on Sunday he said, ‘The states should adhere to the signed GST agreement.’ On his way into parliament this morning he was asked the very same question. Listen to his answer from this morning. Question: ‘What is your view on these state taxes, Wayne? Should they be reduced?’ His answer: ‘My view on the state taxes is the Commonwealth and the states ought to sit down and renegotiate their agreement.’

Why would you renegotiate the agreement? It is a written, signed agreement. The signed agreement requires the states, as they receive GST revenue, to abolish those state taxes. There is nothing to renegotiate. What there is to do is to hold the states to their agreement. That is what has to be done, and that is what this government will defend. One of Labor’s so-called statesmen was quoted as saying: ‘When the state Labor premiers joined forces to bring down the member for Werriwa as Leader of the Opposition and to install the now member for Brand, it would have been a bad day for the Labor Party because the new leader of federal Labor, having been placed there by state premiers, would be incapable of ever standing up to state Labor premiers.’ They wanted a patsy as leader and they found a patsy as leader—the patsy from Brand. Within 24 hours, the signed agreement—which federal Labor said the states had to agree—has to be renegotiated. Let me make it clear: there is nothing to renegotiate. The only thing that has to be done is to uphold this agreement.