Senator JACINTA COLLINS (3:23 PM) —After that performance, I would like to congratulate Senator Watson for at least an attempt to deal with some of the issues of substance in this debate about taxation, although I would have to say his contribution has been somewhat incredible, given his interpretation of the benefits of what the government is proposing to put forward. We still do not have significant light shed on precisely what tax reform means to this government.

In my contribution to this debate, I would like to take a step back, partly in response to Senator Knowles's contribution, to the Fightback package because it seems that she has forgotten some of the issues that were dealt with during that period. If we reflect on the debate as it occurred some years ago, we see this government is overreacting to Fightback. Many commentators have suggested that the government learnt its lesson on Fightback in that it allowed far too much time for the public and the community to become aware of the implications of a GST, so this time they are holding back so that we will not be able to demonstrate the deficits in the government's tax reform package.

I think anyone observing the events as they stand now would support the proposition that the government is holding back on giving any decent amount of information, particularly after its performance in question time today. The overreaction is that they are being far too defensive and, judging by what Senator Vanstone pointed out today, far too dishonest. She highlighted the contribution of the Prime Minister (Mr Howard) to the debate. Many of us in this debate have referred to the `never ever statement'. What I would like to highlight in my contribution is more than just the `never ever statement' but how incredible was the Prime Minister's claim that that was really in the context of never ever in this term.

If you look at the statements that he has made, you will see even that explanation does not hold up. Our Prime Minister's comments on this issue simply do not hold up. John Howard said in a media conference in the Tweed Heads civic centre on 2 May 1995:

. . . there's no way that a GST will ever be part of our policy.

The reporter said, `Never ever?' John Howard said:

Never ever. It's dead. It was killed by the voters in the last election.

In a media release on 2 May 1995, John Howard said:

A GST or anything resembling it is no longer Coalition policy. Nor will it be policy at any time in the future. It is completely off the political agenda. . .

Those comments do not stand up in the light of the Prime Minister's explanation that he really meant in the current term. They just do not stand up. He said, `Never ever.' He said it was no longer part of coalition policy, nor would it ever be in the future.

So how can Senator Knowles stand up today and say credibly, `You don't understand tax—you don't understand what we really mean,' when the Prime Minister says one thing one minute and something completely different the next? We know what you mean. What you mean is: business wants to pay less tax and we are a government which will shift it onto consumers. Who are those consumers? Those consumers are the battlers that John Howard convinced, to get elected, that he was going to make feel relaxed and comfortable. They are not relaxed and comfortable and they do not believe, and will not believe, that this government is about fair tax reform.

Fair tax reform is not a GST. Tax reform is broader than a GST. Because the Labor Party says we do not support a GST because it is unfair, that does not mean that the Labor Party opposes tax reform. Tax reform is much broader than a GST. The Labor Party has participated in tax reform over history since the 1930s, as Senator Sherry pointed out. Our system is not inevitably changing towards a GST. As pointed out in the media recently, the United States do not have a GST.

Senator Watson —They have something pretty close to it.

Senator JACINTA COLLINS —No, they have nothing close to a GST. Senator Watson, you do not understand tax if you think the US system is close to a GST. It is a retail tax, actually more similar to a wholesale tax. It is just applied at a different level. It is not a value added tax. Unless you understand that, you do not understand the tax debate. The retail tax applied in the United States is far more similar to the wholesale sales tax that we have in place here. (Time expired)