Save Search

Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
 Download Current HansardDownload Current Hansard    View Or Save XMLView/Save XML

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Monday, 21 March 2011
Page: 1352


Senator SHERRY (Minister for Small Business, Minister Assisting on Deregulation and Public Sector Superannuation and Minister Assisting the Minister for Tourism) (8:20 PM) —In a long, rambling, contradictory and somewhat repetitive contribution from Senator Macdonald, there were two questions, which I will go to. He asked for the contribution of major taxes—it is in budget paper No. 1 as a percentage of Commonwealth tax revenue. In respect of personal income tax it is 45 per cent of total Commonwealth revenue, company tax 22 per cent, GST 17 per cent. The second issue went to exemptions. We have restricted the scope of exemptions to those affected by disasters in the legislation in the form and manner which I read out in my concluding remarks to debate on the legislation. We published the draft determination on the Treasury website.


Senator Ian Macdonald —Do you think we might get it tabled here?


Senator SHERRY —It is on the Treasury website.


Senator Ian Macdonald —This is the chamber of the parliament. Perhaps it might be tabled here.


The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Senator Troeth)—I understand it has been tabled, Senator Macdonald.


Senator SHERRY —Senator Macdonald asked a series of questions—in, as I said, a somewhat rambling and repetitive manner—about where the government had drawn its inspiration from for this levy approach. Senator Macdonald and I came into the Senate together in 1990. Senator Macdonald has been in this place for the same length of time I have, almost 21 years. He does not have the excuse that Senator Cormann has. Senator Cormann has not been in this parliament for too long and would not know some of the history behind levies.

If you want the truth, Senator Macdonald, we were inspired in our approach by none other than the former Liberal-National Party government of which you were a member. We were inspired by the Liberal-National Party government in our levy approach—you had six of them when you were in that government, Senator Macdonald. If we include the super surcharge, there were seven.

I am showing my age, but in 1996 we had this promise: ‘No increase in taxes, no new taxes and no increase in existing taxes.’ And what were we presented with after the election? Senator Macdonald knows because he was here. We were presented with the super surcharge. Do you know how much this temporary levy or surcharge raised? It raised $1.48 billion. It was a temporary superannuation surcharge, but do you know how long it went on for? It lasted nine years. This temporary super surcharge lasted nine years. Senator Macdonald and quite a number of us know that because we received surcharge statements and we are still getting them. Do not come into this place and give us a lecture about levies when we have seen the impact of the super surcharge. Despite the election promise of those opposite that there would be no new taxes, that super surcharge went for nine years—well beyond when the budget went back into surplus.

But there is more inspiration. There was the milk levy. It raised $1.74 billion thanks to the National Party. How long did the milk levy last? I do not think most Australians knew that they paid a milk levy. I think it was 11c. It went for nine years. Again, that is a far longer period than it took for the budget to go into surplus, Senator Macdonald. That was the milk levy. There was the sugar levy—the third levy under the previous Liberal-National Party government. It raised $86 million. That one went for three years. That was the third levy. Then there was the Ansett levy. That one went for about three or four years. How much did that raise? It raised $369 million.


Senator Ian Macdonald —Was it on individuals?


Senator SHERRY —I will get to the issue of whether it was on individuals in a moment, Senator Macdonald. There was the gun buyback. The gun buyback was projected to raise $550 million and the East Timor levy was to raise $855 million. Let me read through these figures of the party that does not agree with levies or surcharges—$1.48 billion for super; milk, $1.74 billion; sugar, $86 million; Ansett levy, $369 million; and gun buyback, $550 million. This is from a party that says it does not agree with levies. But it is opposed to increases in taxes. That is where we drew our inspiration from, Senator Macdonald—none other than your government. When you were in government, you introduced six levies, not including the super surcharge.

And then there was the piece de resistance—we even had a levy on shipping containers. That was the seventh. For the former Liberal-National Party government, the piece de resistance was putting a levy even on shipping containers. So if they were not whacking your super, your milk, your sugar, your airline flights, your guns or funding the East Timor dispute, there was a levy on shipping containers. That is seven levies over 12 years. That is where we got our inspiration from, Senator Macdonald—none other than yourself. You were a member of that government for almost 12 long years. So do not come in here and give us your hypocrisy about levies, Senator Macdonald. Stop wasting the Senate chamber’s time.