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/jun/21/coaltion-labor-politics-live-tax-turnbull-shorten
The article has changed 13 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 3 | Version 4 |
|---|---|
| Tax plan to pass after Pauline Hanson confirms support – politics live | Tax plan to pass after Pauline Hanson confirms support – politics live |
| (35 minutes later) | |
| Pauline Hanson talks to senate leader Mathias Cormann as the tax bills return from the house this morning. @AmyRemeikis @murpharoo @GuardianAus #politicslive https://t.co/pIouYgYRZr pic.twitter.com/2PGhhCv59y | |
| Mathias Cormann has moved to vote on the legislation. | |
| First he is voting to gag the debate, and then once that happens, he can call the motion to bring on the vote. | |
| Tim Storer: | |
| The Senate is the house of review. Our job is to thoroughly scrutinise each and every bill brought before it. These motions moved by the Government to limit debate on the personal income tax plan, the biggest tax cuts in Australia’s history, should not meet with majority support and it goes against the principles of accountability and transparency, which are of paramount importance. This was clearly the platform on which the Nick Xenophon Team ran at the last federal election. | |
| “It was the central part of their philosophy and I believe that Centre Alliance today should be abiding by that, by allowing the Senate - yesterday and today - to adequately discuss and debate these measures. They are very significant measures. | |
| “.. They have significant implications for future debt, deficit considerations, services and they should not be taken lightly. That’s why I put forward to a revisal to the whole plan to pass stage 1 of the plan, which I saw as a reasonable and appropriate stage, providing tax relief to low and middle income-earners. | |
| “And to therefore look at further changes to tax relief when appropriate, given that the Treasurer, the secretary of the Treasury himself noted that there are significant error bands in forward estimates beyond three or four more years further. So I did support yesterday the Senate to set aside stage 3 of the personal tax plan and that would have left $40 billion or so set aside against, you know, in the future, and should the economy and international economic circumstances make that round of tax cuts affordable, then we can do so,but that is in 2024, which is two elections away, six years away. | |
| “Then, with stage 2, that would cost $80 billion, twice as much as stage 3, and it is still two elections away until it is brought about. So some crossbenchers are suggesting that with economic circumstances these changes would be easily wound back, but that is not the lesson that we’ve learned from 2007 tax cuts, which proved unaffordable in the wake of the global financial crisis, but were locked in. | |
| “It’s made the task of returning the budget back to balance impossible for at least the last decade. The alternative that may come may be to slash services like health and education, and that was tried and it was proved unpalatable to the public and to ultimately the Liberal government. | |
| “The Government presently is struggling to find the money to pay for the level of services the public has come to expect. It plays down the risks of enacting the entire package in one hit, even though Treasury itself acknowledges the error bands, as I’ve mentioned before. | |
| “The recent 24 hours has seen geopolitical trade tremors that may well pass, but there are -- they’re a salutary reminder of just how quickly times can change and the Reserve Bank is clearly worried about the prospects of investment, financial markets are concerned a return to protectionism would mean less trade. | |
| “Either development would have a marked effect on the Australian economy and on revenue, making reducing debt and returning the budget back to balance even more difficult. | |
| “Cuts to education and health would be inevitable. Fewer teachers and nurses in South Australia and uncertainty about the infrastructure plans in terms of roads and bridges upon which the budget just passed. As the Greens have put forward that every dollar of tax cuts received by South Australia, the state would lose $1.40 for spending on essential services. That hardly sounds like a good deal. | |
| “As I’ve argued before, such an uncertain economic environment demands the Senate rethinks yesterday’s and today’s decisions regarding the pushing forward on the whole bill. And this is what Centre Alliance said they wanted yesterday in terms of removing stage 3. I do not believe we should vote for this bill.” | |
| Labor have hit the ground running and have started a robocall to voters in Longman. | |
| This is the transcript those voters are receiving right now: | |
| Right now in Canberra Pauline Hanson plans to vote with Malcolm Turnbull to give another tax cut to the top end of town. She’s even giving herself a massive tax cut. But it’s not too late to stop her. Pauline is in Canberra right now, the final vote could happen at any minute. Press 1 to be connected directly to Pauline’s office to tell her yourself: stop selling Queenslanders out. | |
| Richard Di Natale is not allowed any more time to speak: | |
| Look, whatever you think about this piece of legislation, I mean yesterday we were denied the opportunity through the committee stage to ask substantive questions. Today we’ve seen debate being gagged. We’ve seen – it’s the first time I’ve seen it since I’ve been in this place. A gag on a suspension. A gag on a suspension. Just disgraceful. And now we’ve been given the opportunity to speak for five minutes.” | |
| The crux of his speech comes down to this: | |
| This is one of the most significant pieces of legislation to ever pass through the Australian parliament. This is worth $140 bn. It fundamentally rewrites the fabric of Australian society. | |
| We cannot continue to afford to invest in all of the foundations of a decent society – decent healthcare and education, infrastructure, increasing Newstart, protecting our environment, if we strip $140 bn of revenue in a prescription to turbocharge inequality here in Australia. | |
| Let’s look at what the government’s, this is what the government’s already done. It’s taken $0.5 bn from marina, over $300 m from the ABC, nearly $60 million in Legal Aid funding, freezing Medicare cost nearly $3 bn. | |
| It’s cut family tax benefit supplements, 4,000 jobs from the ATO, jobs from Asic, jobs from the CSIRO, huge cuts to the environment department at a time when we’re losing biodiversity at a rate far greater than any other time on earth! R&D tax offsets, $600 m. Gone! Local grants, $900 m. Gone. Cuts to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander affairs. This government has presided over a litany of tax cuts. Can you imagine what happens if we strip another $140 bn of revenue from those essential services? | |
| Can you imagine what we are going to be faced in the coming years when it comes to the cuts that we’ve already seen from this government? | |
| ... This is one of the most shameful, disgraceful days that I’ve seen in my time in this Senate. $140 bn ripped out of public revenue, taken out of our public hospitals, meaning people need to languish for longer on waiting lists, more upfront costs in public schools, infrastructure that desperately needs investment, isn’t going to get it and all because you want to ram this bill through without any scrutiny. | |
| Penny Wong, and others within Labor ask for Di Natale to be given more time. They are denied. | |
| Penny Wong has a point of order – because Ian Macdonald interjected all through her speech. She asks for him to calm it down for Di Natale’s, or says she’ll ask for him to be dealt with under the standing orders. | |
| Richard Di Natale has now been given five minutes to speak. He complains – as did Penny Wong – because they had originally been promised 15 minutes. | |
| Wong received an extension – Di Natale says he just wants his 15 minutes up front. He is denied: | |
| What a disgraceful, shameful act. What a dark day for the Senate here in Australia. Look, regardless of what you think of this piece of legislation, we should be at least entitled to have an opportunity, firstly to interrogate it, to debate it. | |
| Some Mike Bowers shots from this morning: | |
| From Penny Wong’s speech: | |
| “All of the debate and procedural – what do you call them? – straitjackets, that Senator Cormann has been engaging in has been because he doesn’t want to debate, he doesn’t want to debate what is unsustainable, and that is an argument that low and middle income-earners, low- and middle-income earners’ tax cuts, should be held hostage to tax cuts for high income-earners in 2024. | |
| “Now, let’s be clear what Senator Hanson and others have done today. What she ought to know is that the tax cuts that she is now voting for by agreeing with this motion, agreeing with what’s before the chamber, will ensure that the people of Wentworth do very well and the people of Longman do very badly, do very badly. | |
| “What you need to know is that in Longman, the number of people who are earning over $200,000 is 703. | |
| “Guess how many in Wentworth? Over 10,000. Over 10,000. Well done, Senator Hanson. You’ve delivered to Point Piper. Well done, Senator Hanson, you’ve delivered to Malcolm Turnbull’s electorate. | |
| “But bad luck, bad luck for the burghers of Longman, because you have ensured that tax cuts which benefit overwhelmingly high income-earners, people earning over $200,000 a year – well, I’ll take the interjection. He says ‘And Penny Wong’. I’m voting against it, mate. I’m voting against it. Why don’t you? Why don’t you? That’s a great interjection! That’s a great interjection! | |
| “I want to make this point – I make this point. What we have seen over these last 24 hours is a government’s desperate strategy, a government desperate to try and hold low- and middle-income earners tax cuts, which they deserve, hostage to high income-earners tax cuts. | |
| “Senator Patrick, more fool you that you copped it. You came in this morning and said you want stage 3 out and then voted for every single stage over a procedural straitjacket to ensure that that amendment could not be insisted on and furthermore could not even be debated? I mean what sort of senator does that? At least have the courage of your convictions. Stand up and debate it. Now, what you’ve done is ensure they don’t even have to debate an amendment that you supported 24 hours ago! What sort of senator does that, Senator Patrick? | |
| “What is extraordinary about this, what is extraordinary about this is that if all that we would have needed to ensure that the tax cut for low income-earners proceeded and the tax cuts in stage 3, that overwhelmingly benefitted those above $200,000, would have been the same tied vote that we had yesterday. | |
| “If Senator Patrick and Senator Griff had simply had the courage of their convictions, if Senator Hanson had decided to deliver to Longman rather than Wentworth, that’s all we would have needed to ensure that Mr Turnbull’s political strategy of holding tax cuts for low income and middle-income Australians hostage to high income-earners could not have been delivered. | |
| “But instead this Senate, Centre Alliance and Senator Hanson have fallen over themselves to deliver to high-income Australia and to Malcolm Turnbull’s political strategy. That is all they have done. I urge the Senate not to support the motion from Senator Cormann. | |
| Wait – we are back in the Senate. | |
| It has voted to disrupt the water bill debate, so Penny Wong can speak. | |
| Basically, it looks like those who are against the legislation are trying everything they can to delay the vote for as long as possible. | |
| Wong, who was allowed five minutes to speak, has just been given another 10 minutes. | |
| Her reaction: | |
| “We’re all supposed to be grateful that they’re doling out five minutes here, 10 minutes there, oh! We’re supposed to say thank you Mathias for allowing senators elected to this place who sit at this table to actually debate it. Tell me, did Senator Patrick have a crisis of confidence?” | |
| That motion Tony Burke put forward was not accepted. | That motion Tony Burke put forward was not accepted. |
| So here is what Chris Bowen thinks, as per his statement: | So here is what Chris Bowen thinks, as per his statement: |
| Last night, in an act of gross incompetence, the Turnbull government teamed up with Senator Pauline Hanson’s One Nation to vote to support a bill which abolished all income tax rates from 2024. | |
| This is just the latest act from a government consumed by chaos and incompetence, which has outsourced all economic policy to Pauline Hanson’s One Nation. | |
| For years Pauline Hanson has advocated flat tax and last night the government adopted this policy and set the rate at zero. | |
| The Turnbull government’s latest solution to bracket creep is to abolish every income tax bracket. | |
| The bill supported at the third reading stage in the Senate by the government and One Nation would open up a budget black hole of $240 bn every single year once implemented. | |
| The Turnbull government has gone from a $140 bn three-stage income tax cut plan to a $240 bn a year income tax cut plan … no wonder the Turnbull government or One Nation have no concern for gross debt remaining above half a trillion dollars. | |
| Now that there is a chance to catch my breath, let’s have a look at what just happened. | Now that there is a chance to catch my breath, let’s have a look at what just happened. |
| Yesterday, when the Senate knocked out stage three of the tax plan, they also knocked out specifying what the tax rate would be from 2024. Labor had an amendment ready to go to fix that but the government moved to gag debate before they could. | |
| So, when the bill left the Senate last night, there were no tax rates beyond 2024. This is the legislation which went to the house this morning. | |
| It’s a slight issue (insert sarcasm mark) but it will be fixed by the end of the day. One can hope. | It’s a slight issue (insert sarcasm mark) but it will be fixed by the end of the day. One can hope. |
| Here is the motion that Tony Burke put forward addressing that issue: | Here is the motion that Tony Burke put forward addressing that issue: |
| That the House: | That the House: |
| 1. notes that: | 1. notes that: |
| a. gross debt has grown to a record half a trillion dollars under this government; | |
| b. last night, in act of gross incompetence this government teamed up with Senator Pauline Hanson’s One Nation to vote to support a bill which abolished all income tax rates from 2024; | |
| c. this is just the latest act from a government consumed by chaos and incompetence, which has outsourced all economic policy to Pauline Hanson’s One Nation; | |
| d. for years One Nation has advocated flat tax, last night the government adopted this policy and set the rate at zero; | |
| e. the government has also dealt with bracket creep by abolishing every tax bracket; and | |
| f. the bill which was supported at the third reading stage by the government and One Nation will open up a budget black hole of $240 billion every single year once implemented; and | |
| 2. condemns this government for its gross economic incompetence. | |
| Doug Cameron on Pauline Hanson this morning: | Doug Cameron on Pauline Hanson this morning: |
| This will be a pyrrhic victory for the government if it goes through, it will be a pyrrhic victory for Pauline Hanson because everyone out there under a certain amount of money knows they are not being benefitted by this tax cut. | This will be a pyrrhic victory for the government if it goes through, it will be a pyrrhic victory for Pauline Hanson because everyone out there under a certain amount of money knows they are not being benefitted by this tax cut. |
| This is really benefitting those in the eastern suburbs of Sydney. Those that earn big money are going to pocket about $7,000 and what we are seeing now is that many workers out there battling day in day out trying to earn a quid in the retail sector and in the entertainment sector are going to end up having to beg for tips to make a living. | |
| This is the Americanisation of the Australian economy and I just think it’s ridiculous. We were always the people of the fair go in Australia, we are not the fair go anymore after this ridiculous decision in the Senate last night. | |
| Natalie Joyce, Barnaby Joyce’s estranged wife, has given an (unpaid) interview with Women’s Weekly for its rural women edition. | Natalie Joyce, Barnaby Joyce’s estranged wife, has given an (unpaid) interview with Women’s Weekly for its rural women edition. |
| In more quotes released today, she says when she became aware of Joyce’s affair with Vikki Campion. | In more quotes released today, she says when she became aware of Joyce’s affair with Vikki Campion. |
| From the report: | From the report: |
| After 24 years, the state of Natalie Joyce’s marriage came down to a look. Or, as her husband Barnaby sprinted for his plane without a backward glance, the absence of one. “I stood there paralysed, my stomach wrenched in a million knots, and I knew then the marriage was all but over,” Natalie, 48, tells her friend, journalist Lizzie Wilson, for the Weekly’s exclusive interview. | After 24 years, the state of Natalie Joyce’s marriage came down to a look. Or, as her husband Barnaby sprinted for his plane without a backward glance, the absence of one. “I stood there paralysed, my stomach wrenched in a million knots, and I knew then the marriage was all but over,” Natalie, 48, tells her friend, journalist Lizzie Wilson, for the Weekly’s exclusive interview. |
| Natalie is recalling the day in July last year at Sydney airport when, after what would be their last overseas trip together as Australia’s deputy prime ministerial couple, the Joyce’s caught their respective flights – Natalie back to Tamworth and their four daughters; Barnaby to Canberra and his media adviser, Vikki Campion. But, in hindsight, Natalie now realises Vikki was set on insinuating herself into the Joyce family months before. | Natalie is recalling the day in July last year at Sydney airport when, after what would be their last overseas trip together as Australia’s deputy prime ministerial couple, the Joyce’s caught their respective flights – Natalie back to Tamworth and their four daughters; Barnaby to Canberra and his media adviser, Vikki Campion. But, in hindsight, Natalie now realises Vikki was set on insinuating herself into the Joyce family months before. |
| “She wanted my life from the get-go,” says Natalie. “This was a whole lot more than a fleeting office romance.” | “She wanted my life from the get-go,” says Natalie. “This was a whole lot more than a fleeting office romance.” |
| At their first meeting in 2016 at the Joyces’ family home, Natalie was struck by Vikki’s icy demeanour. “She was so cold,” Natalie recalls. A few months later Natalie’s intuition, honed by decades of marriage, suspected something between her 50-year-old husband and his 33-year-old staffer. | At their first meeting in 2016 at the Joyces’ family home, Natalie was struck by Vikki’s icy demeanour. “She was so cold,” Natalie recalls. A few months later Natalie’s intuition, honed by decades of marriage, suspected something between her 50-year-old husband and his 33-year-old staffer. |
| “After watching them at the Nationals Christmas party, I had a feeling they were having an affair,” Natalie tells the Weekly. “As it turned out their tawdry union was the worst kept secret in Canberra.” | “After watching them at the Nationals Christmas party, I had a feeling they were having an affair,” Natalie tells the Weekly. “As it turned out their tawdry union was the worst kept secret in Canberra.” |
| But Natalie wasn’t ready to surrender. As Barnaby drifted away from his family and finally stopped coming home, Natalie took action. Told her husband and his mistress were at his local electorate office in Tamworth last March, Natalie jumped in the car and drove into town, headlong into a confrontation with her husband and his mistress. | But Natalie wasn’t ready to surrender. As Barnaby drifted away from his family and finally stopped coming home, Natalie took action. Told her husband and his mistress were at his local electorate office in Tamworth last March, Natalie jumped in the car and drove into town, headlong into a confrontation with her husband and his mistress. |
| “I was very measured,” says Natalie of that day, “I didn’t raise my voice. She and Barney were smoking outside. He bolted when he saw me. I turned to her and said, ‘My husband is out of bounds, off-limits, he’s a married man with four children’ and then I called her a home-wrecking wh---. It was not one of my finer moments but, looking back, I’m proud I stood up to her.” | “I was very measured,” says Natalie of that day, “I didn’t raise my voice. She and Barney were smoking outside. He bolted when he saw me. I turned to her and said, ‘My husband is out of bounds, off-limits, he’s a married man with four children’ and then I called her a home-wrecking wh---. It was not one of my finer moments but, looking back, I’m proud I stood up to her.” |
| As their marriage crumbled and her husband’s career went into free-fall, Natalie watched on in disbelief. And then she found out that Vikki was carrying Barnaby’s baby. An emotionally charged meeting at the Joyce family home ensued. “I asked him to come home,” she recalls. “He said, ‘I can’t, she’s pregnant and I have to be there for my son.’ He always wanted a boy and, while the girls really are the epicentre of his universe, we had no chance: she was giving him a son.” | As their marriage crumbled and her husband’s career went into free-fall, Natalie watched on in disbelief. And then she found out that Vikki was carrying Barnaby’s baby. An emotionally charged meeting at the Joyce family home ensued. “I asked him to come home,” she recalls. “He said, ‘I can’t, she’s pregnant and I have to be there for my son.’ He always wanted a boy and, while the girls really are the epicentre of his universe, we had no chance: she was giving him a son.” |
| In February this year the Weekly was with Natalie Joyce when she heard the news that Barnaby had resigned as leader of the National party, and deputy leader of Australia. | In February this year the Weekly was with Natalie Joyce when she heard the news that Barnaby had resigned as leader of the National party, and deputy leader of Australia. |
| Wiping away a tear, Natalie ended the phone call and said, “He’s finished”. But there was more humiliation to come. The birth of Barnaby and Vikki’s son followed in April and when the baby’s name, Sebastian, was revealed, “It felt like another malicious taunt in a very long line of appalling behaviour,” says Natalie. Had they ever had a son, Sebastian had always been number one on Barnaby and Natalie’s list of favourite boys’ names. | Wiping away a tear, Natalie ended the phone call and said, “He’s finished”. But there was more humiliation to come. The birth of Barnaby and Vikki’s son followed in April and when the baby’s name, Sebastian, was revealed, “It felt like another malicious taunt in a very long line of appalling behaviour,” says Natalie. Had they ever had a son, Sebastian had always been number one on Barnaby and Natalie’s list of favourite boys’ names. |
| A second attempt to censure Pauline Hanson in the Senate has failed, with the crossbench, other than Tim Storer, voting to shut it down. | A second attempt to censure Pauline Hanson in the Senate has failed, with the crossbench, other than Tim Storer, voting to shut it down. |
| The house is dividing on Tony Burke’s motion to suspend standing orders – but we all know the composition of the chamber and how that will end. | The house is dividing on Tony Burke’s motion to suspend standing orders – but we all know the composition of the chamber and how that will end. |
| The legislation is back with the Senate. | The legislation is back with the Senate. |
| The Senate has moved on to debating the water bill. | The Senate has moved on to debating the water bill. |
| The Senate, including the crossbench, voted against Penny Wong’s motion to suspend standing orders, in order to put forward her motion to restart the debate. | The Senate, including the crossbench, voted against Penny Wong’s motion to suspend standing orders, in order to put forward her motion to restart the debate. |
| Capiche? | Capiche? |
| Basically, the crossbench and government voted against wanting to continue the debate on this legislation – or even attempting to have the debate gag lifted. | Basically, the crossbench and government voted against wanting to continue the debate on this legislation – or even attempting to have the debate gag lifted. |
| The government is now attempting to gag Sarah Hanson-Young’s motion to censure Pauline Hanson. | The government is now attempting to gag Sarah Hanson-Young’s motion to censure Pauline Hanson. |
| Hanson has not yet corrected her claim. | Hanson has not yet corrected her claim. |
| The vote was just held and Derryn Hinch and Centre Alliance voted with the government to gag the debate – so Hanson will not be forced to correct the record. | The vote was just held and Derryn Hinch and Centre Alliance voted with the government to gag the debate – so Hanson will not be forced to correct the record. |
| While Tony Burke is fighting to continue debate on the tax legislation before sending it back in the house, Penny Wong and Labor are working to get debate started again in the Senate. | While Tony Burke is fighting to continue debate on the tax legislation before sending it back in the house, Penny Wong and Labor are working to get debate started again in the Senate. |
| Scott Morrison has circulated the government’s reasons for rejecting the amended bill: | Scott Morrison has circulated the government’s reasons for rejecting the amended bill: |
| Reasons of the House of Representatives for disagreeing to the amendments of the Senate | Reasons of the House of Representatives for disagreeing to the amendments of the Senate |
| Senate Amendments (1, 2 and 3) | Senate Amendments (1, 2 and 3) |
| The amendments proposed by the Senate remove step three of the Personal Income Tax Plan. Step three of the Personal Income Tax Plan simplifies and flattens the tax system by abolishing the 37 per cent tax bracket entirely, reducing the number of tax brackets from five to four. | The amendments proposed by the Senate remove step three of the Personal Income Tax Plan. Step three of the Personal Income Tax Plan simplifies and flattens the tax system by abolishing the 37 per cent tax bracket entirely, reducing the number of tax brackets from five to four. |
| The Plan is a package that gives certainty to Australian families that they will keep more of what they earn in the future. It comprises three steps. | The Plan is a package that gives certainty to Australian families that they will keep more of what they earn in the future. It comprises three steps. |
| Step 1, prioritises low and middle income earners by providing tax relief of up to $530 to help with cost of living pressures. | Step 1, prioritises low and middle income earners by providing tax relief of up to $530 to help with cost of living pressures. |
| Step 2, protects what Australians earn from bracket creep, ensuring that a pay rise, extra overtime or working more hours do not get eaten up by higher tax rates. | Step 2, protects what Australians earn from bracket creep, ensuring that a pay rise, extra overtime or working more hours do not get eaten up by higher tax rates. |
| Step 3, by simplifying and flattening the tax system, ensures that, by 2024-25, some 94 per cent of taxpayers will face a marginal tax rate no higher than 32.5 per cent based on projections. | Step 3, by simplifying and flattening the tax system, ensures that, by 2024-25, some 94 per cent of taxpayers will face a marginal tax rate no higher than 32.5 per cent based on projections. |
| High income earners will continue to pay their fair share with the tax system remaining progressive under the Personal Income Tax Plan. For example, a person on $200,000 would pay around 13 times more tax than a person on $41,000. | High income earners will continue to pay their fair share with the tax system remaining progressive under the Personal Income Tax Plan. For example, a person on $200,000 would pay around 13 times more tax than a person on $41,000. |
| In 2015-16, the top 20 per cent of taxpayers paid around 61 per cent of all personal income tax. Under the Personal Income Tax Plan, this cohort is projected to continue to contribute a broadly similar share in 2024-25. | In 2015-16, the top 20 per cent of taxpayers paid around 61 per cent of all personal income tax. Under the Personal Income Tax Plan, this cohort is projected to continue to contribute a broadly similar share in 2024-25. |
| In 2015-16 those on the top tax bracket paid 30.3 per cent of all personal income tax collected. Under the plan those on the top tax bracket will pay around 36 per cent of all personal income tax collected in 2024-25. | In 2015-16 those on the top tax bracket paid 30.3 per cent of all personal income tax collected. Under the plan those on the top tax bracket will pay around 36 per cent of all personal income tax collected in 2024-25. |
| The Personal Income Tax Plan delivers lower, fairer and simpler taxes to all taxpayers. | The Personal Income Tax Plan delivers lower, fairer and simpler taxes to all taxpayers. |
| Accordingly, the House of Representatives does not accept these amendments. | Accordingly, the House of Representatives does not accept these amendments. |
| Sarah Hanson-Young is attempting to have the Senate censure Pauline Hanson for misleading the Senate – over this comment yesterday, where Hanson said she won’t be receiving a tax cut (she will – just over $11,800, over her term -from 2024/25 there is an annual reduction of $7225, for the four years between 2018/19-2022 you get $540, and then 2023/2024 you get $4050 on her wage): | Sarah Hanson-Young is attempting to have the Senate censure Pauline Hanson for misleading the Senate – over this comment yesterday, where Hanson said she won’t be receiving a tax cut (she will – just over $11,800, over her term -from 2024/25 there is an annual reduction of $7225, for the four years between 2018/19-2022 you get $540, and then 2023/2024 you get $4050 on her wage): |
| Senator Hanson-Young read the bill and spoke on it, but unfortunately she did not understand it. It’s quite funny when the senator makes comments about me. She said that I’m getting a tax cut. No, I’m not. I’m on the same wage as Senator Hanson-Young. The tax cuts are going to be up to $200,000. I’m a very fortunate Australian to be earning more than $200,000. I am paying tax of 45c in the dollar on that. I’m not getting tax relief. To make that comment is to mislead this parliament. I don’t think she understands it. If she’s really worried about pensioners and the battlers and everyone out there, then I suggest that she flies economy class, like I do, instead of sitting up the front of the plane, at more cost to taxpayers, or taking her child on a taxpayer funded whale-watch or the overseas trips. | Senator Hanson-Young read the bill and spoke on it, but unfortunately she did not understand it. It’s quite funny when the senator makes comments about me. She said that I’m getting a tax cut. No, I’m not. I’m on the same wage as Senator Hanson-Young. The tax cuts are going to be up to $200,000. I’m a very fortunate Australian to be earning more than $200,000. I am paying tax of 45c in the dollar on that. I’m not getting tax relief. To make that comment is to mislead this parliament. I don’t think she understands it. If she’s really worried about pensioners and the battlers and everyone out there, then I suggest that she flies economy class, like I do, instead of sitting up the front of the plane, at more cost to taxpayers, or taking her child on a taxpayer funded whale-watch or the overseas trips. |
| Hanson-Young: | Hanson-Young: |
| We saw yesterday in this place, Senator Hanson, the leader of One Nation, come into here and try and tell this place and the Australian people that she would not be getting a dollar from the tax cut bill that is passing through this place and the other place today. | We saw yesterday in this place, Senator Hanson, the leader of One Nation, come into here and try and tell this place and the Australian people that she would not be getting a dollar from the tax cut bill that is passing through this place and the other place today. |
| Senator Hanson misled the Australian parliament, she misled the Australian people, because we know that what this tax cut bill does is give her and in every other person in this place a massive tax cut. Upwards of $11,000 worth of tax cuts. And for Senator Hanson, who prides herself on being the voice of the battler, the people’s Pauline, she misled the Australian people and misled this Senate. She said she will not financially benefit, when indeed she does, and she benefits more than most other Australians. The majority of Australians get very little under this tax cut, very little, but Senator Pauline Hanson, leader of One Nation, gets a whopping $11,815 worth of a tax cut, and yet she came into this place and she denied it. | Senator Hanson misled the Australian parliament, she misled the Australian people, because we know that what this tax cut bill does is give her and in every other person in this place a massive tax cut. Upwards of $11,000 worth of tax cuts. And for Senator Hanson, who prides herself on being the voice of the battler, the people’s Pauline, she misled the Australian people and misled this Senate. She said she will not financially benefit, when indeed she does, and she benefits more than most other Australians. The majority of Australians get very little under this tax cut, very little, but Senator Pauline Hanson, leader of One Nation, gets a whopping $11,815 worth of a tax cut, and yet she came into this place and she denied it. |
| Greg Jericho has written on who exactly will benefit the most – but I think you already know who wins out of this $144bn package: | Greg Jericho has written on who exactly will benefit the most – but I think you already know who wins out of this $144bn package: |
| The tax cut debate, as expected, has led to an absolute mountain of manure designed to mislead about who is going to benefit. Data on personal incomes out this week from the ABS, drawing on the 2015-16 ATO tax statistics, once again delivers a nice shot of reality to the debate. The biggest beneficiaries of the tax cuts are high-income earners, with median-income earners – especially women – largely ignored. | The tax cut debate, as expected, has led to an absolute mountain of manure designed to mislead about who is going to benefit. Data on personal incomes out this week from the ABS, drawing on the 2015-16 ATO tax statistics, once again delivers a nice shot of reality to the debate. The biggest beneficiaries of the tax cuts are high-income earners, with median-income earners – especially women – largely ignored. |
| The government would have you believe the main beneficiaries of the tax cuts are true-blue, dinky-die, aspirational Aussie battlers, while the opposition would have you think it is merchant bankers from Vaucluse. | The government would have you believe the main beneficiaries of the tax cuts are true-blue, dinky-die, aspirational Aussie battlers, while the opposition would have you think it is merchant bankers from Vaucluse. |
| As I have previously related, certainly merchant bankers and their ilk are the ones who are going to benefit the most. While stage one of the tax cuts – lifting the low-income tax offset – benefits low- and median-income earners, stages two and especially three are focused mainly on benefiting those who earn more than $90,000 and, even more so, those who earn more than $120,000. | As I have previously related, certainly merchant bankers and their ilk are the ones who are going to benefit the most. While stage one of the tax cuts – lifting the low-income tax offset – benefits low- and median-income earners, stages two and especially three are focused mainly on benefiting those who earn more than $90,000 and, even more so, those who earn more than $120,000. |