Bills

Budget Measures Bill 2017

Final Stages

The Legislative Council agreed to the bill with the suggested amendments indicated by the following schedule, to which suggested amendments the Legislative Council desires the concurrence of the House of Assembly:

No. 1. Suggested Amendment No 7 [Lucas–1]—Long title—Delete 'enact legislation in relation to the 2017 State Budget so as to impose a levy on major banks operating in the State; and to'

No. 2. Suggested Amendment No 1 [Lucas–1]—Clause 2, page 4, lines 4 to 22 [clause 2(2) to (6) inclusive]—Delete subclauses (2) to (6) inclusive and substitute:

(2) Schedule 1 Part 3 clause 14 will be taken to have come into operation on 1 July 2016.

(3) The following provisions will be taken to have come into operation on 22 June 2017:

(a) Schedule 1 Part 1 (other than clause 11 which comes into operation in accordance with subsection (1));

(b) Schedule 1 Part 2;

(c) Schedule 1 Part 5.

(4) The following provisions will be taken to have come into operation on 1 July 2017:

(a) Schedule 1 Part 3 (other than clause 14 which comes into operation in accordance with subsection (2));

(b) Schedule 1 Part 6.

(5) The following provisions will come into operation on a day to be fixed by proclamation:

(a) Schedule 1 Part 4;

(b) Schedule 1 Part 8.

No. 3. Suggested Amendment No 2 [Lucas–1]—Clause 3, page 4, line 24—Delete 'a Schedule' and substitute 'Schedule 1'

No. 4. Suggested Amendment No 3 [Lucas–1]—Clause 4, page 4, line 26 to clause 14, page 7, line 13 [clauses 4 to 14 inclusive]—Delete clauses 4 to 14 inclusive

No. 5. Suggested Amendment No 4 [Lucas–1]—Schedule 1, page 7, lines 14 to 21—Delete Schedule 1

No. 6. Suggested Amendment No 5 [Lucas–1]—Heading, page 7, line 22 [Heading to Schedule 2]—Delete the heading and substitute 'Schedule 1—Budget Measures'

No. 7. Suggested Amendment No 6 [Lucas–1]—Schedule 3, page 30, lines 22 to 31—Delete Schedule 3

Consideration in committee.

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: I move:

That the Legislative Council's suggested amendments be disagreed to.

In an unprecedented move, the Liberal Party of South Australia is attempting to stifle the ability of a government to set a budget. It is a dangerous precedent—a dangerous precedent being set by a dangerous Leader of the Opposition, who is creating, or attempting to create, an atmosphere of chaos.

If the Leader of the Opposition truly believed that he was capable of forming government after March next year, it would be a very different outcome today. I believe that if he had actually believed that he could win the next election, what he would have said was, 'We disagree with these measures the government has in its budget. We disagree with them being implemented, but the government has a right to pass its budget and, if we were elected, the first thing we would do in our budget is remove these measures.' That is what someone who wants to govern would say because that is the precedent we have had in this parliament for generations. Only governments can and should amend budget bills, and we have done that in the past. Governments have amended budget bills.

Mr Marshall: So have oppositions.

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: No, you have never amended them.

The CHAIR: I am on my feet! Sit down. Members are reminded that, even in committee, standing orders remain that the Treasurer is entitled to be heard in silence and interjections are out of place. Treasurer.

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: Governments have amended money bills. Governments are entitled to do so. Governments that have amended their budgets are entitled to do so. Oppositions and the Legislative Council are not. They can make suggestions, and those suggestions will be rejected by this house.

The opposition then have a choice to make. They can follow the precedent that this leader is attempting to set from now on every budget measures bill, if they are successful in the next election. Let's be clear about this so that they all understand it. From what I can understand, it is almost impossible now for members opposite to gain a majority in their own right, given the third party that is wreaking havoc in their own seats and given the genius tactical advantage the Leader of the Opposition has given them by making sure they have so many open seats.

Mr Marshall interjecting:

The CHAIR: Order on my left!

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: I know you do not like this. If they form government, it will be in a coalition with the Xenophon group. If they form government, it will be in a coalition with the Xenophon group, and the precedent that they are setting today by following this man off a cliff is that budget bills can be amended. If the opposition in the upper house sets this bill aside, that is a new precedent that the Liberal Party is setting in South Australia.

While the Leader of the Opposition thinks he is being clever, after waiting 11 days to decide whether he would back a budget or not back a budget and then did whatever the banks told him anyway, think of the imagery of the Liberal Party today that he has created. The National Australia Bank, one of the largest funders of the Australian Bankers' Association—the people who are running the campaign on behalf of the Liberal Party in the media and in print and saying that the bank levy will cost jobs—have today announced a super profit of $6.6 billion—billion! It is 2½ per cent higher than last year.

And now, because of those super profits, what do they do? They are going to sack 6,000 people. This is the imagery the Liberal Party are aligning themselves with, with this Leader of the Opposition who has already lost one election that they thought they would win. Let's be clear about this: they lost it—

Members interjecting:

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: They lost it through his own hand.

Mr van Holst Pellekaan interjecting:

The CHAIR: Order, member for Stuart!

The Hon. P. Caica interjecting:

The CHAIR: Order on both sides of the house!

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: The bank levy will not cost jobs. The bank levy is affordable to the banks. The banks say so themselves. We know that profitability and job creation with the banks are no longer relevant because the banks themselves have said that, despite the super profits, they are still sacking people. On a per capita basis, if you allocate those 6,000 job losses across the country, that is 500 to South Australia. The Leader of the Opposition has aligned the Liberal Party brand with these people—himself.

This is his decision. He is the one who has decided that no, no, no, he is not interested in convention or precedent. He says, from opposition, he is going to team up with the crossbenchers and block a government's budget. He thinks there will be no consequences of that for governments in South Australia going forward. He thinks it will just be an aberration, that this is an extraordinary circumstance that the government wants to introduce a revenue measure. Well, new revenue measures are not extraordinary. They are not. Governments do them from time to time. I will give you a recent example: Scott Morrison introducing a brand-new levy on banks!

Members interjecting:

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: No, I am not upset, because I have something—

Mr Marshall interjecting:

The CHAIR: Order on my left!

The Hon. P. Caica interjecting:

The CHAIR: Order on my right!

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: Madam Chair, the conventions of this parliament are important, and the people who drafted our constitution were very clear in their thinking. They have never wanted the Legislative Council to be able to amend money bills. That is why they did not give them the power to do so. All they gave them the power to do was to suggest changes, and then this house—

Members interjecting:

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: —is either to accept those suggestions or not. Well, I am going to submit to the house that we do not accept those suggestions and send this bill back to the other house for their support. I ask the opposition, and the more learned members of the Liberal Party—the ones who aspire to govern one day, the ones who aspire to implement their own ideology one day, the ones who are actually here to make a difference one day, the ones who actually believe in the philosophies that they campaign on and the reason they joined the Liberal Party—I say to them: if you are true conservatives, is trashing the constitution and conventions of this parliament what a true conservative does, or is it what a radical liberal does?

Ms Sanderson: What about ministerial responsibility?

The CHAIR: Order, member for Adelaide!

The Hon. T.R. Kenyon: She doesn't even know what that is.

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: She does.

Ms Sanderson interjecting:

The CHAIR: Member for Adelaide!

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: She knows all about ministerial responsibility. If the member for Adelaide knew about ministerial responsibility—

The CHAIR: Minister, it is disorderly to respond to interjections. You just have to ignore them.

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: I apologise, ma'am.

The CHAIR: The interjections, that is.

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: What is at stake here today is tax cuts of up to $10,000 per business eligible for payroll tax cuts. People who are out there now signing up for apartments are buying them off the plan for concessions—First Home Owner Grants, preconstruction grants—and partnering with the Adelaide city council in a cooperative way to try to give people who buy apartments off the plan up to nearly $40,000 in concessions. The Liberal Party make no argument in their budget speeches with expenditure but they have called on us to cut. They are happy with the level of expenditure we have. What they now say we should do is remove a revenue measure, then socialise that revenue amongst South Australians so that the banks do not pay. What the opposition is really telling us to do is keep all the spending, do not charge the banks, charge South Australians.

Ms Sanderson interjecting:

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: That was a profound interjection by the member for Adelaide.

The CHAIR: Order!

Members interjecting:

The CHAIR: No.

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: It is almost impossible to respond to. This Leader of the Opposition presents a risk to South Australia. He is a risk to his own party and the conventions of this parliament. He has shown his inability to take pressure, now on a number of occasions, by getting things dramatically wrong under pressure. Now he is taking the Liberal Party to the point of trashing hundreds of years of tradition and convention in this parliament for the sake of five banks which, no matter how much profit they make, still sack people.

This government will not be amending its budget. This government stands with the people of South Australia and the small businesses who are going to earn these tax cuts. I say to the real conservatives on the other side of the chamber: do not trash convention, aspire to govern, and if you are in government you do not want outside influences attempting to hijack your budget process for short-term gain. Fundamentally, it will worsen our democratic institutions and make it increasingly harder to govern. Do not follow this fool off a hill.

Mr MARSHALL: I rise to speak on this matter. The Liberal Party certainly supports the suggestions that have been made from the other place regarding the Budget Measures Bill. It is pretty galling to have to come into this chamber and listen to the most incompetent Treasurer this state has ever had. This guy who comes in here and tries to explain economics to this chamber in such an irrational and illogical way is nothing short of galling. The Liberal Party will be standing up for every—

Members interjecting:

The CHAIR: Order!

Mr MARSHALL: —single solitary person in South Australia.

Members interjecting:

The CHAIR: Order! I am on my feet.

The Hon. A. Koutsantonis interjecting:

The CHAIR: Excuse me, I am on my feet. That means people sit down. The leader is entitled to be heard in silence. We have tried to maintain some sort of order in the chamber so that we can all hear and Hansard can record this debate. Members need to observe the standing orders. The leader.

Mr MARSHALL: We are listening to the people of South Australia, who do not want to see the continuation of the wrecking ball economics presided over by this hopeless, dysfunctional, 15½-year-old Labor administration in South Australia. People aspire to more than they have been left with after 15 years of this hopeless government in South Australia. They want a growing economy in South Australia; they want jobs in South Australia. Most importantly, they want a future for the next generation in South Australia, and that is never going to be delivered by Labor. If you need any proof of that, you only have to look at the last 15 years in South Australia where our position as a state on the national stage has been diminished every single solitary year by this completely and utterly dysfunctional, self-serving, shameful government in South Australia.

Let me tell you about the problems that confront the people of South Australia. They are many and they are varied, but the solution is always the same from Labor. Every time we have a problem in South Australia, they say, 'I know what we'll do; we'll introduce a new tax.' How is that working for the people of South Australia? I tell you that in the last 36 months, the last three years, we have had the highest trend unemployment rate for 33 of those 36 years. That is how it is working. There is a mass exodus of capital and young people out of this state, all put in place by these hopeless policy settings that Labor have inflicted upon the people of South Australia.

We are very proud on this side of the chamber to stand up and say, 'Enough is enough. No more taxes. No more Labor taxes inflicted on the people of South Australia.' They love taxes—the gambling tax increases and the emergency services levy tax increase inflicted upon the people of South Australia. When the former treasurer, the member for Playford, first contemplated a state-based land tax on the family home, he said that this would be something that would be introduced only after extensive consultation and only after a government took it to the people at an election. Let me tell you, there was no consultation and they did not take it to the 2014 election. Immediately thereafter, the government removed the remission, essentially putting a land tax on the family home. They are addicted to taxes.

Then they tried to introduce a car park tax, and again the Liberal Party, with responsible members in the other place, was called upon to save the people of South Australia from this tax-addicted government. Now, of course, they are running spurious commentary right throughout the media here in South Australia. Labor lies every single day. Let's consider some of these Labor lies—first of all, 'The Liberal Party is blocking the budget.' Actually, the Supply Bill went through a long time ago. I do not know whether or not you got a briefing from your office; perhaps you could get one. The reality is that the Liberal Party is not blocking the budget.

Yes, there is a Budget Measures Bill, and again Labor lies and puts out to the people of South Australia that if this Budget Measures Bill does not pass then, for some reason, this is going to block payroll tax concessions and stamp duty concessions in South Australia. This is another lie by Labor. The reality is that the only people in South Australia who are talking about blocking stamp duty concessions and payroll tax concessions are the Labor Party in South Australia. Not one other member in the other place even contemplated cutting those concessions. It is another Labor lie. In fact, the Under Treasurer gave evidence to the Budget and Finance Committee making it very clear—abundantly clear—that these two concessions did not require legislation to be continued. So this is another Labor lie that has been exposed here in South Australia.

Then, of course, the government says, 'We can't afford to pay these concessions if we don't increase taxes.' Their logic is: 'Let's increase taxes so that we can give a tax concession.' Only a Labor Party could invent something like that: 'We're going to increase taxes so that we can give you a tax reduction here in South Australia.' What a hopeless government this is. Why do they not stop this outrageous expenditure? There are taxpayer-funded advertising campaigns out there all day, every day, telling the people of South Australia that they are doing a really good job in terms of energy security in South Australia and a really good job in terms of lowering energy prices in South Australia, or that our hospital system is running really well, or that our school system is running really well.

It is outrageous that this government is spending so much money. They cannot be trusted with state taxpayers' money because they waste it each and every day. I would like to offer a statistic to this house regarding the difference between the budget that was brought down in June this year and the budget that was brought down in June the previous year. One of the statistics I want this chamber to consider is the writedown in state-based taxation revenue.

Between June 2016 and June 2017, the forward estimates provided for a $380 million writedown in state-based taxation revenue. Why was there a writedown in state-based taxation revenue? I will tell you: because our economy in South Australia has ground to a halt after 15½ years of dysfunctional, incompetent Labor government, and for four of those years that guy has been sitting in the Treasurer role. It is completely and utterly incompetent—a $380 million writedown in state-based taxation revenue.

Why has our economy ground to a halt? Because we have high taxes, high regulation and dysfunctional government, so the solution to the slowing economy is to increase taxes in South Australia and continue to put more and more red tape around business in South Australia. It is absolutely outrageous. It is no solution. The solution in South Australia is to create the most attractive place in the country for people to invest and the most attractive place in the country for people to employ people, and to do that the Liberal Party wants to lower taxes. The Liberal Party in South Australia will always stand for lower taxes; Labor will always stand for higher taxes in South Australia.

For all these reasons, we are supporting those from the other place. We reject the government's suggestion that this is unprecedented; in fact, Mr Lucas, in the other place last night, outlined I think five, six or seven different occasions when the Australian Labor Party themselves, either in government or in opposition, moved amendments to budget measures bills. The concept that this is completely and utterly unprecedented is outrageous and incorrect, but that is exactly what we have come to expect from this hopeless Labor government.

What is unprecedented is the way the Leader of the Government behaved in the chamber last night. It was an outrageous threat that was made to our democracy in South Australia by the Labor Party that, if they did not get their way, they were going to be like a petulant child who said that they were going to inflict punishment on every successive government in South Australia, inflict vandalism on all future budgets in South Australia.

I note that the Treasurer very quickly distanced himself from those comments on a radio interview this morning; nevertheless, they exist in Hansard. This speaks to the mindset and the desperation of this hopeless government in South Australia. The reality is that the only way to get this state back on its feet is to elect a Liberal majority government at the next election. The Treasurer has been in this chamber talking about a whole pile of issues.

Sitting extended beyond 18:00 on motion of Hon. A. Koutsantonis.

Mr MARSHALL: The reality is that this Treasurer was being too clever by half. He thought he was on a real winner bashing the banks, but the people of South Australia are far smarter than the Treasurer himself. He thought that, because there was some success with the federal government's imposition of a national major banks levy, this would be an easy target in South Australia, but the people of South Australia considered this. They considered it very carefully and they had to make a decision as to whether or not this would be good for the state. Was this something that was going to create additional jobs? No. Was this going to create greater investor confidence in South Australia? No. Was this something that was going to make sure that their kids had a future in South Australia? No.

I think the people of South Australia are far smarter than this Treasurer gives them credit for. The reality is that the people of South Australia do not want another massive tax hit on our economy. They know what nearly 16 years of Labor government in South Australia have inflicted upon the state and they do not want it anymore. I am very proud to be standing up on this side of the chamber fighting for the people of South Australia to make sure that we do not continue the wrecking ball economics being inflicted upon the people of South Australia by this Treasurer. We will be supporting, every step of the way, the suggestions made by those in the other place.

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: That was an appalling contribution by the Leader of the Opposition. It showed his naivety about what it is to be a government. He has just proven to all his colleagues that he is not fit to govern.

The opposition believes that this is not unprecedented. What is about to occur is that the government is not going to accept the suggestions. I know that this is a difficult and complex issue for the opposition to understand: we are not going to accept the suggestions. This is going back to the upper house. Then there are two options left for the opposition—support or set aside. That is it. You can take the legal advice of the member for Mitchell, or you can listen to the Clerk of the House of Assembly and the Clerk of the Legislative Council. This Leader of the Opposition is saying to members opposite—

Members interjecting:

The CHAIR: Order!

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: He is saying to them that he cannot win an election in his own right anymore. He has created open seats throughout their backyard and the Xenophon group are hunting them in packs. They are going to win seats off them, seats that they expected to have in their corner, and now he is telling them, 'But we will be able to govern because we can pass our budgets.' Well how, with the precedent you are setting today?

He cannot think ahead. It goes to the ability to think strategically—like, the night before an election do not tell everyone to vote for your opponents. That is just a bad strategy, but this is what they continually do. For 11 days after the budget he ummed and ahhed about whether he supported it, and on the 11^th day he succumbed to one meeting from one bank. So here we are again today making the same arguments and he is trying to convince his own backbench that this is all normal.

An honourable member interjecting:

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: I am sure the ones down here are going to follow you off a cliff, I am sure they are. Long may you reign, long may you stay Leader of the Opposition and long may they follow you, because there is nothing better than a bumbling Leader of the Opposition making up stupid things during a campaign for a government to use. You are going to star in our campaign. You are going to be the headline act, baby. You are going to be in charge. We are going to make sure that Steven Marshall is going to be on TV every single day telling everyone exactly how to vote.

Mr GARDNER: Point of order.

The CHAIR: Order! We have a point of order on my left—and I know it will not be frivolous.

Mr GARDNER: Calling the Leader of the Opposition by his name is unparliamentary to start with, and relevance would go on top of that.

The CHAIR: I was still coping with 'baby' at that point, but I remind the Treasurer that it is not—

Members interjecting:

The CHAIR: Order! Looking at me! It is unparliamentary to use names.

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: We want to give South Australian small businesses the tax cuts they deserve. We want to be able to take a part of the economy that is making super profits and is undertaxed by about $4 billion per year, according to the commonwealth government of Australia, their political party. Their political party is the one that opened the door to these measures. We have argued long and hard that we need to make sure that banks pay their appropriate fair share of tax, and we are going to make sure they pay their fair share of tax.

As for the economic data that the Leader of the Opposition was rattling off, he keeps on saying over and over and over again that we should be growing at the same rate as the nation. Well, last year the nation's GDP grew by 1.9 per cent, and South Australia's grew by above 2. You want us to slow down? Here he goes, a low base. We have moved up the CommSec ratings, the bank's own ratings, CommSec's own ratings. We are now the third highest ranking state of all the states in economic activity on CommSec, but the Leader of the Opposition says, 'No, we're not. We're the worst in the nation. Ignore the facts.'

Our unemployment rate has gone from 8 per cent; it is now below 6 per cent. We have the third lowest unemployment rate in the nation because of tax cuts that have been targeted towards parts of the economy that are growing, making sure that South Australians have a tax system that is fair and efficient. We are saying to a very profitable part of the economy that are not paying their fair share of tax that they need to contribute more so we can contract create more jobs in small business. Why would any Liberal vote against a measure in the upper house to give small businesses tax cuts?

Just remember this: the Leader of the Opposition is telling is party to vote (1) against payroll tax cuts, (2) to vote against concessions for first homeowners, and (3) to vote against taxes of foreign investors who are competing with South Australians who are going to be buying properties. These measures will all be before the upper house, and the opposition have only one trigger to pull: support or block—that is it. That is all they have. It cannot come back. The Leader of the Opposition has no idea what he is making his members do. I urge the house to support the motion. The motion is that the suggested amendments of the Legislative Council be disagreed to.

The CHAIR: The question is actually the other way. The question before the house is that the suggested amendments made by the Legislative Council be disagreed to.

Mr Marshall: He only got it 100 per cent wrong.

The CHAIR: Actually, he is able to say it that way. I am a learner, too. The question is that they be disagreed to.

The committee divided on the motion:

Ayes 21

Noes 14

Majority 7

Motion thus carried.

At 18:11 the house adjourned until Tuesday 14 November 2017 at 11:00.