Senator THISTLETHWAITE (New South Wales) (16:16): The minerals resource rent tax is sound economic and social policy—a recommendation of the Henry tax review and a reform supported by the overwhelming majority of economists in our nation. It is a reform that will ensure that the benefits of the mining boom that are being enjoyed by a few multinational, large miners—the majority being overseas owned—are shared by all Australians and that the revenue is directed to occupational superannuation, to tax breaks for small businesses and to investments in regional infrastructure. I often wonder what Australian families think of the debates that occur in this place. The average Australian worker would be just getting home from work at the moment after a hard day's work, facing the prospect of paying the mortgage, school fees and bills, and getting by from week to week. What would they think about the approach that is being taken by the coalition to this major, important economic reform that will redirect some of the benefits of the mining boom and place it in the hands and the pockets of Australians through increased retirement incomes and tax breaks for small businesses? The most profitable miners in this country are doing well. At its last AGM, Fortescue Metals announced a $1 billion profit—its largest so far. BHP, our largest miner, announced a $22.5 billion profit—and a majority of that was generated from the minerals boom that is occurring in Australia. Rio Tinto announced a 30 per cent increase in their first half figures for this year. This reform is aimed at ensuring that these big miners pay their fair share—and it is the big miners that will pay this tax—and at putting back into the Australian economy some of the benefits that they get from extracting a non-renewable resource, a resource that is owned by the Commonwealth, by the people of Australia, and selling it on the open market for a very big profit. The opposition have sought to criticise the consultation process. I think Senator Cormann's words were that some of these people were 'in the back pocket of the government'. Well, the Policy Transition Group was established and they have undertaken a 12-month process, and there have been two rounds of public consultations. A Resource Tax Implementation Group has been established and it is made up of industry representatives— Senator Cormann: Chaired by whom? Chaired by the former chairman of BHP. Chaired by whom? Senator THISTLETHWAITE: I will go through some of the members of the Resource Tax Implementation Group, Senator Cormann. They include: Grant Cathro, partner at Allens Arthur Robinson, a tax law expert; Frank Drenth, executive director at Corporate Tax Association; Teresa Dyson, partner in tax law at Blake Dawson; Yasser El-Ansary, tax counsel at the Institute of Chartered Accountants— Senator Carol Brown interjecting— Senator Cormann: Chaired by whom? Chaired by whom? The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Order! Senator Cormann, that is an unusually extra interjection, so please resist. Senator Carol Brown, please resist shouting across the chamber. Senator Thistlethwaite, please direct your comments to the chair. Senator THISTLETHWAITE: Basil Mastilis, a partner at Ernst & Young; Noel Mullen, the deputy chief executive at the Australian Petrol Production and Exploration Association; Anthony Portas, head of tax at Asia Pacific Anglo American; and Gordon Thring, corporate and international tax partner at Deloitte. These are the people who, in the words of Senator Cormann, are 'in the back pocket of the government' when it comes to drafting this piece of legislation. They provided valuable input through the legislative drafting process and it reflects the view of the government that this is a necessary reform and one that we have consulted widely on. The revenue raised from this tax will go to funding superannuation increases in our economy. We will move the compulsory superannuation level from nine to 12 per cent over the course of the next eight years. With an ageing population and an increasing burden on our budget and on our social security system, this is a major economic reform and an important economic reform. Up until a couple of weeks ago, it was opposed by the opposition, in line with their historical opposition to occupational superannuation in this country. When the Labor Party sought to introduce superannuation in the 1990s, it was opposed by those opposite. Now we have in our economy $1.3 trillion of funds under management and those funds are used for investment and growth by companies and to support jobs. Senator Williams: What about the industry super funds? Senator THISTLETHWAITE: In fact, Senator Williams, during the global financial crisis when debt markets were frozen, when access to liquidity was difficult to come by, it was Australian superannuation funds that were invested in businesses, many in the mining industry. CBus, the construction industry superannuation fund, is one big investor in BHP and Rio. They are putting back into the mining industry, ensuring that there are sufficient investment funds for growth. Those opposite always oppose superannuation and up until a few weeks ago, they were opposing the increases in the superannuation guarantee from nine to 12 per cent being funded by this important reform. These reforms are supported broadly by the funds management industry and by the superannuation industry. A recent report by the Allen Consulting Group—a very enlightening insight into the state of superannuation in this country—highlights the fact that the increase from nine per cent to 12 per cent over the course of the next eight years will increase our nation's gross domestic product, our income, by 0.33 per cent to 2025. That means in 2010 dollars there will be an extra $5.4 billion in our economy because of this reform. That $5.4 billion will fund the retirement incomes of working Australians and provide an important pool of investment sources for business growth. The other aspect of the revenue generated from this reform will be to provide assistance to companies in the form of an instant asset write-off, increasing from $1,000 to $6,500 over the course of the coming year. That will benefit 2.7 million small businesses throughout the country. The company tax rate will fall from 30 per cent to 29 per cent, funded by the minerals resource rent tax revenue—again, opposed by those opposite, those who claim to be advocates and supporters of the growth of small businesses. We have often heard of the infrastructure bottlenecks that exist in our economy. The revenue generated from this tax reform will ensure that we invest in rural and regional communities, most notably in freight lines and overcoming bottlenecks associated with port infrastructure. Overwhelmingly, the revenue used from this tax will ensure a more healthy, stable economy into the future. It will boost retirement incomes, which is important for our ageing population, and it will provide tax breaks for small businesses. What a great shame that the mighty Liberal Party, the party of the free market, of business enterprise, of government getting out of the way, is opposing these reforms that will provide a big boost to retirement incomes, secure our economic growth into the future and ensure assistance for small businesses in our economy. Those opposite come into this place and seek to make points about modelling. Senator Cormann made some comments about the modelling associated with this. Indeed, he has been one of the principal opposition critics of the Treasury modelling on the carbon price. Let us have a look at the Liberal Party's record on modelling. At the last election they refused to submit their election costings to independent expert analysis. Why was that? When they did, the costings came up $11 billion short—an $11 billion black hole. They said that they had their costings independently audited by a group of auditors from the North Shore of Sydney who signed off on them. When we had a look at the costings, we saw that those auditors would not give an unqualified audit of the Liberal Party's election costings. Yet the Liberal Party comes in here and criticises the government's modelling, when all the facts associated with the carbon price and this important reform are on the table. We have had leaks from the shadow cabinet which indicate that there will be cuts of $70 billion to services under a coalition government. Then we had the almighty backflip on occupational superannuation a couple of weeks ago when the shadow finance minister Andrew Robb was not told that the coalition would not repeal the increases in superannuation. This will add an extra $12 billion to their budget bottom line costings. Ours is a sensible reform, it is costed and the Australian public needs it. (Time expired)