Senator KIM CARR (Victoria—Minister for Human Services) (15:44): Senator Brandis asked us who was the smartest person in the room. Well, we know the answer. Who is the smartest person in the room every day of the week? It is none other than Lord Brandis himself! What we have seen is an arrogant, contemptuous, pompous display of the attitude that this opposition brings— Senator Nash: On a point of order, Mr Deputy President, I would ask that you ask the minister to refer to Senator Brandis by his correct name. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you, Senator Nash—quite appropriate. Senator Carr, please refer to Senator Brandis as 'Senator Brandis'. Senator KIM CARR: I will indeed. I was simply complimenting Lord Brandis on his approach— The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: No, Senator Carr. You have to refer to Senator Brandis as 'Senator Brandis', thank you. Senator KIM CARR: Thank you, Mr Deputy President. Senator Brandis has tried to present to us that he is the cleverest man and is God's gift to the legal fraternity. He is obviously the most intelligent legal mind that has ever been produced in this chamber! He is a man that is knee-deep in horsehair and can advise the rest of us about what is right and what is wrong when it comes to the question of revenue in this country, because not one word has he said about the question of the revenue that was raised by this particular tax. He argues that he is very concerned about the welfare of the mining industry when it comes to the question of the revenue stream here. He argues that it has not raised enough money; that is the claim that they are making publicly. We know what crocodile tears those remarks are, because from day one of this whole exercise those opposite have opposed the resources rent tax. They have seen it as an opportunity to go down on bended knee to the wealthy and the vested interests in this country and to argue their case that they should pay no tax. That has been their proposition: they should pay no tax. That is the principle upon which they have based their entire approach. When it comes to actually helping out Australians in these times of need, what have we seen the opposition actually do? They have voted against tax breaks for 2.7 million small businesses, they have voted against supporting the retirement savings of 8.4 million working Australians, they have fought to deprive the country of the most needed infrastructure and they have done so in order to do the bidding of the most powerful and most deeply enriched vested interests in this country. When we look at this whole issue, we do not hear one word of criticism of any state government that is imposing revenues in terms of its capacity through the royalties system. Not one word has been uttered about this. If it is such a shocking thing to tax the mining industry, why have we not heard a word about what is occurring with the states across this country? We know that the state royalties are an inefficient tax which actually discourage investment, but there is not one word from those opposite. We know that royalties do not ensure an adequate return to the community, and it is the community that owns these resources—it is not the states and governments but the people of this country that own these resources. Of course, there is not one word about the failure of the royalties system to ensure a proper return when commodity prices are high. The Australian government has sought to engage the states on this matter, but what we know is that the states have taken full advantage of these circumstances. The New South Wales Treasurer, Mike Baird, has announced an increase in the state's mining royalties of approximately $1.5 billion over four years. Senator Conroy: How much? Senator KIM CARR: One point five billion dollars over four years. He says, 'Oh, this is to offset the carbon price.' What a pathetic excuse! What a miserable attempt to hide what is clearly a tax hike based on the coal industry! What we know is that the New South Wales government's increase in mining royalties increases the risk of investment cuts and increases the level of uncertainty for businesses. We know that in Queensland a similar pattern has emerged. The Queensland government has announced an increase in the royalty payable for the coal price at more than $100 a tonne from 1 October last year. The increase will see a jump of some 10 per cent—a 10 per cent hike to 12.5 per cent—for every tonne of coal sold between $100 and $150. Coal sold for more than $150 a tonne will attract a 15 per cent royalty. This is an increase included in the Queensland 2012-13 state budget and it is expected to raise $1.64 billion over the next four years. So what we saw in the case of Queensland is that the government's decision to raise the royalty on coal will create additional pressures operating in that state, which is already being affected by the falling commodity prices, by higher costs and by the strong Australian dollar. There is not one word over there about the impact of those charges on the coal industry. I am particularly interested that Queensland coal operators, under the resources rent tax, do not bear a liability and cannot offset it until such time as their profits exceed $75 million. If their profits are below $75 million, that means they cannot actually claim the state royalties back. So the consequences of the changes in Queensland are that small and medium-sized miners are in fact hit with that tax. There is not one word over there about the consequences of that operation and not one word in defence of the mining industry on those matters. We know now that Queensland is the fifth state—after Western Australia, South Australia, Tasmania and New South Wales—to increase the iron ore and/or coal royalties since the Commonwealth resources tax reforms were first introduced in May 2010. If the opposition were serious about these matters, they would have drawn attention to what has been a very substantial increase in revenues that have come from the states. Upon coming to office, this government was faced with quite extraordinary economic difficulties flowing from the effect of the two-speed economy. We were determined to ensure that the government was able to assist people in rebuilding this country. That is why there have been record investments in health and education, record investments to build infrastructure and record investments to produce more jobs, more opportunities and more prosperity in this country. Despite the extraordinary headwinds of the international economic downturn, the economy has created 380,000 jobs, including some 67,000 jobs in the mining industry. There has been $152 billion of capital expenditure in mining, an increase of 160 per cent. There has not been one word from over there about the importance of those economic effects. Total business investment across the economy has increased by 45 per cent. There has not been one word from those opposite about the strength of the Australian economy. This government is in the business of ensuring that we, as one of the more prosperous countries in the world, are able to achieve this prosperity through having a balanced economy, not relying on resources alone but appreciating the skills and opportunities for the whole population. That is the legacy this government has been building upon. That is why we negotiated and delivered the minerals resource rent tax. The coalition should stand condemned for their opposition to this proposition from day one. The opposition have no credibility whatsoever when it comes to these questions. The opposition have not been able to release any of the costings for their promises. They are not subject to any scrutiny, any accountability. When people had a chance to look at their costings at the last election, they left a funding gap of some $11 billion. Their approach to these issues is about covering up the fact that, in aggregate, they now have commitments of $70 billion over budget expenditure. They need to find mechanisms to cover up the inevitably savage cuts that they will be making to hospitals, schools and universities. These savage cuts will have to be endured by working people across this country. That is what this debate really is all about. It is not about the concern of the opposition for the revenue streams that are coming from the mining industry. Nothing could be further from the truth. We have an opportunity here to build a better country if this parliament is prepared to seize it. But those opposite have taken every opportunity to turn their backs on fairness and turn their backs on ensuring that we are able to build a stronger economy and a more equal society. After 21 years of consecutive economic growth, Australia is now the 12th largest economy in the world. This is despite the economic crisis. You would have thought we would be able to seize that opportunity, build a much stronger and fairer economy and ensure that the people of this country are able to enjoy the security that comes from that sort of prosperity. But those opposite have been pursuing a policy which is really about defending vested interests. That is the long and the short of it. It is about defending those that are already extremely well-off. It is not about ensuring we have fairness built into the system. You have opposed every single measure to ensure we have a more productive economy and a fairer society. You are not in the business of ensuring the long-term reform that is needed to build the economic underpinnnings to secure the prosperity of Australia. While commodity prices are down, the revenues from this arrangement will be down. As commodity prices improve, the revenues will improve. We should not, however, fall for a moment for the claims that have been made, the crocodile tears that have been shed, about concerns about the mining industry. I am particularly concerned about the position that is taken in the education area and the failure of the conservative governments around this country to meet their responsibilities. The royalties they have taken from coal and iron ore have been used for other purposes at the same time as we have seen massive reductions in the hospital and education systems across the country where conservative governments have been in office. To me, this is a harbinger of things to come. What we are likely to see, if the coalition are ever elected, is a government that is determined to ensure that the pandering to vested interests is accelerated but the opportunities to support the people of this country with proper education and health take a back seat. We are entitled to ask, with a motion of this type: what does the coalition actually stand for? What does it actually seek to do? Senator Abetz: The abolition of the mining tax. Senator KIM CARR: You say you are about the abolition of the mining tax, but are you also saying that you are opposed to all the things that flow from it? Senator Abetz: It's not funding it, you goose! Senator KIM CARR: So you are going to remove the $18,000 floor from the taxation system? The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Order! Senator Kim Carr, first of all, direct your comments to the chair and please do not interject across the table. That goes for all senators. Senator KIM CARR: We have today the clear statement from those opposite that those earning less than $18,000 a year will now be paying tax under a conservative government, and the measures taken on superannuation will not proceed— Senator Abetz: No. We didn't say that at all. Senator KIM CARR: That is exactly what you said: 'We don't have the money to pay for it, so we're not going to do it.' Senator Abetz: No. That is untrue. Senator KIM CARR: That is clearly what you were saying, Senator. You were saying that those who currently do not pay tax because they earn less than $18,000 a year will lose that benefit. That has to be understood by the clear intention that you are pursuing here today. But, if it is not your policy, I have no doubt your next speaker will make it perfectly clear that it is not your policy. What we have to do is see what other measures are also being funded by these measures which are already built into the budget. Opposition senators interjecting— Senator KIM CARR: Are you going to continue with them or not? Are you continuing with it or not, Senator? The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Order senators! We are not debating each other across the table. Address your remarks to the Chair, Senator Carr, please. You have the call. Senator KIM CARR: It strikes me that what we are getting here is a little bit more than the opposition bargained for because they are now being forced to reveal what their policies actually are, and that is taking benefits off people—some of the poorest people in this country and some of the most vulnerable people in this country. There is an attempt being made by those opposite to actually defend what is indefensible. You want to support the vested interests of the multimillionaires, but you want to impose higher taxes and charges on the poorest people in this country. Is that how you are going to balance the budget? Is that your intention, to actually make people who earn less than $18 thousand a year pay tax? Because that is the clear implication of the proposition that you are advancing here today. We know that since the resources rent tax was announced, those opposite immediately did the bidding of their billionaire mates. From day one, they have said that they will not support what they call an 'investment-destroying and job-destroying' tax. Of course we know the reality, and the reality is very, very different. This is a tax that is justified, is fair and is reasonable, and the Australian public know that. They know that they have to share the benefits of the resources boom. They do know that we have to have a system that ensures that we are able to build a future with confidence, and that we have to have measures in place so that the ordinary people of this country do get the benefits of the enormous wealth that this country produces. The alternative is very straightforward, of course. The alternative is that, essentially, you want to increase the taxes and the charges for those who are least able to afford it. What you are prepared to do is to say that you will cut back on school kids' bonuses and you will cut back on superannuation reforms that benefit working people across this country. You will go down in history as amongst the greatest wreckers. And you are not interested in building. This is a country that aspires to something much, much better. This is a country that aspires to genuine progress. This is a country that has a right to aspire to those things, and this is a country that will not get any answers from those opposite on these matters. We know that those opposite are really in the business of ensuring that those least able to afford it will pay the highest. And those with vested interests, who are already very wealthy, will get the benefits of your support. That is the real nature of this debate. You are in the business of defending the millionaires and taking from the poorest in this country—of cutting social security benefits, of making people on low incomes pay more tax and reducing the benefits that come to their social wage through the education system and the health system. You are in the business of undermining the infrastructure of this country and destroying the prosperity of this nation; that is quite clear as a result of your approach to these issues. How else? How else will you be able to fund the $70 billion-black hole that is now being created in terms of your own arrangements? We know that those who are on low incomes, those who are, of course, entitled to the support of the taxation system, will be right in the firing line—right in the firing line under a conservative government. What we do know is that Tony Abbott has not changed his spots one bit because the previous arrangements— The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Mr Tony Abbott, Senator Carr. Senator KIM CARR: Thank you Mr Deputy President. What we do know is that when it comes to the question of policy differences in this country, nothing could be starker. Nothing could be starker! You are on the side of the wealthy and the powerful. You want to use the state to undermine the opportunities that will ensure that the benefits are spread for the poorest and the weakest in this country. You want to reimpose that $18,000-arrangement whereby people who earn less than that will now be paying tax under a coalition government. We know that hard-working Australians are in the firing line under Mr Tony Abbott's government, and this is a position that we will strongly argue against to ensure it does not happen.