Senator SMITH (Western Australia) (17:12): It gives me great privilege to take note of answers given by Senator Conroy today in regard to the debate we have had about the minerals resource rent tax. I think it is fair to say that this is a government that is losing the will to live but has not yet lost the will to tax, even if that tax achieves little in revenue. The coalition opposes Labor's mining tax because it is bad for jobs and bad for Australia. If the Labor Party were the party of equity and fairness, then it would ask its faceless men to roll Julia Gillard and Wayne Swan in the same way that they rolled Kevin Rudd. But Labor is not a party of equity— Senator Carol Brown: Acting Deputy President, I rise on a point of order to remind the senator to use the proper titles when he is referring to members in the other House. The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT ( Senator McKenzie ): Senator Smith, it is Prime Minister Gillard. Senator SMITH: Thank you Acting Deputy President and thank you Senator Brown for your timely intervention. What is important here is that the coalition position is not changing. We are unequivocally opposed to the mining tax and we will abolish it in government. It is good for Western Australia to abandon the mining tax, and what we know, in the current state of our economy, is that what is good for Western Australia is good for Australia. In the debate today at question time we heard the government leader say that the tax was important for long-term reform. The government kept telling Australians that they would share the benefits of the boom through their historic reform of the mining tax. This historic reform has so far raised only a fraction of the money promised in the budget. Labor is right on only one point—that the coalition will most definitely repeal the tax. Even the Reserve Bank has recognised that sharing the benefits of the boom occurs through jobs, through company tax and through royalties. The RBA, as we have heard today, found that soaring resource exports over the past seven years have created about 500,000 jobs across every major industry. Not only is Labor dysfunctional and incompetent; it is divided and confused over its own position. Earlier this month, on 15 February, the Minister for Regional Australia, Regional Development and Local Government, Simon Crean, said: In the meantime we're seeking to address the design flaw in—well, we're seeking to actually now change the design— of the mining tax. Only days earlier, Prime Minister Gillard had told the parliament: … the government has no plans to change the design of the MRRT. Labor cannot be trusted on this tax nor on any other plans to tax the Australian community. In giving evidence at Senate estimates on 14 February, the Secretary of the Treasury, Dr Parkinson, confirmed that the flaws in Labor's MRRT were the result of the negotiations orchestrated by the Prime Minister and Treasurer after the ousting of Kevin Rudd. Senator McLucas interjecting— Senator SMITH: I think this is a critical point—that the flaws were the result of negotiations orchestrated by the Prime Minister and the Treasurer after the ousting of Kevin Rudd. The Australian newspaper— The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT ( Senator McKenzie ): Senator Smith, I remind you to use the proper title of members in the other place. Senator Birmingham: That's 'Prime Minister in exile' for Mr Rudd. Senator SMITH: Thank you very much, Senator Birmingham. Later in that same week, the Australian newspaper reported: Treasury secretary Martin Parkinson has admitted the design of the mining tax is responsible for its failure to generate revenue, not the falling commodity prices, higher currency and state royalties blamed by the government. In explosive testimony to the Senate economics committee yesterday, Dr Parkinson said Treasury had compiled its budget forecasts in ignorance of the real cost of concessions agreed to by Wayne Swan and Resources Minister Martin Ferguson when they renegotiated the tax in private with the chief executives of BHP Billiton, Rio Tinto and Xstrata in mid-2010. I think this is an important point. How critical have changing commodity prices been? Do they give the government a defence for this significant policy failure? While the government now point to changes in commodity prices, the risk of commodity price falls did not stop them from boasting at the time this tax was brought in that it would be a multibillion dollar revenue windfall. It did not stop them from putting forward a variety of programs to be funded through this tax initiative. On 1 November 2012, the West Australian put to rest the suggestion that commodity prices are the only cause for concern in this revenue mix-up: He— the Treasurer— is now trying to create the impression that lower commodity prices are the only reason the MRRT has not delivered any revenue so far. That is part of the story, but there is much, much more.