Mr BAYLEY (Clark) – Honourable Deputy Speaker, it is disappointing. Our withdrawal motion was an opportunity for the government to go away, get expert advice and give considered reform to this bill. Given that we are still debating the bill, we will go to Committee. As foreshadowed, we have a number of amendments that seek to achieve the outcomes that we think need to happen here.
I take the opportunity to restate again that we are not opposed to a fund such as this. We acknowledge that the superannuation liability does need to be dealt with, and we acknowledge that paying surplus funds into a fund such as this is a good idea, but only when there are surplus funds. Just because we get a GST windfall does not necessarily mean there is a surplus, and obviously there is not if we are running a budget deficit.
I do not have a lot more to say. I am not going to labour the points on this, but I will reiterate my question again to the Treasurer because he did not take the opportunity to answer it when he got to his feet on that amendment: I want to know whether you have external expert advice and have done analysis about whether mandating the payment of 50 per cent of GST windfalls is a good idea and a good investment.
We know and we heard you mount a strong political defence for this bill in your response to our amendment. I did not hear anything technical in your response. I did not hear anything that justified why this is a good idea, why the arguments that I have put in relation to only doing this in years of cash surplus is wise, why Saul Eslake is wrong. I did not hear you address any of those points. When you are summing up, I invite you to answer that question about external advice, about whether you have done modelling to ensure that this is the best pathway forward, and to respond to the concerns that we have raised.
We do not oppose a bill like this. It has merit, but it has to be right. We need to get it right, so, I urge you to address those points specifically and not just launch into a political diatribe that attacks the Labor Party. We know that is the genesis of this bill. It comes from a media release three days out from the last election with the headline ‘A Strong Plan to fix Labor’s unfunded super liability’. We know the genesis of it – that does not mean it is wrong, but it is only right if you get it right, and that is our concern.
We will move those amendments that I have foreshadowed in my second reading to try to constrain this to only paying in 50 per cent of GST windfalls in those years of cash surplus. Thank you.
