MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE
Mr VIOLI (Casey) (15:34): Deputy Speaker, you should always listen to the speeches of the minister opposite, because sometimes it's not about what they say but what they choose not to say. In that 10 minutes, the minister chose not to defend or mention the disastrous budget handed down by the Treasurer. He didn't want to talk about those changes, although he did talk about competition and he did talk about dynamism.
So let's talk about the tech sector. The tech sector is fundamental to driving competition in this country. The tech sector is fundamental to creating start-ups and creating competition in this country.
However, the budget changes passed by this government will cripple the tech sector. And don't just take don't take my word for it. Dr Leigh: What does the Tech Council say?
Mr VIOLI: The minister asks, 'What does the Tech Council say?' Thank you for that, Minister. I was about to quote from the Tech Council—perfect. The Tech Council, talking about the innovative business CGT concession, said: As proposed, however, the IBCC would leave Australia a less attractive place to start, fund and grow a technology company.
The minister walks out of the chamber. He clearly doesn't want to hear from the Tech Council. It wasn't a great interjection, champ.
Who else signed that statement? It was the Tech Council of Australia, Robotics Australia Group, EduGrowth, FinTech Australia, Aussie Angels, Climate Tech Australia, the Medical Technology Association of Australia, AusBiotech, (Energy)Lab, Australian Agritech Association, Stone & Chalk and Startmate. They all signed that statement confirming that the tax changes proposed by this government will cripple the tech sector in Australia.
Again, we have a minister in this government who is not across their brief, asking for a quote from the Tech Council. He didn't like what he heard, and then he walked out. Many others have criticised the budget changes.
The member for Sturt has provided commentary on those changes. Now, the government wouldn't let us table the member's letter. They were embarrassed by their own member's words.
But the member for Sturt did say—and I'm going to quote from the member's email to her constituent: I have had difficulty coming to terms with the extension of these changes to other asset classes, for the specific reason you identify. I agree with your concerns. Mr Hogan: A little bit of honesty.
Mr VIOLI: Yes, a little bit of honesty. The member for Parramatta is always smart enough to never put it in email, but he did speak in the media about how he had concerns about the budget changes. The member for Bennelong has also spoken about his concerns.
They were a little bit more cryptic in their criticism. They've been around a little bit longer. What concerns does the member for Sturt have such that she agrees with her constituent?
Well, let me quote from Mr Cooper: I think the government spends more than they need to because it helps keep them in power. They may need the money but I'm not sure this is the way to do it. I think if they are going to do tax changes, they should have taken it to an election in the same way John Howard took the GST to an election.
So the member for Sturt agrees that the Prime Minister broke his word, he misled the Australian people and he should have taken these changes to an election. While I admire the courage of the member for Sturt, I do fear for her career options, because we know what this Prime Minister does to those who dare question him. He is very vindictive.
He runs the facade of unity. He forces unity. But, as they say, he protests too much.
We know that quietly behind that there is a group that aren't happy. The member for Brisbane has told her constituents that she will raise this matter with the Treasurer when she's next in Canberra for parliament, referring to the tax changes. I wonder how that conversation went.
She wasn't prepared to defend the changes to the constituents. She said she'd have a conversation with the Treasurer. We know that the Treasurer, as he said today, doesn't listen or doesn't care about the backbench.
Another MP—and this MP didn't want to be named; they had a bit of sense—said a 'group of Labor politicians' were calling for further changes after hearing complaints from self-funded retirees, young people who are investing in shares to save for a home deposit and younger women who may have had time out of the workforce. These budget changes are a disaster, all overseen by this Treasurer.
Those on the Labor backbench know it. They were prepared to vote for it, and it cost their own communities.