Division
Glenn Lazarus The Palmer United Party oppose schedule 7 in the following terms: (1) Schedule 7, page 37 (line 1) to page 39 (line 3), to be opposed. We oppose this schedule of the Minerals Resource Rent Tax Repeal and Other Measures Bill 2013 [No.2], commonly known as the mining tax repeal bill, to ensure the low-income superannuation contribution is continued. Mathias Cormann As we made very clear in the lead-up to the last election, we were committed to getting rid of the mining tax and we also said that, given this is failed tax which does not raise any revenue, we were also going to get rid of all the unfunded spending promises attached to it. This proposal before the chamber has a cost of $3.6 billion over the forward estimates, which is of course $3.6 billion the budget does not have. That is why the government is opposed to this proposition. Christine Milne The Australian Greens have an amendment which is identical to what has just been proposed, the aim of which is to retain the low-income superannuation contribution. The low-income superannuation contribution is about reducing inequality in Australia and that is something the Australian Greens are passionate about. One of the worst things happening in this country is the widening of the gap between the rich and the poor. Taking away the low-income superannuation contribution at the same time as allowing the wealthiest people in the country to maximise their wealth through superannuation is quite wrong. At the same time as the Prime Minister is supposedly standing up for women in Australia, here he is taking away the low-income superannuation contribution, which is a real attack on women—because we know that women are the ones who are likely to have lower incomes and who are more likely to be left without adequate superannuation. That is why we so strongly support this proposal. As for the government going on about removing the mining tax and therefore having to remove the unfunded other programs associated
Senate, 2014-07-17. negative: ayes 29, noes 39.
Question
Glenn Lazarus The Palmer United Party oppose schedule 7 in the following terms: (1) Schedule 7, page 37 (line 1) to page 39 (line 3), to be opposed. We oppose this schedule of the Minerals Resource Rent Tax Repeal and Other Measures Bill 2013 [No.2], commonly known as the mining tax repeal bill, to ensure the low-income superannuation contribution is continued. Mathias Cormann As we made very clear in the lead-up to the last election, we were committed to getting rid of the mining tax and we also said that, given this is failed tax which does not raise any revenue, we were also going to get rid of all the unfunded spending promises attached to it. This proposal before the chamber has a cost of $3.6 billion over the forward estimates, which is of course $3.6 billion the budget does not have. That is why the government is opposed to this proposition. Christine Milne The Australian Greens have an amendment which is identical to what has just been proposed, the aim of which is to retain the low-income superannuation contribution. The low-income superannuation contribution is about reducing inequality in Australia and that is something the Australian Greens are passionate about. One of the worst things happening in this country is the widening of the gap between the rich and the poor. Taking away the low-income superannuation contribution at the same time as allowing the wealthiest people in the country to maximise their wealth through superannuation is quite wrong. At the same time as the Prime Minister is supposedly standing up for women in Australia, here he is taking away the low-income superannuation contribution, which is a real attack on women—because we know that women are the ones who are likely to have lower incomes and who are more likely to be left without adequate superannuation. That is why we so strongly support this proposal. As for the government going on about removing the mining tax and therefore having to remove the unfunded other programs associated
How each member voted
Per-member votes are not present in this static export. Consult the original division record.
Related bills
Only formal divisions leave a per-member record. A procedural vote is not necessarily a vote for or against a bill.