Luke Howarth (Petrie, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Defence Industry) Share this | Hansard source

I'm really happy to rise today to speak about superannuation. It's a subject that's dear to my heart, as someone who started my own super fund when I was 19. The Superannuation (Objective) Bill is pretty straightforward—'a bill for an act relating to the objective of superannuation'. Most people would already know what super is for. This bill I think really just sort of explains what is already in place. The reality is that super is there for people when they retire.

But not everyone knows a lot about what actually happens with their super. Some of the things that the former coalition government did have really made Australians aware of the options that they have around super. The former coalition government delivered real reforms to superannuation that actually delivered for Australians. On this side of the House, we understand that superannuation is Australians' money. It's not the government's money, it's not the Prime Minister's or the Treasurer's money, it's not the unions' money, it's not the member for Kooyong's money; it's actually Australians' money. It's their money. And with $3½ trillion in super funds at the moment, the government has a tremendous responsibility to every Australian who has invested in superannuation.

I sometimes think that those opposite, the current Labor government, don't seem to understand that super is Australians' money. They might think that it's their money—that it's an opportunity to have those funds for them to use—and I'll come back to that a bit more later.

The basic principle of superannuation is pretty simple, and I think it's important that we outline it here. Quite simply, superannuation is about providing for people, for Australians, in their retirement. We've heard some conflict there from the Treasurer, where he's mentioned that superannuation should be used for nation-building projects—often associated with industry super funds that are linked to unions—or to invest in social housing through industry super funds. Well, I'll say it again: the basic principle is that superannuation doesn't belong to the government, or even the industry super fund or the retail fund that's managing it. It's up to Australians how they invest their money.

When I was 19, I had the fortunate opportunity where my dad said to me: 'Luke, put away $80 a month. Salary sacrifice $80 a month into super.' At the time, I think I was earning about $290 a week or something, working in retail, and I didn't really want to give up 80 bucks a month. That would have filled up my car well and truly back then. But, over time, that just built. I understood and learnt a little bit about salary sacrificing and watched that grow over time. The company that I invested in was bought out by someone else, and then I ended up with some shares. As a former assistant minister for youth, I also learnt that a lot of our younger Australians, particularly those aged between 15 and 24, don't always have the financial literacy that I was fortunate enough to have been taught. So, rather than the $400 million, or whatever it is, being spent by the government on advertising tax cuts—which they wouldn't be doing if the former coalition government hadn't legislated stage 3 tax cuts to start with—that money could be better spent on financial literacy programs like the First Home Super Saver Scheme, which explained salary sacrificing and how people can get into a home that way as well.

We've also seen that the government have broken promises in relation to super. We know that during a cost-of-living crisis it's even more important that we ensure our superannuation schemes remain focused on those people they're meant to bring security to—the Australian people. We had the Prime Minister promise before the last election that life would be easier under him, that the cost of living would be reduced under him, that there would be no changes to superannuation under him, and now we have seen that the government has broken a number of promises, time and time again, in less than two years. At the 2022 election, the Labor government claimed that they wanted to end the superannuation wars. That's what they said. The Prime Minister and the Treasurer promised no changes to superannuation prior to the election. Then, in February 2023, after he was elected, the Prime Minister promised no 'major' changes. So there was one thing before the election and one thing after.

We know that the government have introduced a new superannuation tax on unrealised capital gains. That will affect the youth of today, because, while it's on balances over $3 million and kicks in from 1 July 2025, it's not indexed. If it's not indexed, people that are 19 today, like one of my sons, will, in 40 years from now, be hit with a tax that's double the rate it is today in March 2024. It's currently taxed at 15 per cent, and they have legislated to take it up to 30 per cent. So they have broken the trust of the Australian people. The government have continually come into this place and justified it by saying, 'It's only wealthy people,' or, 'It's only people that turn over a certain amount.' They continually pit Australians against each other. They did the same thing with the stage 3 tax cuts, with a promise not to change them, and then they did that as well. There were many policies that weren't taken to the election or that they said they wouldn't change and have now changed, and it's not good enough.

The former coalition government understood that the primary purpose of super funds is to make investment decisions that are in the best interests of members, and this was critical to our Your Super, Your Future reform package. Once again, the government have indicated that they're looking to make changes there as well—that they want to make changes to benefit the people that donate to them. That's what the Labor Party often does around legislation when they come into this place. They legislate for union donors. We saw that through one of the first moves this government made, which was to repeal the arrangement that we set in place around Your Future, Your Super, namely:

… Clearly, expenditure on items that are not supported by identifiable financial benefits to members articulated in a clear business case, are unlikely to satisfy the requirements of the best financial interests duty.

This move alone has allowed unaccountable expenditure to run rife since the election of this government, in less than two years. In the last financial year, 2022-23, 10 super funds made over $15 million in payments to unions and over $21 million to the now-defunct Industry Super Australia. The premise of this legislation is important to ensuring that the objective of super remains within the best interests of Australians, and the government can't be trusted when it comes to this.

I mentioned before the First Home Super Saver Scheme, which the members here in the chamber at the moment all voted against. It was a pretty simple policy that actually did more to help young Australians and educate them on financial literacy than anything that this government has ever done, because it taught thousands of Australians about the importance of salary sacrificing where they're earning a wage. They might be on $80,000 a year. At the time they were getting about 10 per cent—another $8,000 a year—in super . What we legislated was that they could salary-sacrifice more funds into their super and then withdraw them for their first house. All these youths throughout Australia—and not just youths under 25 but some people in their 30s as well—had started to salary-sacrifice into their super.

Those who are now in government fought against it all the way and said they'd repeal it. I congratulate them on not doing that, because, once again, it's helped tens of thousands of people into their own homes and taught them about salary sacrifice. Rather than paying 30 per cent tax on their wage and ending up with a $10,000 contribution—a $7,000 deposit, because they lost $3,000 in tax—they put it into their super and are taxed on it at 15 per cent, so on that $10,000 their tax is $1,500, and they end up with $8,500 as a deposit, as opposed to $7,000. That Australian is $1,500 better off, with a higher deposit for their home. That's happening right now. It's legislated law of the land today. The coalition put that in place, along with a number of other policies to help Australians into their first home. So it won't surprise Australians if we take to the next election—which we will—the opportunity for Australians to use a little bit of the super that they currently have in place to help them into their first home. We're not making apologies for it, and this bill does nothing to stop it. We will take that to the next election. I can say to my coalition colleagues in this place that we should continue to take it to elections and explain it. If we think it's the right thing to do then we should continue to take it to elections.

It's the same with energy or anything else. The Treasurer often speaks about using superannuation and industry funds to invest in clean energy, but they won't invest in, or even talk about, nuclear power. In fact, he rubbished it today. We know that, if they're serious about climate change and want to meet net-zero emissions, it's probably the only baseload power they can do. So what we get is hypocrisy from this government, because on the one hand they say, 'Oh, you can't do this with your super,' but, when it comes to industry funds, that's okay. It's alright if their union donors who manage these industry funds do it.

It's absolutely wrong, and in the lead-up to the next election I and others around the place will be out there talking to young Australians about their super and encouraging them to salary-sacrifice. I believe in super. I want people to salary-sacrifice. I want them to contribute over and above what their employer contribution is. But, if they want to use part of their super to help get them into a home in the middle of a rental crisis, they should be allowed to. The reality is that our policy, which we'll take to the next election, will enable them to do that. If they sell their home in 10 years and upgrade, that original deposit will go back into their superannuation, plus a share of the capital gain. You can use super and industry funds to invest in social housing or in community housing, but the Labor Party say that you can't use your own money to invest into your own house.

The coalition will continue to talk to people, and not just in my own seat of Petrie. I have had widespread support when I've spoken to people in my own electorate. In fact, I was at a polling booth for the Brisbane City Council elections on Saturday—two days ago—and I was talking to a man in his late 30s. He'd been through a relationship breakdown. He was renting. He'd never owned a house before. He's obviously doing the right thing and paying his ex-partner maintenance for their children and so forth, which is good. When I spoke about superannuation and the opportunity to use a little bit of his super to get a deposit on his first house, he was excited about it because he had quite a bit in super and he just can't save the deposit with everything else that he's doing with his growing family and in the middle of the cost-of-living crisis that we've seen under this Albanese Labor government, with 12 interest rate rises. It's pushed up mortgage payments rents; it's pushed up electricity bills; it's pushed up the cost of food and everything else.

So, when we get out there and explain it and talk to people, that's good. I don't know who the member for Kooyong has been talking to when she comes into this place and says she's talking to people. Maybe she is referring to people who are wealthy and who own their own homes and are voting for her. But, I'll tell you what, there are a lot of young people in this country that are excited about our policy. And, in the lead-up to the 2025 election, the coalition will continue to talk to those people—people who need that help, people who want to invest their own money into their own home.

So, as the federal member for Petrie, I can say to the government, to everyone in this House and to those in my electorate: I believe in super. It's a good thing. It's a really good thing. We want to continue to talk, and every member in this House should talk about financial literacy and salary sacrifice, and they should promote the programs that the coalition started and that the Albanese Labor government are continuing—and I'll put it right on the front of my website, LukeHowarth.com.au—the First Home Super Saver Scheme, the First Home Loan Deposit Scheme, the Family Home Guarantee, offering two per cent deposit for single parents to get into their own home. That's important. We all have a responsibility to our constituents to want to see them get ahead. We don't have a responsibility just to our donors and what they want or always what our party wants. But we do have a responsibility towards what is in the best interests of our constituents—to help them get ahead.

If the coalition believes in different policies—and I say this to my colleagues—we should continue to fight for that. John Howard did that—going back to the GST. It was defeated in 1993 and then they revisited it in 1996 and they took it to an election. Unlike this government, they took the GST to an election, won that election and implemented it. And it has actually been a bonanza for the states and it has actually been fairly good policy.

See this speech in context