Pat Conaghan (Cowper, National Party, Shadow Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Hansard source

I move the amendment as circulated in my name:

(1) Schedule 1, item 1, page 3 (after line 23), after section 6L, insert:

6M Temporary freeze in indexation for tap spirits

(1) Despite any other provision of this Act, subsection 6A(1) applies, in relation to a tap spirit and each CPI indexed alcoholic beverage rate, as if the indexation factor were 1 for each of the following indexation days:

(a) 1 August 2026;

(b) 1 February 2027.

Note 1: This means the rates as they are on 31 July 2026 will be unchanged for the next year.

Note 2: When indexation resumes in August 2027, the indexation factor for 1 August 2027 will be applied against these unchanged rates (see subsection 6A(1)).

(2) In this section:

CPI indexed alcoholic beverage rate means a rate of duty set out in:

(a) item 2 of the Schedule; or

(b) subitem 3.1, 3.2 or 3.10 of the Schedule.

indexation day has the same meaning as in section 6A.

tap spirit means:

(a) an alcoholic beverage not exceeding 10% by volume of alcohol stored in an individual container:

(i) of at least 8 litres but not exceeding 48 litres; and

(ii) designed to connect to a pressurised gas delivery system or pump delivery system; or

(b) an alcoholic beverage exceeding 10% by volume of alcohol stored in an individual container:

(i) of at least 4 litres but not exceeding 20 litres; and

(ii) designed to connect to a pressurised gas delivery system or pump delivery system.

This is a straightforward amendment that would extend the government's pause on indexation of draught beer excise so that it also applies to on-tap spirits from 1 August 2026. We welcome the pause on the draught beer indexation. In fact, it was Nationals policy going back some time. We've said very clearly that pubs, clubs and hospitality venues deserve support, especially in our regions where our locals play an important role in our communities. But this particular amendment goes to something more important, and that is fairness. Because under the government's approach, if you order a draught beer at a bar, you get relief. But if you order a gin and tonic, a vodka soda or a spirit served on tap, you keep paying the inflation tax. I want to ask a very simple question: how is that fair? Why should Australians who prefer spirits be singled out to keep paying automatic tax increases while beer drinkers get a break? I'd genuinely like to hear someone from the government benches explain that logic.

In many venues, spirits on-tap are becoming more popular. They're served the same way over the same bar by the same staff in the same venues as draught beer. Yet the government has decided that one drink deserves relief from inflation-linked tax hikes and the other doesn't, and that unfairness matters more when we look at who is being affected. Spirits, particularly lighter, mixed drinks are more commonly consumed by women and young people. This government likes to pretend it's a friend to women and younger Australians, but clearly not if you don't prefer beer. What the government has effectively done is say, 'If you drink beer, we'll give you a break, but, if you drink spirits, you're on your own.' At a time when the cost of living is already at a crisis, that distinction is hard to justify, and then it becomes even harder to justify when inflation runs hotter than expected.

Annual inflation to December is now at 3.8 per cent, and, yesterday, we had a rate hike. So, when Labor provides relief from inflationary tax rises to some drinkers and not others and inflation is out of control, the impact of that unfairness only grows. By pausing indexation for draught beer but not for on-tap spirits, the government is deliberately locking in unequal treatment and letting it compound over time. Why is the government picking winners and losers here?

This amendment will ensure that every Australian's tastes are treated the same. The decision makes even less sense when you consider the practical reality for venues. Pubs and clubs don't see beer and spirit drinkers as separate classes of customer. They're all patrons. They're all supporting the venue. They all keep local hospitality alive. But, under this government's approach, venues will face distorted incentives, pushing some products over others purely because of a tax treatment, not consumer choice. That's bad for customers, that's bad for venues, and that is bad policy.

This amendment doesn't reduce the relief beer drinkers are getting. They deserve a drink. All it does is say, if we're pausing the inflation tax on alcohol served on tap, we should do it fairly. Beer on tap and spirits on tap should be treated the same. This isn't a radical position, and it's not likely to break the government coffers. It's just basic fairness. At a time when Australians are struggling with the cost of living, the least we can do is make sure relief measures don't arbitrarily favour one group over another. I urge the House to back this sensible, fair and modest change and ensure that, when relief is provided, it's provided equally. Thank you.

See this speech in context