Aaron Violi (Casey, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

It's a day ending in Y, and we've got another ALP special. We have a bill that has a very impressive-sounding name, but it's actually hiding what it really does. Building a stronger and fairer super system sounds good. It sounds reasonable. It sounds fair. It's very much Labor. The first point they have to do is name the bill well. That's about the only thing they generally get right: an impressive name. What this bill, the Treasury Laws Amendment (Building a Stronger and Fairer Super System) Bill 2026, really is is a broken promise and higher taxes for the Australian people. When you break it down, that is what this bill is about: a broken promise and higher taxes for the Australian people. The reason this government needs higher taxes is to pay for their tax-and-spend agenda and to pay for the significant increases in government spending that are driving higher inflation and driving higher interest rates for the Australian people. That is the reality that is being lived in so many communities across Casey and across the country.

Although, if you had the opportunity to listen to the Prime Minister today, he said that living standards are up today and the Australian people have never had it better. I thought I'd heard some disconnected Canberra-bubble statements in my time in this House, but I think that takes the cake. With a straight face, the Prime Minister told everyone in the country that their standard of living today has improved and they're doing better. Could you be more out of touch? And that's why this government needs to continue to increase taxes on the Australian people. There are some really concerning elements to this bill that we should look at, which are the changes that they've made and what they've taken out. The Australian people should be really concerned about that broken promise, but they should also be concerned that this government, this prime minister and this treasurer thought that taxing unrealised capital gains would be an acceptable way to change the tax system. This government put forward a system that would tax unrealised capital gains. What does that mean in simple terms?

It means, if you're a farmer in my electorate of Casey or anywhere across the country and you happen to have land that you own and grow crops on, if that land happens to be worth more than $3 million—let's call it $4 million in land—and you put that land into superannuation as part of an arrangement because your children are now working the land and they pay rent on that land to you—let us be clear. The rent was so you could feed yourself and pay your bills; you're not making a big profit on that. Many in my community undertake this. It's not looking to dodge tax; it's looking to pass it to the next generation and make sure that it's sustainable for those families that have worked that land for 50 to 60 years if not longer and are now looking to retire. So it can be transitioned generationally to their children. Those farmers do it tough. As my uncle, who is a farmer, likes to say, 'For three years you'll make money, for three years you'll lose money, for three years you'll break-even, and if you get really lucky you'll make a dollar in that 10th year, and it makes it all worth while.'

But this government said to every Australian and every Australian farmer: 'We think it's reasonable that we take money off you for the value of that land. Even if you're not looking to sell it and even if you're not looking to do anything with it, we're going to make you pay money to us on land that you're not looking to realise, on land you are not looking to sell and on land in which you have no cash to use.' Every Australian should be concerned that every member opposite thought that was reasonable. Day after day, they defended the principle of taxing unrealised capital gains. They finally backflipped and saw a little bit of sense once they realised they weren't going to get it through, but that doesn't change the fact that they all thought it was reasonable. They all defended it. They continued to run the line that the farmers of Casey, the small-business owners of Casey, the farmers of the country and the small-business owners of the country, should have to pay tax on money that they do not have and on something that they have not earned.

The other element to this that is deeply concerning is the broken promise. What's next? We know we can't trust the government when it comes to tax because they broke their word on tax when they said they weren't going to change the tax system. They backflipped and broke their word. They said they weren't going to change the superannuation system. They're now changing the superannuation system. So every Australian has the legitimate right to ask themselves: what's next? We've repeatedly asked the Prime Minister and the Treasurer if they would rule out taxing the family home, and they won't rule it out. They're not prepared to rule it out. So, when you join the dots, every Australian has to legitimately be fearful that housing is next.

We know that the Prime Minister emphatically ruled out before the last election that they had any plans to change the capital gains system or negative gearing in this country. 'My word is my bond' was the statement from the Prime Minister before the 2022 election. We saw that that word is not worth anything because he broke that word and he broke his bond with the Australian people after the 2022 election. So, when this Prime Minister gives his word, his bond, that he is not going to change the capital gains tax system or negative gearing in this country, we take it with a grain of salt. We will watch with interest because, already, we've seen the backgrounding and we've seen Treasury are doing more modelling. We legitimately ask: what's next? That is the fear for the Australian people.

We have a government that believes it is reasonable to tax unrealised capital gains. We have a government that believes it is reasonable to mislead the Australian people and promise one thing before an election and do another thing after. We like to say that the biggest mistake Bill Shorten made was that he was actually upfront and honest with the Australian people in 2019. They've clearly learned their lesson. But every Australian needs to know what's next. That's the scary part. We will see in the May budget whether the Prime Minister's word is his bond, whether he's not going to change capital gains tax and whether he's not going to change negative gearing, as he promised every Australian at the election in 2025 that he would not. If he breaks that promise, what's next? Is it your house? We just don't know. I guess we'll find out soon.

See this speech in context