Angus Taylor (Hume, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. Over the past week, I've spoken to hundreds of hardworking Australians across every corner of our country that have had one question they want to ask of the Prime Minister: why did the Albanese Labor government lie to Australians about plans to tax them more?

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Well, I've spoken to a lot of Australians over the last week as well. Ten days ago, I spoke with Mika, Matt and their dog Pikelet here at Kingston. They bought a home of their own in Canberra using just a five per cent deposit. They're some of the 250,000 first home buyers—

Hon. Members:

Honourable members interjecting—

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Prime Minister will pause. We're just going to have some silence. The Leader of the Opposition was heard in silence. I made sure the House was—we're not starting off on this bad book.

Member for Cook, you are now warned. That kind of yelling out is not going to happen today. Prime Minister.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They are some of the 250,000 first home buyers who have done exactly the same and got into their first home. A few days later, I was at the Housing Australia Future Fund, the HAFF, site in Melbourne, in Rosanna, which I visited last year with the member for Jagajaga when it was a building site. This year, it is a site with 45 homes with people moving into them, right where the railway station is and right where the shops are there at Rosanna.

In Hobart with Premier Rockliff, we spoke about the more than 1,000 homes that will be built on the Defence land site on the edge of the Derwent. In central Perth, we saw the 219 apartments over 29 floors which are about to be fitted out, including 110 social and affordable homes. At Prospect Corner, I met Harry and Erin, who just four weeks ago moved into their own apartment built by the HAFF. That day, Erin summed it up simply and powerfully: 'It's really life changing.' We met another young woman as well who'd been a beneficiary of the Help to Buy scheme and had got into her own first home as a result.

Over our four years, we've thrown everything at housing supply, and it is making a difference, but there is more to do. That's why we're reforming negative gearing and capital gains and opening aspiration to a generation who are being locked out. Our changes are pro aspiration and they are pro supply. Perhaps he might like to speak to the next leader of the Liberal Party, who said:

I feel the anger regularly from young Australians who feel locked out of the housing market—red-hot anger, frustration—and also a sense of despair that they can't get a stake in the country, that they can't afford a home, and again we've got to listen to what they say …

It's good advice from the member for Canning. You might like to watch him. He's just behind you. (Time expired)

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Before I call the member for Macquarie, the Leader of the Opposition used an unparliamentary term during that question, so I'm reminding everyone the same rules will apply that applied last week regarding using the word 'lie'.

Susan Templeman (Macquarie, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. How will the Albanese Labor government's tax reforms benefit Australian workers, first home buyers and businesses? How does this compare—

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Macquarie will begin her question again. We're not going to have interjections. Just as I called them out when a member from the opposition was asking questions, we're not going to have interjections. We're going to reset. Everyone's going to hear their question in silence, including the Speaker, because, if I can't hear the question, I won't be able to take action down the line. So the member for Macquarie will begin her question again, and there will be no interjections.

Susan Templeman (Macquarie, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. How will the Albanese Labor government's tax reforms benefit Australian workers, first home buyers and businesses? How does this compare to other approaches?

Jim Chalmers (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you to the member for Macquarie not just for her question but for the very substantial small-business experience that she brings to this parliament. The tax reform package at the core of the government's fifth budget was about three main things: making it easier for people to buy their first home; cutting income taxes for 13 million Australian workers; and better aligning the tax treatment between people who work and people who earn their income in other legitimate ways. A really important part of that budget was that tax cut for 13.3 million Australians—the Working Australians Tax Offset. It's targeted to workers. It represents the most meaningful permanent increase to the effective tax-free threshold since Labor last increased it more than a decade ago.

But it's not the only way that we're cutting income taxes. We're cutting income taxes five different times in three different ways. We've got the tax cuts already legislated, including another round in July this year and another round after that in July next year. Those opposite voted against those tax cuts. We've got a $1,000 instant deduction next financial year, and now we've got the Working Australians Tax Offset announced in the budget. Altogether, our five different tax cuts will mean the average worker will benefit by up to $2,816 in 2028. We're also delivering over $3½ billion in new measures to lower taxes for businesses, and we're reducing compliance costs by more than $10 billion a year. This is what the budget was all about.

On Thursday, in this parliament, we'll be introducing legislation to give effect to these tax cuts: the standard deduction, the Working Australians Tax Offset and the core elements of the changes to negative gearing and capital gains. We will learn on Thursday whether they've learned the lesson from the last election. The last time this parliament cut taxes, those opposite voted against it and said that, if they won the election, they would repeal those tax cuts. We will learn on Thursday whether they've learned anything from the last election, whether they've changed a bit in recent times. What we already know is that there are two kinds of people in this parliament: people who see the issues in the housing market for young people and want to fix them, and people who see those issues and want to do absolutely nothing about it. There are people who see the social, economic and political division and dislocation around the world and want to avoid it versus those who want to copy it. There are people who see aspiration as the birthright of every single Australian and those who see aspiration as the exclusive preserve of people who are already doing very well. Thursday, when the legislation is introduced, will be another test for those opposite. This time they should vote for tax cuts. (Time expired)

Tim Wilson (Goldstein, Liberal Party, Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Treasurer. Andrew from Parramatta founded a start-up. He started his business in 2015 and sold it in 2020 for $35.8 million. Andrew, like so many Australians, said that the new capital gains tax regime 'doesn't interact well with small businesses'. Andrew said, 'Start-ups and some small businesses are a real concern, and the point that many small businesses have been making is valid.' Did the Treasurer endorse the Cabinet Secretary's position?

Government Members:

Government members interjecting—

Jim Chalmers (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm reminded that the last time the shadow Treasurer tried to cite an example—this time, at the National Press Club—it turned out that the person whom he had based his entire speech around was more than likely exempt or able to access very considerable concessions and carve-outs. The last time he got up here, all puffed up with self-importance, but at the National Press Club, he used an example who was able to access one of these four concessions and carve-outs for small businesses that we are not changing. So you'll forgive me for taking with a grain of salt anything that the shadow Treasurer says when he tries to quote specific examples in the parliament.

Now, when it comes to the changes that the shadow Treasurer is asking me about, I remind him of somebody who said this, and I'm quoting:

There is no intergenerational justice in such preferential arrangements …

That was a quote from an author of a book, who also said in this parliament:

Today it's time to be honest: the tax system is screwing over young Australians … it favours well-off, established interests against those trying to get ahead … people who can predominantly live off of income from their assets can pay very little tax and get discounts on capital gains from increases in asset values.

The same person said:

Young Australians need to demand a fairer tax system, where they aren't the only ones carrying the burden to cover the cost of Australia.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The members on my right will cease interjecting so I can hear from the Manager of Opposition Business on a point of order.

Dan Tehan (Wannon, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It goes to relevance. It was an incredibly direct question: does the Treasurer endorse the cabinet secretary's position? You can't get more straightforward than that. He's been quoting from a book now, and we're one minute and 30 seconds in.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There's nothing against the standing orders in the Treasurer quoting from a book. I don't know who the author of this book is. I may have a suspicion, but the Treasurer needs to make sure the quote that he is referring to—because the manager is correct. He was asked a question, but there was a bit of a preamble in there about the scenario.

The member for Gippsland is not helping. The Treasurer has just got to make sure that, whatever this quote is, it is of direct relevance to the question that was asked.

Jim Chalmers (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Of course I endorse and support the great work of the member for Parramatta, and I also support the great work of the shadow Treasurer, who said:

When people can earn more and be taxed less because of the holding of assets over income, it rewards capital interests against labour, and that means that you entrench those interests and you break apart what I think of as one of the fundamental principles that has made this nation successful and strong, which is to turn to the next generation and say: 'You get your equal chance too.

So I support the member for Parramatta's great work as part of our team, and I support the comments that the shadow Treasurer has made—twice in this parliament and once in a book that I might be the only one who's read.

I raise this, in endorsing the member for Parramatta's work, because it says everything about the shadow Treasurer that he is now trying to weaponise a campaign against the very changes that he called for—and not by accident. He's come in here twice and he's written a book about how we have to deal with these issues in the housing market and in the tax system. And as I said, he'd want to be careful that the Daily Tele doesn't put him on the front of the paper with a little hammer and sickle next to him, because the problem that he's describing is exactly the problem that this government has the courage to try and fix.