Carina Garland (Chisholm, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. How is the Albanese Labor government's budget delivering reforms to housing policy that are pro aspiration and pro supply? Why is this important, and are there any alternatives?

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

I thank the member for Chisholm for her question and for her passionate work in the suburbs of Melbourne, campaigning very strongly to give young people a fair crack at a better future. The truth is that the housing system is broken. That is the truth. Young Australians know it. Their parents and grandparents know it. They know that the housing system is not working in the interests of Australians. Young people simply can't get a fair crack if they're turning up at auctions and they're competing with people who have the taxpayer as a partner where, if the taxpayer has to bid that extra $20,000 or $30,000 in order to be successful, then they can, because they know it will lead to a reduction in their tax. That is why this has been called for—the reform—by so many, including the shadow Treasurer. It's why it was acknowledged by the member for Canning as well. It's why, in his valedictory in 2015, Joe Hockey said:

… negative gearing should be skewed towards new housing so that there is an incentive to add to the housing stock rather than an incentive to speculate on existing property.

I've got a lot of time for Joe Hockey. Joe Hockey yesterday was asked about this comment at the National Press Club, and he doubled down. He said this:

… if you don't like it, tough … I stick by what I said in my valedictory speech.

The difference between what my friend Joe Hockey did and what this government has done is that we're actually doing something about it. We're not giving a speech on the way out; we're doing something about it to make a difference. That's why the legislation that we will introduce tomorrow is pro-aspiration, to give young people a crack, and pro-supply because people will still be able to invest in negative gearing and receive the existing capital gains tax discount, but, in order to do that, they not only will be investing in their future wealth and their future assets, they'll be investing in the future wealth and assets of the nation as well. We are doing this because we want aspiration for all, not just for some. That is what we on this side of the chamber stand for—introducing legislation to improve housing supply, to improve aspiration and the opportunity for people to get into their first home at the same time as we are decreasing taxes for them through our working Australians tax offset and the $1,000 automatic tax deduction. All of this chamber should take the opportunity to vote for it.

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

Resume your seat, member for Goldstein. You have a habit of, each time, walking up to the dispatch box in a dramatic way. Just wait till you're called, and then you will get the call and get to the question. It works both ways. When questions run out of time, I could easily withdraw questions out of order, but I'm not doing that, and I'd like to give the opposition a fair go with their questions. Each time someone yells out, 'Time!' we can have this discussion again, and we can easily go down this path. I have got an account of the amount of times opposition members have gone over the time, and the questions will be ruled out, but I like to include as many questions as possible. If you could assist the Speaker by not interjecting, 'Time!' it would be greatly appreciated.

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

My question is to the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister has repeatedly said: 'We are simply returning the CGT system to what was there before 1999.' In 1999, capital gains could be averaged over five years to stop small-business owners being pushed into the top tax bracket. Prime Minister, in your own words, 'It's time to be honest.' Is this your policy?

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

This is from the shadow Treasurer, who wrote a terrific book, justifying why this should occur. There are, actually, as well, a range of comments about capital gains tax. Here's what the Institute of Public Accountants had to say—

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

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

The member for Casey will cease interjecting. Members on my left, enough is enough. The yelling has got to stop. It's ridiculous.

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

Here's what they had to say. The Institute of Public Accountants, last time I looked, is not an affiliate of the Australian Labor Party, though I am worried about the IPA being quoted by the Treasurer, I must say. It's the second faux pas he's committed today, on top of the tie. The Institute of Public Accountants had this to say: 'Over 90 per cent of small-business owners will potentially qualify for some of the CGT concessions.' If they can avail themselves of those concessions, they're going to achieve, in some cases, tax as low as zero. This is what Nash Advisory had to say:

The preservation of the small business CGT concessions is the most important detail in this budget for business owners considering a sale.

They went on.

… the concessions under Division 152 were always the more powerful mechanism, and they remain fully available.

That is what they had to say. Daniel Petre, the co-founder of Airtree Ventures—they help founders launch and grow their companies.