My question is to the Minister representing the Treasurer, Senator Cormann. Does the minister agree with former Liberal Premier Jeff Kennett, who said: 'I'm very disappointed at the way in which my side of politics are arguing against what I think is an eminently supportable concept that's been put forward by the Labor Party in terms of negative gearing'?

No, we do not agree with our valued friend and colleague, the former Premier of Victoria, in relation to this point. The Labor Party clearly does not like it when police officers, nurses and teachers aspire to get ahead. On this side of parliament we like Middle Australia to aspire to get ahead. We do not believe that to hit them around the head with the sort of ill-thought-out policy that Labor put forward of ramping up taxes, distorting the market, leading to increased costs for rental accommodation—

On my left!

leading to lower property values in terms of established properties is a good policy. We do not think that is a good policy on this side of the parliament. We believe that a good tax policy is one that encourages people to work more, save more and invest more. We believe that a good tax policy is a policy that helps us strengthen growth and create more jobs in a way that is also fair, and that is the policy agenda that this government will continue to pursue.

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Does the minister agree with former Treasurer Joe Hockey that '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'?

No.

Order on my left!

Government senators interjecting—

And my right!

Honourable senators interjecting—

On both sides!

Senator Cameron interjecting—

Senator Cameron!

Senator Ian Macdonald interjecting—

Senator Macdonald!

Senator Conroy interjecting—

Senator Conroy!

Government senators interjecting—

On my right!

Thank you, Mr President. For a moment there I thought I was at the Press Club. Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Does the minister agree with the coalition-appointed chair of the Financial Systems Inquiry, Mr David Murray, that reducing the concessions for negative gearing 'would lead to a more efficient allocation of funding in the economy'? When even the government's Liberal mates agree with Labor's policies, why won't the government?

I do not agree that David Murray endorsed Labor's policy on negative gearing, so I reject the premise of the question. What I would say is that this government will continue to assess the tax system as a whole for opportunities to make our tax system more growth friendly so that we can strengthen growth and create more jobs in a way that is fair. Obviously, as we do in the lead-up to any budget, we will be considering all of the information, assessing all of the options and making judgments on what is in the national interest. Those decisions will be announced and reflected as appropriate in the budget on the second Tuesday in May.