Ross Cadell (NSW, National Party, Shadow Minister for Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the answers given by ministers to questions without notice asked by Opposition senators today.

There is a lot of focus around housing today in what's going on here. It's quite interesting that you can deliver a budget and not enough of your own party room actually read the budget papers to know what's going on it. The surprise on faces to some of the questions yesterday was truly great to see. The talk is about how this is going to build more houses, and it’s going to be great for the economy. If you go to page 158, it actually says that we will build 35,000 fewer houses. There is also talk about how it is going to be great for rents. But if you go to the same page, you will see that the taxation policies will drive up rents.

What gets it for me is that we're going back to tried and tested territory on removing negative gearing and what it does to housing. Back in the eighties, they tried this very same thing, and we found that in Sydney and Perth, especially, rents went through the roof. The proof is in the pudding. When negative gearing was removed, rents went through the roof. They studied this, because they didn't go up everywhere. They found that a low supply of rental housing—it was below two per cent—caused rents to go through the roof. Then Labour in New Zealand tried it. They said: 'Let's learn from our cousins. Let's get negative gearing in New Zealand.' They tried it, and they found that rents went through the roof. They looked at the reasons for that, and they said: 'It's because we had higher-than-expected immigration. That's the reason we had it.'

What do we have in Australia now? We've got this government getting rid of negative gearing, and we've got both. We've got low vacancy rates. In fact, every capital city in Australia has 1.4 per cent or less. Some cities have 0.4 per cent vacancy rates. So they are lower than they were in Sydney and Perth the last time when it was blamed, and we have higher immigration. The budget papers say that two million people are coming to Australia. We have both instances, both causes, on the one instance. But we're going to try it again, and we'll pretend the rents will only go up by two dollars!

Here's what's going to happen. We're building 35,000 fewer homes. We're bringing in two million people. In every experience where low vacancy rates below two percent have happened, rents have gone through the roof. And we think everything is going to be okay. This is a joke! Talk about mess around and find out—the Australian people, renters, students, people come into this country and guys trying to save for a mortgage will find out exactly what a joke this is, because I guarantee this: rents will not go up two dollars per year; they will go up far more than that. Don't worry about the gain on your investments to try to get a house. You won't be able to put away any savings because your rent is going to go through the roof.

Everything we see in the past—I'd love it if one Labor person was able to point to anywhere in the world where negative gearing has been removed in a tight rental market and it has actually given better accommodation outcomes, because it hasn't. We are going to reinvent the wheel if this works. We have low vacancy rates and high immigration, yet they still think this will work.

You go out there and say, 'Hang on a sec, this is going to be great for young people wanting to get into the market.' No, it won't, because they haven't got the negative gearing aspects if they want to buy a unit to start off. They haven't got the capital gains tax exemptions if they want to go into the share market or have other investments to get into it. All of us have got it. Twenty-three members of cabinet have multiple properties. They have all benefited from capital gains tax and negative gearing. We can all do that here. I've got a place in Canberra. If I wanted to, I could have done it that way. But, for the people who want to get into the market, you have taken away their options to get those benefits.

This is a joke of a policy. Your own budget statements, your own Treasury papers, say this. But you didn't bother to read that bit. You keep going, 'Overall, this is a good thing.' Page 158 says, 'The taxation policies contained here will lead to 35,000 fewer homes being built.'

Dorinda Cox (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The focus of the opposition in today's question time was on things they actually didn't do when they were in government, which is surprising. Three hundred and seventy-three homes are all they built when they were in government. Our budget that was handed down by our treasurer in the other place the other night was a responsible budget. It was a budget that focused on three things. It focused on resilience, relief and reform. They are important things to ensure that we are delivering more cost-of-living help and building a more productive economy and a fairer tax system. Getting lectures from the opposition, from 'High Taxes' Hume and co over there—

Slade Brockman (WA, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Cox—

Dorinda Cox (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I withdraw. But we're not going to take lectures from the opposition around a better tax system when they went to the last election talking about higher taxes.

Now, on a fairer housing market—you saw an absolutely disgraceful display, Deputy President, when Senator Walker was on her feet in this chamber asking a question, as a young Labor senator, and was, disgracefully, yelled down by those opposite. Young people sitting in this gallery were nodding about the housing benefit they will now have access to because of the policies that were announced in our budget on Tuesday night. It is disgraceful that this party who claims to be the tail that is being wagged by the dog over there, in Pauline Hanson's One Nation, is trying to lecture us about a more sustainable budget. It's ridiculous.

Tax cuts, housing and fuel were the focus because of the conflict in the Middle East. That is weighing heavily on our economy. You can't disagree with any of that. And you are tone deaf, absolutely tone deaf, to the compounding cost-of-living pressures that Australians are under. For months you've sat in this place and concentrated on yourselves and haven't even listened to the Australian people. That is why your base has cracked. That's why she increased her margin in Farrer in the by-election. That's because of what you've done—navel-gazing.

Slade Brockman (WA, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Cox, please refer to people by their correct title.

Dorinda Cox (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I did—Senator Hanson. I was referring to the party.

Slade Brockman (WA, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, you pointed across the chamber.

Dorinda Cox (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm sorry, do I have the call, or does Senator Hanson—

Slade Brockman (WA, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I didn't ask her to withdraw, Senator Wong.

Dorinda Cox (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You were correcting me.

Slade Brockman (WA, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I just said, 'Please refer to people by their correct title.'

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On a point of order, Deputy President, I didn't hear—I may have missed it. But generally the chair picks that up when someone refers to someone by a different title, not the word 'you'.

Slade Brockman (WA, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

She pointed across the chamber and used the word 'she'. I think it is more usual in this place to go through the chair and to use people's names, Senator Wong. To be honest, that is the way most presidents would have perceived the rules. Senator Cox, you have the call.

Dorinda Cox (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will talk about the reforms that our party have made in Medicare and our investment in health and ageing. Our aged-care budget, and the announcements made by Minister Rae in the lead-up to the budget, is about our investment in older Australians. We're putting the 'care' back into aged care after years and years of neglect.

The Labor Party are responsible for building Medicare, and we will continue to invest in strengthening Medicare. That is our commitment to the Australian people. We have done that, and in my home state of Western Australia we have now made 14 urgent care clinics permanent. That is a game changer in our home state, is it not, Senator Whiteaker? For us as mums, when our children are sick, to be able to go to an urgent care clinic is amazing. We stand by this budget, and we will continue to do the work for the Australian people.

Maria Kovacic (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Women) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Well, where to begin? I think I will begin with the questions that Senator Bragg asked in relation to housing in our country. One of the answers to his questions was that this government has an ambitious target for more houses. The reality is, whether there is an ambitious target or not, the delivery of houses under this government has been nothing short of unacceptable. Young Australians have found it harder to purchase a home under this government than in any other time in our history.

The government's budget on Tuesday evening was delivered under the guise of intergenerational fairness. Well, I would like somebody to explain to me how it is fair for young Australians that the Prime Minister, who used negative gearing and capital gains tax discounts to build his own wealth after his own beginnings in public housing, gets to retain the benefits of that but young Australians don't ever get the chance to do that. That is intergenerational fairness under the Albanese Labor government—in order to be fair to you, we're going to lift the ladder up so you can't use it when we're finished using it. Explain that to me. Explained to me, if we are trying to create more housing in this country, why then we have to tax everything else more. Why are we taxing housing? Why are we taxing shares? Why are we taxing small businesses? How does that create intergenerational fairness? What that actually means is that young Australians will have nowhere to go to build wealth because this government doesn't want them to build wealth. This government wants them to rent their houses built by the CFMEU and owned by the super funds. That is what this government wants.

Every single time that we have pointed out a deficiency in one of its policies, this government has pretended that it doesn't exist. The RBA said that the government's five per cent deposit guarantee, without requisite supply-side measures, would increase prices of entry-level dwellings. This Prime Minister said, 'No way, no, no, it will probably increase prices by 0.6 per cent over six years'—something like that. But guess what? They have gone up 3.6 per cent in the December quarter alone.

But why would we believe anything the Prime Minister says anyway? He abjectly does not tell the truth to Australians. Some 50 times before the last election, he said that negative gearing and capital gains tax were off the table, and what have they done in their budget this year? They have introduced both, despite telling Australians that they would not. Why didn't he have the courage and the transparency to tell Australians that this was what he was going to do? Because I put it to you that he had a plan to do this all along. He deliberately misled Australians when they went to the polls and, I tell you, he probably has an inheritance tax on the family home up his sleeve next. Oh, you can scoff and you can laugh but you can't hide from the fact that this Prime Minister lied about this some 50 times before the last election. That is a fact, amongst so many other things that this government has said that they would and would not do. (Time expired)

Ellie Whiteaker (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What has become abundantly clear after today's performance in the chamber by those opposite is that they do not understand the people of my generation let alone the generation below me. I think the behaviour that we saw while Senator Walker was attempting to ask her question in question time really says everything about what those opposite think about young people in this country. We should not forget that this is a coalition who, while in government, had no plan to build homes, had no plan to help young Australians get into their own home. They didn't even have a housing minister for most of the decade that they were in government. They built—what was it?—300-and-something homes while they were in office. Now they have the gall to come in here and speak over Senator Walker, who comes from the generation below me and who feel like they are locked out of a system that does not work for them. They're a generation who can do everything right, who can work hard, but who still can't get their foot in the door and still can't get a home of their own.

Our government is committed to changing that. Yes, we have made a hard decision to do what is right. We are not sitting on our hands and pretending this isn't a problem like those opposite did for the near-decade that they were in government. I am proud to be part of a government that is delivering for my generation and the generation below mine and the generations to come to give us a real shot at owning our own home.

This budget brings our total housing investment to $47 billion dollars. Our tax reforms will support 75,000 more young people to own their own home. We will invest an extra $2 billion in enabling infrastructure to help the states and local governments build more homes. Our budget will build 65,000 more homes for Australians. We will also deliver $59.4 million for states and territories for social and affordable homes. In my home state of Western Australia, we are building 4,200 more social and affordable homes. More than 3,000 of those are through the HAFF, which Senator Bragg likes to pretend isn't actually building any homes despite all evidence to the contrary. I don't know if he's walking around the country with his eyes closed, but I see them in my own community and in the regions as I am out further in Western Australia. I see these homes being built. Nineteen thousand Western Australians have bought their first home thanks to our five per cent deposit scheme. That is 19,000 Australians who otherwise would not have been able to buy their own home. They certainly wouldn't have been able to buy their own home if those opposite were in government.

So it's really no surprise to me that my generation and the generation below can't bring themselves to vote for the Liberal Party anymore. It's because they do not speak for young people and they will not make the hard decisions to get young people into their own homes. They sat on their hands for a decade and did nothing. It was an absolute disgrace. Only Labor is doing what is right to build homes. (Time expired)

Dean Smith (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister to the Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As the dust settles on Labor's budget of broken promises, higher taxes, a lower standard of living and less housing, young Australians are being forced to wake up and pay attention. Young Australians are waking up to the realisation that Labor's claim of intergenerational fairness is actually a fraud against young Australians. Young Australians are waking up to the news of Labor's youth tax. What is Labor's youth tax exactly? Labor's youth tax seeks to tax the livelihoods of young Australians. The budget papers estimate that gross debt for Australia will soon reach $1 trillion, growing to $1.2 trillion. Just think about that for a second. What is $1 trillion? A thousand billion equals a trillion or a million million equals a trillion. It is phenomenal. It is almost unfathomable. If you're a young Australian, it's your problem—because that is Labor's youth tax. You will be required through future taxes to meet that debt cost. That debt cost comes with interest payment bills of $42 billion a year. Just think about that. What is $42 billion a year? It's $80,000 a minute in interest payments on $1 trillion. And if you're a young Australian, that's your problem. If you're a young Australian, you have to pay that in future taxes. That is Labor's youth tax, and that is the realisation that young Australians are coming to.

And if you're a young Australian who is renting, or if you're a young Australian who is hoping to rent one day, in preparation for getting your own home, you need to be ready for the fact that rents are expected to increase by at least 10 per cent. In the budget papers the Labor government tries to tell you that those rental increases will be limited to $2. In the media this morning, that has been called 'delusional'. Young Australians will be hit with higher rents. Why? Because changes to negative gearing and changes to the capital gains tax, detailed in the budget, will make it harder for property investors. It will lead to a decline in the number of rental properties that are available to young Australians.

Increasing rents makes it harder for young Australians, and that is the consequence of Labor's plans to tax, Labor's plans to change negative gearing and capital gains tax. In the media today someone has said, 'You can't trust the government; they are just making up the numbers.' And young Australians pay a hefty price for Labor's economic failures.

But if you're a young Australian, there's an alternative, and we'll hear about that alternative tonight. That alternative comes in the form of Angus Taylor's budget-in-reply speech, a speech that will present a plan to restore our standard of living and protect our way of life in Australia. It will be a plan that focuses on getting rid of Labor's toxic taxes, a plan that reduces taxes on homes, a plan that removes taxes on small businesses, a plan that reduces taxes on hardworking Australians and a plan that will give hope to younger Australians. (Time expired)

Question agreed to.