Matt O'Sullivan (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Choice in Childcare and Early Learning) | Link to this | Hansard source

In part 2, in continuation from last night, let me be crystal clear—this government has indeed misled the Australian people. The biggest misleader of all was the Prime Minister, because the Prime Minister said, on no fewer than 50 occasions, that he would not touch capital gains or negative gearing. The Prime Minister couldn't take these policies to an election because he knows that they are an absolute stinker. What this government is doing—with their partners at the other end of the chamber, the Greens—is undermining the aspirations of Australian people. This is an absolute stinker. This is the worst budget that this country has seen in over 30 years, and the Australian people know it.

The Australian people know what's going on here. They know that it's got nothing to do with generational equity, as we keep hearing. It's got everything, though, to do with a blatant tax grab. That's all they're doing, because even their own modelling shows that it's not going to build a single extra house. In fact, there are going to be 30,000 fewer homes built as a result of these changes because investment has been dragged out of the market. We're seeing it already. We're seeing clearance rates more than halve across the country. It's down now to the period during the height of COVID. So this isn't about generational equity; this is a blatant tax grab. It's about generating another way for this big-spending Labor government to take more revenue from working Australians to fund their spending addiction. When the government runs out of money, what do they do? They come right after yours.

The Australian people have seen these policies before. Remember, back in 2019, when Bill Shorten tried to introduce them? That was something that he, to his credit, actually had the courage to take to the election, and guess what? The Australian people rejected it. Having learnt that lesson, the Prime Minister saw that, if he took these changes that they're now bringing into the election, people would reject it as they did in 2019. He didn't have the courage to do it, so he hid it from the Australian people. He said: 'We're not going to do this. No changes.' Fifty times, he said it: 'No changes.'

The electorate knew that those policies stank back then, and they know right now that these policies stink. The Treasurer claims to be the fount of all knowledge when it comes to his political hero, Paul Keating. He learnt nothing from what the repercussions were for Mr Keating with his infamous 'l-a-w law' broken promise on tax cuts in 1993. Like that episode, this terrible Labor government has breached the fundamental trust of the Australian electorate.

In the lead-up to the recent budget, the Prime Minister said, 'There's nothing to see here.' He was asked by a journalist, 'Can you rule out any changes to negative gearing and capital gains tax settings?' The Prime Minister then responded: 'Yes. How hard is it? For the 50th time.' The Prime Minister even acknowledged how many times he had said that he was not going to touch these things. Asked again on 17 April, he said: 'I rule it out. I rule it out. I have responded to that lots of times.' These words have not aged well.

This very debate is evidence of the Labor government's contempt for the Australian people. As has been said time and time again, no-one voted for these laws and no-one voted for these new taxes. This government is attacking the aspirations of Australians. This is a government that aspires to have Australia become a place where investing for the future is a bad thing. This is a government that is driving the nation to be one where aspiration simply becomes a fantasy, where the hard worker is punished and where the everyday Australian feels that it is impossible to get ahead. That's how Australians are feeling already.

But now with this, I lament, it is getting so hard, particularly for young Australians. Maybe they can't quite afford to buy their own home just yet. Of course we know that that's the reality for almost everyone. So what do they do? They want to invest in some shares to help build their equity and build their wealth. But now that is being taken away from them too because they're going to get taxed at a minimum of 30 per cent. What if you're earning less than $40,000 or $50,000 a year? You're going to be taxed at 30 per cent. The first tax rate of 30 per cent doesn't kick in until $45,000. It's just insane what you're doing here.

According to the October 2024 survey by HSBC, gen Z are quite financially active and willing to take on more risk when investing. Given this generation is facing challenges accessing the housing market, they are taking it upon themselves to build wealth through methods more accessible to them and allocating more of their income to do so. Gen Z are increasingly using pooled investment securities like exchange traded funds, or ETFs. According to Vanguard, nearly one in five gen Z Australians reported holding ETFs, and 18 per cent of gen Z said they hold cryptocurrencies. Overall, 45 per cent of gen Z, millennials and gen X reported holding at least one investment product. One 20-year-old, who the Australian newspaper interviewed about Labor's proposed changes, said it will only make it harder to save for a deposit, the very thing that they are saying these tax changes are all about. This is actually undermining that aspiration and that goal of so many young Australians.

I've got two of them in my home, my son and my daughter. They're 18 and 20 years of age. There are their friends and the people they're at uni with. My son's a tradie. He's doing an apprenticeship. There are his mates that he's connected with working on the job sites and on the tools. How are they going to get ahead under this policy and under what this government's doing? It does not make any sense. This is just a blatant tax grab. That's all that this is. It's so that you can continue to fund your addiction to spending rather than take the difficult steps and decisions to actually constrain your government's spending. Removing the capital gains tax discount on investments like shares and ETFs is actually going to disincentivise people from investing and increase the difficulty for younger Australians to get ahead. That's what's happening.

For many young people, renting a home is not just expensive; it's consuming an unsustainable share of their income. Do you remember that old 30 per cent rule on housing? It's now heading well above that. In some cases, even just renting a home is out of reach. The median weekly rent for homes across Australia's capital cities is $724 per week. Meanwhile, the median personal income for Australians aged 24 and under is roughly $455 a week. That's $23,840 per year. This means that the average young renter would need to hand over every dollar they earn, and then some, just to cover the cost of rent, even without accounting for utilities, transport, groceries—all the things that you need to. The modelling for the property industry by economic firms found that combining a CGT discount cut with negative gearing restrictions would push rent prices up by 2.4 per cent in 2029-30. A 2.4 per cent increase on today's median rent will inevitably put more pressure on young people who already lack the financial buffer to get ahead and to shoulder it—again, disadvantaging the young people that this government is claiming to be helping.

I'll turn to specific issues in my home state of Western Australia. Schedule 1 of the Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Reform No. 1) Bill 2026 represents a significant threat to minerals exploration and the long-term future of Australia's mining industry. This is a front-of-mind issue for me as a senator for Western Australia. My state is the home of mining exploration. The impact disproportionately falls on junior exploration companies, which dominate early-stage mining activities. They account for approximately 70 to 75 per cent of Australia's geological discoveries. Reduced exploration will mean fewer discoveries; fewer discoveries will mean fewer mines; and fewer mines will mean less government revenue, fewer royalty payments, and reduced economic activity across our nation. And make no mistake, this will have an impact on jobs directly and indirectly.

According to the Association of Mining and Exploration Companies, 84.5 per cent of retail investors view the current CGT discount as essential or very important, and over 85 per cent of surveyed investors anticipate reducing or exiting investments in junior explorers because of these changes. What this government is doing is undermining investment in this country—investment that is critical to Western Australia and critical to Australia's economic prosperity. We don't actually make too many things in this country anymore, but there’s one thing that we do exceptionally well, better than anywhere else in the world—and I'm proud to say this as a Western Australian—and that's how to extract minerals and sell them across the world because they are very, very valuable. This tax bill that we're dealing with right here undermines that ability for Australia to continue to bat way above its average and make prosperity for the entire nation.

Corinne Mulholland (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to strongly support the Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Reform No. 1) Bill 2026. This chamber comes one step closer to delivering a tax system that gives a fair go for working Australians, which is something that those opposite simply cannot stand. Nobody in this country right now is saying, 'Yes, we've got the housing settings in Australia right.' Nobody in this country right now is arguing that giving tax breaks to wealthy investors while young people and working families are locked out of their homeownership dreams is fair. Fortunately, there is one party that is willing to stand up and do something about it—and that is the Australian Labor Party. It's not easy, but it's the right thing to do. And if those opposite stuck to their own values, their party might not be in such disarray. This is the single most significant tax reform this country has seen in nearly a quarter of a century. It tips the scales back in favour of working people. And those opposite have the gall to come in here and oppose it. They come in here backing the vested interests of powerful people over the powerless. So let's talk about what this tax bill does, and let's talk about why they oppose it and why One Nation wants to kill it.

This bill cuts taxes for working Australians. We have already legislated a reduction in the lowest marginal tax rate, from 16c in the dollar down to 15c and then down to 14c. That is real money every year in the pocket of every working Australian. This bill delivers more today: a new tax offset for working Australians, a permanent annual tax offset for every eligible worker in Australia. Why would you vote against that? This is a $1,000 instant tax deduction—no receipts, no paperwork, no issue. Around 6.2 million Australians will benefit. Why would you vote against that? More than a quarter of the people who will benefit from that are under 30, and more than half of them are women. Add it all up. A worker on average earnings will be up to $2,816 a year better off from 2027-28 compared to where we started. This is a Labor government delivering for working people who earn their money through a wage, not a property dividend. This is not a one-off sugar hit; it is established permanently and structurally for future generations. I would like to remind the Liberals and One Nation that they're the people that you are supposed to be standing up for—working Australians. We are meant to be acting in the interests of Australia's future and the working people who are building this nation. They need someone on their side, and that's exactly what Labor is doing while those opposite are acting with shameless self-interest—the same self-interest that got Australia into this mess, driving rents up and putting homeownership out of reach, perhaps for good.

Now let's talk about housing, because this is where the story of intergenerational housing inequity really starts, and it's a story the Liberals don't like to tell. In 1999, the Howard Liberal government introduced the 50 per cent capital gains tax discount. It was a single policy decision that changed everything. That worked out very well for people who already owned assets. It worked out very well for people building their property portfolios. It worked out very well for people with access to capital. But, for younger Australians trying to buy their first home, it has been an economic disaster. We have watched investors compete against first home buyers weekend after weekend in our suburbs. We have watched homeownership move further and further out of reach. Now this government has the courage to act, not because it's politically easy but because it's right.

Since John Howard introduced the CGT discount, house prices have risen more than 400 per cent. In the same period, wages have risen less than half that. For 25 years, we've watched house prices run away from wages thanks to the Liberal Party. Homeownership amongst Australians aged 25 to 34 has fallen by seven percentage points. In some parts of Queensland, my home state, homeownership is as low as 20 per cent. For the first time since World War II, a majority of Australians in their early 30s do not own a home and may never own a home. Let that sink in. That is the Liberal Party's legacy, locking young people out of the housing market and throwing away the key. That is 25 years of broken, rigged systems that our side finally has the courage to fix. As Treasurer Jim Chalmers put it when he introduced this legislation, this is about making aspiration and opportunity the birthright of every Australian, not just some.

So what are we doing about it? We are replacing the 50 per cent capital gains tax discount with an inflation adjusted indexation so that only real gains are taxed, not paper gains—not inflation but real gains. We are limiting negative gearing on residential property to new builds from 2027-28. This will channel investment where it is needed—into new housing supply, not into bidding up the price of existing homes that a first home buyer is also trying to purchase at a weekend auction. Over 80 per cent of new investor lending currently goes to existing homes. We are changing that. These changes will help around 75,000 more Australians achieve their dream of homeownership. That's 75,000 families and 75,000 sets of keys to a front door of a home of their own.

For those who own an investment property purchased before budget night, nothing changes. So the scaremongering needs to end. We are not going after people who played by the rules that existed. We are changing the rules for tomorrow's future because Australians deserve the same fair go that previous generations in this nation had.

Let's talk about the people of this chamber who are voting against it. The Liberal Party and One Nation are lining up day after day to block these reforms, and Australians deserve to know why. If you understand who benefits from keeping the current system exactly where it is, you get an idea of where they're going on this issue. You only need to have a look at the register of interests—it's publicly available online—and you will find senators and members owning multiple investment properties and benefitting from these tax arrangements. They have personally accumulated wealth—

I'm not surprised you're arcing up about it, Senator Henderson, because you are absolutely part of the problem. People who have personally accumulated wealth through these very tax settings are the ones who are coming in here defending them while working Australians and young Australians cannot get into a house of their own.

Sarah Henderson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Communications and Digital Safety) | Link to this | Hansard source

It's not just me arcing up; it's the Australian people.

Corinne Mulholland (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

You come into this place, Senator Henderson, defending the rights of vested interests over the working people of Australia.

Sarah Henderson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Communications and Digital Safety) | Link to this | Hansard source

You're destroying younger Australians.

Corinne Mulholland (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

You are part of the problem, and it is that cynical betrayal of the Australian dream that has got the Liberal Party into the mess that they find themselves in. It's no wonder that, when I went through Hansard, I found a curious thing. A lot of your senior leadership team has been found missing on this bill. Why is that? It's because they're smart enough to know that they shouldn't be voting against the interests and speaking against the interests of working Australians.

As a Queenslander, I know exactly what's going on in our housing market at the moment. A young couple in Caboolture trying to save a deposit for a home just want a fair go. They don't own multiple investment properties like that lot over there. A nurse in Mackay who's renting with her young family after a recent divorce doesn't benefit from a CGT discount. A tradie in Toowoomba working overtime, hoping to one day own his own home, has nothing to gain from the status quo. In fact, he's hurt by the status quo that Senator Henderson and all her mates on the other side are trying to argue in favour of, because it benefits them, not the people outside of this building that we're trying to stand up for.

It sickens me that people would come into this place and put their own personal financial interests above those of working people—nurses, tradies, teachers—out there from where I come from who are struggling to get into the housing market. Working people need someone to stand up for them, and it will be this Labor government. It certainly won't be that rabble over there. So don't come in here voting for secret vested interests and putting the interests of working people to the side. We will stand up and we will call it out every single day of the week.

Let's be honest about the interests that those opposite and One Nation are standing up for. Those are the interests of Australia's billionaires propping up the Liberal Party and propping up One Nation. Is it any wonder why they come into this place and argue against the interests of working Australians? What do those billionaires get in return for their money? They get a Liberal Party and a One Nation coming in here voting against a pay rise for childcare workers. They get a Liberal Party who is willing to keep house prices up, up, up. They get politicians standing up at the dispatch box defending a tax system that rewards capital over work. Labor will not allow this to happen to this country. We will not allow the interests of billionaires to veto the aspirations of working Australians. We will not be Americanised. It is really shameful that those opposite would trade their values away from those of the Australian people.

The good news in this bleak political landscape I see in front of me is that this budget also provides for a bright future for Australia. We are continuing to build our healthcare system that was absolutely trashed under the Liberal-National government. They tried to drive bulk-billing rates into the floor. Under this government, we've opened 137 new Medicare urgent care clinics right around Australia. There are 26 in my home state of Queensland alone in places like Brisbane, Buderim, Cairns, Capalaba, Carindale, Gladstone, Mackay and Greenslopes—the list goes on. Most recently, the very last one of our 137 urgent care clinics was opened in Caloundra, and I was very pleased to welcome Prime Minister Anthony Albanese to the Sunshine Coast to help us officially launch that new urgent care clinic, which saw over 110 patients in its first three days of operation—110 patients on the Sunshine Coast who didn't need to put their hand in their pocket. They didn't need to make an appointment. They could walk in and receive world-class care from a GP and a nurse in their own community, and that is exactly what Labor delivers for the working people of this country.

I'm also proud to say that bulk-billing rates in this country are going up. From November 2025 to January this year, more than 81 per cent of GP visits were bulk-billed—the biggest quarterly increase since the pandemic. In communities like mine, in the seat of Longman, on the north side of Brisbane and around places like Caboolture, bulk-billing rates have jumped by 30 per cent. We've also delivered a 15 per cent pay rise for early childhood educators—workers, who are overwhelmingly women, who have been chronically undervalued and underpaid under the opposite side of politics. A typical educator in this nation is now earning $150 more a week because of Labor.

From 1 July next week, paid parental leave in this country rises to 26 weeks—six months of government funded leave for families welcoming a new child—up from 18 weeks when we first came to government. One Nation voted against it. The Liberal Party didn't support it. It was Labor that delivered 26 weeks of paid parental leave for working women and families in this nation. We also knew it was important to put superannuation on top of that paid parental leave to close the super gap, and guess what? That mob voted against that too.

Mehreen Faruqi (NSW, Australian Greens) | Link to this | Hansard source

The government wants us to believe that this is courage, that it is solving the housing crisis for generations of young people locked out by a tax system that treats housing as a commodity rather than a human right and that, after decades of cowardice, Labor has finally found a spine on negative gearing and capital gains tax, but don't believe it for a second. These are policies that have torched housing affordability for entire generations and allowed property investors to run taxpayer subsidised rings around everyday working people for decades. But, in typical Labor fashion, we see them fluff the policy and preserve the wealth of the rich to access unfair tax breaks in perpetuity.

We are backing this bill because it puts an end date on these scam tax breaks, but the grandfathering of entire property empires is shameful. Labor have told young people that these policies are the reason you can't afford a home, and then they bake in unlimited tax breaks for the wealthy. Everyone who has already got rich off this keeps every cent. Everyone else—the young person scraping for a deposit, the renter priced out—gets nothing. Is it any wonder young people are angry and frustrated as their struggles go on and their material conditions don't improve while every property baron who has already used these taxpayer advantages to build an empire of bricks and mortar gets to keep playing by the old rules forever? Think about who that protects. Investors in this country that own dozens of properties get these tax breaks while every nurse, every teacher and every check-out worker pays tax on every single dollar that they earn.

This was never a minor concession; it has been a wealth-hoarding machine. There are $33 billion a year in negative gearing handouts for people with two or more investment properties—this is money that could directly fund cost-of-living relief for renters and mortgage holders—and that includes 11,000 landlords with seven-plus houses who claimed $1.9 billion from 98,000 investment properties. The system is built for the wealthy and delivers for the wealthy. This is not real reform; it is the same old, same old dressed up as something more generous. I can picture the property barons right now—portfolios stacked, decades of hoarding locked in a safe, grinning like the cat that got the cream. They know exactly what unlimited grandfathering means. Their wealth is untouchable.

Labor had a once-in-a-generation chance to claw back hoarded wealth and hand power back to ordinary people, but they looked away and missed the opportunity. This is a government that will never touch its rich mates' wealth, even while admitting that wealth was built on a rigged system. For decades, the Greens have argued that unfair tax concessions are pushing homeownership further out of reach and driving inequality. While Labor and the coalition spent 25 years protecting this rort, we were the only ones fighting for a tax system built for people, not portfolios.

The Greens have secured an amendment that will prevent wealthy property investors from exploiting a loophole to use self-managed super funds to buy up tax advantaged investment properties and will remove ministerial discretion that would have allowed the minister to wind back these reforms. It is a small step in the right direction, but what really needs to happen is this. Scrap the capital gains tax discount, end negative gearing, tax billionaires and big corporations properly, tax the one per cent, and build public homes at the scale that is needed so everyone can have a roof over their head. That is real reform: wealth, power and ownership wrenched back from the ultrarich and billionaires and returned to the people.

But Labor's state governments are wrenching public homes from communities and the people who live there, demolishing them and handing them over to private developers. It is happening in my neighbourhood in Sydney. It is happening in Melbourne. It is happening across the country. Labor governments are demolishing public housing for the interests of private investors and private developers, and good on the communities who are resisting this and who want to protect public homes in their communities—some have lived there for generations in some cases. Good on them. They will keep fighting, and we will keep fighting with them.

Labor's lack of ambition to solve the housing crisis is staggering, but the same is true for climate, for higher and higher uni fees and for everything else. They are completely wasting their majority government by refusing to make big, bold changes. Instead they are tinkering around the edges. Well, enough of that. Labor is not going to fix any crisis. Let's not be fooled by their words, which are not followed up by the action that is actually needed. The Greens are not here to facilitate their failings; we are here to take them on and to win.

Sarah Henderson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Communications and Digital Safety) | Link to this | Hansard source

I first want to address an issue that was raised in previous contributions this morning: the very unfortunate reflection on some coalition senators who the government alleges are not interested in these bills, the Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Reform No. 1) Bill 2026 and the Income Tax Rates Amendment (Tax Reform No. 1) Bill 2026, because they're not listed to speak. I want to put on the record, very clearly, that Senator Liddle was granted leave yesterday because she is attending a funeral today. Senator Gallagher named Senator Liddle, casting an aspersion on her, because she's not listed to speak. That's a disgrace. Acting Deputy President Sterle, through you, I would ask the minister to return to the chamber to correct the record and apologise.

Senator Mulholland also made reflections on a number of coalition senators. She didn't name anyone. I expect more coalition senators will be speaking on these toxic bills. For someone as senior as Senator Gallagher to cast aspersions on Senator Liddle, knowing—or assuming that she knew—that the Senate granted Senator Liddle leave not to be here today because she's attending a very significant funeral, is absolutely beyond the pale. I am asking, through you, Acting Deputy President, Senator Gallagher to please return and apologise to Senator Liddle and correct her erroneous statements.

Mr Albanese and the Labor government can try to run, but they cannot hide from the Australian people. What we've just witnessed in this place is a dirty, rotten deal to sell out Australians. Labor deceived all Australians before the election, betrayed Australians on budget night and has now done a dangerous and dishonest deal with the Greens, which will mean toxic taxes on housing, savings, investment, small businesses and younger Australians. I want to have a look at some of some of these headlines. I won't hold them up, because that would be using a prop. Today the Herald Sun reads: 'CAVE-IN: Albo accused of'—the L word—'again after "dangerous deal" to fast-track controversial tax grab on Aussies. PM UNDER GREEN THUMB'.

The Australian says, 'LEFT-WING PARTY TO DEMAND MORE CONCESSIONS ON NDIS REFORM BILL'.

Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Henderson, resume your seat. Do you have a point of order, Senator Grogan?

Karen Grogan (SA, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

I do, Acting Deputy President. While Senator Henderson said she won't hold up the props, because they're props, she is holding up the props.

Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes. Thank you, Senator Grogan. Senator Henderson, I did hear that. I did see the hand come up, and I know it won't come up again.

Sarah Henderson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Communications and Digital Safety) | Link to this | Hansard source

Thanks, Acting Deputy President. I again quote from the front page of the Herald Sun: 'CAVE-IN: Albo accused of'—that L word, which I can't say—'again after "dangerous deal" to fast-track controversial tax grab on Aussies. PM UNDER GREEN THUMB'. Today's Australian says: 'LEFT-WING PARTY TO DEMAND MORE CONCESSIONS ON NDIS REFORM BILL. LABOR HIT ON SMSF HOUSING INVESTMENTS. Paying for Greens' 'kill' plot'.

Australians cannot trust a word this Prime Minister says. Before the election, he said there would be no changes to capital gains tax, negative gearing or superannuation. This was his bond. He said:

My word is my bond.

His word means nothing. We cannot trust anything more this Prime Minister says.

This is a gross deception to which Australians have been subjected, and this latest dirty deal to prohibit self-managed super funds from borrowing to purchase residential real estate is another kick in the guts for mum-and-dad investors who thought their super was safe under Labor. Here is my message: your super is not safe. Your savings are not safe. Your investments under this toxic government are not safe. Guess what's coming next? The family home. The Prime Minister says, 'No, we're not going to target the family home.' We can't trust him, because we know that when Labor runs out of money they come after yours.

Of course, this prohibition on borrowing through SMSFs has nothing to do with building more homes. This is all about appeasing the big boys in the industry super funds—and the unions, which have their tentacles wrapped through every part of these companies. That is a disgrace. After the shocking corruption we've seen in Victoria, where some $15 billion has been funnelled through Big Build projects in corruption and rorts, written and authorised by the CFMEU, we now see this dirty deal.

Australians are speaking with their feet. Nearly $8 billion has flowed out of industry super funds into self-managed super funds in the past year alone as more Australians choose to take control of their own retirement savings. So many Australians are saying, 'We cannot trust the industry funds to put our interests first.' Is it any wonder? Industry super funds control hundreds of billions of dollars in workers' retirement savings, yet they too often have operated with inadequate transparency, entrenched poor governance structures and board appointments driven by union affiliation, rather than merit. Australians are increasingly questioning whether their retirement savings are being managed solely in their best interests. This is not an attack on the big end of town. The big end of town don't have their own private, self-managed super funds. These are mum-and-dad investors. The big end of town are the big corporations and the big foreigners who get tax concessions. What a joke!

As for the Greens, they do this deal and then stand up, make all these excuses and say, 'Oh, no, it's really terrible.' They've done this dirty deal. The Greens have sold out the renters of Australia. The Greens have even sold out people with disability. The Greens will not stop.

What we know is that no-one voted for these new taxes. The Prime Minister didn't have the ticker—he didn't have the heart or the courage—to say to the Australian people, 'I want to change the tax system, and I'm going to take it to an election.' Labor knew exactly what they were going to do. I know, on that side, despite all the protestations that we are hearing, there is a lot of deep concern, even amongst Labor members and senators, about what this budget has done to so many Australians. It is a crime.

As for the Greens deal, of course they've done nothing to grandfather the negative gearing arrangements for those that are in existence, but they've punished young Australians. Young Australians have been denied the opportunity to negatively gear—except for a new build, an impossible dream for so many, which could take two, three or four years. The Greens, in doing this dirty deal, have particularly sold out young Australians—young Australians who wanted to invest in their future through the purchase of shares or property or through utilising their own self-managed super fund—and the renters of this country.

What has happened is extraordinary. We have got the death tax, a tax on family savings and a tax on renters, first home buyers and young Australians trying to get ahead. We now have a tax on small businesses, startups and entrepreneurs—on the engine room of the Australian economy. This is a disgusting, disgraceful budget of broken promises—a budget that breaks the Australian dream. It is an assault on aspiration, pulling the ladder of opportunity up from young Australians before they get their feet on the first rung. This is a bad-faith budget which does nothing to improve intergenerational inequality; it makes the problem worse. Labor's budget isn't one of intergenerational fairness; it's intergenerational fraud.

This budget is unravelling faster than anything we've seen in this place before. Every week, another broken promise surfaces. There was a death tax buried in the fine print along with dodgy inflation data and a secret $200 billion income tax hike. The Treasurer can't even keep track of his own deceptions. He doesn't even know how many young Australians have shares. He did that interview with that magnificent young podcaster who had to correct the Treasurer, and here he is scrambling with his papers because he didn't even understand that the changes to capital gains tax punish young Australians, including those seeking to buy shares or who have shares, more than anyone else. Mr Chalmers' economic model has one setting—to stoke inflation, tax inflation, spend inflation. Australians are living with these consequences at the supermarket, on their mortgage, in their pay packet.

I was also just flabbergasted to hear Senator Mulholland say, 'Well, we're here looking after the salary earners of Australia and Australian workers.' Australian salary earners are entitled to invest in their future, and the tenor of Senator Mulholland's entire contribution was: this doesn't matter to them; we need to look after their salary. Of course, that's not in debate but why should salary earners be denied the opportunity to invest in their future? Because these tax changes crucify anyone wanting to put a bit away for a rainy day, either for themselves into the future, for their retirement, for their kids or for their grandkids.

What a title we have from this Prime Minister—the highest-taxing government in Australian history. The Prime Minister has now confirmed $273 billion in taxes Australians did not vote for over the next nine years. It is time the truth be told. Debt is heading towards $1.25 trillion. The interest bill is $80,000 a minute. That's 12 credit cards being issued per Australian behind their backs. Today's debt is tomorrow's taxes, and it's the next generation being handed the bill.

The coalition opposes schedules 1 and 2, and supports schedules 3 and 4 of these bills. We will fight these toxic taxes tooth and nail. If they become law under Labor, a coalition government will repeal them. Our plan is the opposite of Labor's—lower taxes, lower inflation and an economy designed to back the self-starters of the nation, not kneecap them. You work, you risk, you invest, you believe in this country and you have the certainty under the coalition. Hopefully, the next government will be a coalition government which will back Australians every step of the way.

I want to finish on the shocking impact that this budget is having on housing. The government's own budget papers say 35,000 fewer homes will be built as a direct consequence of these new taxes. That's not our number; that's the number in the budget papers. When you tax something, you get less of it. That's not ideology; that's economics 101. That's what's in the budget papers. The more you tax housing investment, the less housing investment you get, and the government has decided that's a price that young Australians in particular should pay. So there is all this rubbish from the government and the Greens about intergenerational fairness yet, if you strip away the rhetoric, look at the budget papers, you will see that there is lower supply, which, combined with the government's own migration overshoot of 90,000, means higher demand, lower supply and higher prices. That is not fairness. This is a housing disaster hiding behind a focus-group-tested phrase, and we can see it in action already. Auction clearance rates are going through the floor. Confidence is being sapped out of the housing market. But Labor could not care less because they're bringing in another 1.4 million people—the population of Adelaide—and, of course, we are all paying the price of these grossly irresponsible policies. (Time expired)

Michelle Ananda-Rajah (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Reform No. 1) Bill 2026. This bill is a massive shake-up. It is the biggest shake-up of our tax system in a generation, and it strikes at the heart of this toxic relationship between capital gains tax and negative gearing, an interaction that came about through the Howard government back in 1999. It led to a complete decoupling of salaries from house prices. It was meant to divert capital into the share market and into productive activity, and, instead, it turned housing from a human right into a speculative asset. Add 15 years of cheap credit, and the whole thing detonated.

In 1999, it cost around four times your median salary to buy a house. Fast forward to now, and we now have a situation where it costs around eight times. However, it's very much location specific. In places like Melbourne, it's about eight times your median salary. In Sydney, however, it's 10 times the median salary. These cities are now in the impossibly unaffordable category. That's a message. The average age of a first home buyer in 1999 was in their late 20s. It's now 34 to 36. Westpac reports, this year, that one in five people who are applying for first homeownership loans are actually 40 years and over. Just think about that—40 years and over and one in five. That tells you that people are actually ageing into housing. This has a multiplicity of knock-on effects. It has a detrimental effect on whether people have relationships, settle down and have children. Is it any wonder then that our fertility rate is in freefall? It currently stands at 1.7, which I'm told is actually not bad for Australia, but it should be 2.1 and above if we are to remain a vibrant community. Something has got to give.

We can continue to admire this problem, or we can do something about it. This Labor government is administering the bitter medicine that this country has needed for a very long time in order to save the patient—in order to restore hope to a generation of young people who have lost hope when it comes to housing. We've created a generation of people in this country who believe that they are going to be lifelong renters, and that's not good enough. We don't accept that status quo.

These changes will mean that negative gearing is now limited to new residences—new homes. We believe that these changes will result in 75,000 homes moving from property investors to owner-occupiers. And, yes, the modelling does suggest that there will be some reduction in new house builds of around 35000, but this is being more than offset by our $47 billion package which is designed to boost housing supply, cut red tape and skill up more tradies in construction. On the supply side, we have ring fenced 100,000 new builds just for first home buyers, and these deals are starting to be done with the state governments. The first one was in South Australia. We've also, in this budget, allocated $2 billion for enabling infrastructure. This means money for things like powerlines, pipes and pavements so that new builds can be fast-tracked.

We know that there is more to do, but this certainly builds on the already ambitious housing agenda that we brought in in our first term. As you know, the five per cent home deposit scheme has been incredibly successful. Over 250,000 people have entered the housing market as a result of this, 81,000 of them in regional communities. We've also introduced the Help to Buy scheme, which is really targeted for people on modest incomes, and we continue to restrict foreign investors from purchasing existing homes until mid-2029. All of these measures are designed to boost housing supply and enable people to get into homeownership with a smaller deposit.

Now, thanks to these taxation changes—changes to capital gains tax as well as negative gearing—we are ironing out the distortions that have turned housing into a speculative asset and seen this absolute boom or explosion in house prices and a legacy of unaffordability for the next generation. We are already seeing change, with a market adjustment occurring. This $12 trillion housing market is taking a bit of a haircut right now, but it turns out that the sky is not falling in. Twelve trillion—that's how much this housing market is.

These changes have actually been backed by the Australian people. A Resolve poll taken a couple of days ago showed that 54 per cent of people backed in these changes, and support for the cooling of property prices was actually seen across every single income bracket—low, medium and high income. Support was highest amongst 18- to 34-year-olds, and that's telling, because that is the very group these measures are designed to target, and they get it. So do their parents. So do their grandparents. There is a growing awareness in the community that the status quo is untenable. That is really at the heart of this budget.

The revenue raised by these measures and by ironing out this distortion will be diverted into other important programs. Let's not forget Medicare. Medicare is the reason I, as a former doctor, sit on this side of the house rather than that side of the house. With respect to Medicare, there are a whole lot of things going on. Among my favourites—it's like picking your favourite child—is making permanent Medicare urgent care clinics. All 137 that we promised have now been delivered, and these urgent care clinics have been visited by 3.1 million Australians. A third of them are children. They're open from early till late. They are often staffed by local GPs from the community, and all you need is your Medicare card. You do not need your credit card. They are fully bulk-billed.

We've also seen an investment in hospitals, with an additional $25 billion going into our hospital system. I spent my whole career, my whole life, working in public hospitals. These are really busy places. They are constantly under pressure, so that additional money will be welcome. It will be welcome, but it is not enough. The real action happens in the community, and that's why we are strengthening Medicare by boosting bulk-billing. The best way to reduce pressure on hospitals is to actually improve access to GPs and make it cheaper—in fact, make it free. That is what we're doing. With our record investment of $8½ billion in Medicare at the end of last year—this injection into Medicare—we have seen a huge uplift in bulk-billing, in the order of five to six percentage points across the country—in some places, like the Northern Territory, 13 percentage points. What that means is that we now have 3,800 general practices around the country that are bulk billing. That far exceeds our timelines and our expectations, so it is working.

That's not all we're doing. In this budget, we had an additional $3 billion towards aged care, where we are delivering more beds and more packages and we're making those personal care services—like showering, for example—free. We also have additional investment into dementia care, with the establishment of more specialist dementia care units. This is incredibly important. As our population ages, more people will develop dementia. But dementia is not a homogeneous condition. There is a great deal of variation within dementia. Yes, Alzheimer's is the most common, but there are other types. In most severe cases, elders with dementia who have behaviours of concern are the most challenging patients to manage. They are often rejected by aged-care facilities and, unfortunately, very often end up in hospitals, which are not suited to care for dementia patients. This additional investment will help families and relieve carer stress, particularly for women who bear the brunt of that stress.

In addition, we have established a new tax cut for all working Australians. It's called the working Australian tax offset. It means that around 14 million working Australians will receive an additional $250 in their pocket. That's on top of a $1,000 tax deduction, with no receipts needed. and five tax cuts in total, which means that the average worker is now $2,800 better off. Labor is the party of lower taxes.

This budget also has a large package of around $13 billion to go towards strengthening fuel security. Off the back of this oil crisis—this oil shock—we need to do more at home, so we will be extending our liquid fuel reserves to 50 days. This is on top of the additional $1.1 billion we're putting towards developing new low-carbon fuels—like biodiesel, for example—that come from the stuff our farmers grow, such as sorghum, canola, wheat, and even the waste products like tallow, biomass and so on. It's an innovative lens on our fuel security needs, and Australia is well placed to take advantage of that.

Finally, this budget also establishes the national resilience and science council. I'm particularly interested in this. Off the back of multiple crises like COVID, the fuel shock and the regional wars in the Middle East and Ukraine, I think all Australians realise that we are not immune or insulated from geopolitical shocks and shifts and that we have been far too vulnerable to what happens a million miles away from us. The establishment of this national resilience and science council will be there to inform government at the highest level, from the Prime Minister down, on what's coming our way and how we can better insulate and better protect ourselves. That means investing in the shock absorbers: housing, health care, the skills and smarts of our people.

There's a whole lot of work in this budget around strengthening our scientific and innovative capability, because the only way we can grow the pie in this country and the only way we can reach that future prosperity is by playing the long game. To play the long game, you must make the investments now and then hold steady over 10, 15 or 20 years so that we can build up those companies. We can take research and development from our world-leading, world-class institutions and universities and carry them through multiple valleys of death and then commercialise them and take them to market. That creates jobs. That creates exports. That creates the multiplier effect. And there are a number of measures in this budget that support that ecosystem.

I commend this bill to the House.

Tyron Whitten (WA, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

If you're wondering why the Fire the Liar campaign was such a hit, here it is: a dirty deal with the votes-for-sale Greens. This is something that the Prime Minister said 385 times he would not do. And to do what? To delay much-needed reform to the NDIS in order to ram through new taxes—new taxes that he told us 50 times would not happen. That's 435 porkies by his own count. More spending and higher taxes, brought to you by Labor and the Greens. It is the coalition of the socialists on that side of the chamber. Stalin would be proud. Keeping the money tap on for NDIS rorts and taxing anyone that has managed to start a business with their own sweat and blood to pay for it—the Australian people will not forgive these betrayals of trust. They will not sit back and let Labor and the Greens destroy the future of their children.

This country was built on the back of people that took risks. They took risks to start businesses, provide employment and reap the well-deserved rewards. But for the socialists on the other side of the chamber any success or benefit that accrues to the risk takers and entrepreneurs are ill-gotten gains. All of the workplace relations are aimed at making it impossible to run a business. I should know. I owned a business. I've dealt with the unions. I've had them come on to job sites and threaten to shut us down to strong arm us. Labor doesn't just allow this, they encourage it. Labor doesn't care about union workers. It is for the union bosses and the Labor coffers. But my brother and I dealt with all of this, worked hard and grew the business because there was a hope of reward at the end, a hope that I could provide for my wife and children, a hope that I could retire on my own terms after putting it all on the line every day.

But this bill dims that hope for the next generation. It pulls up the ladder. Kids will now have to contend with the fact that they give up to 47 per cent of their business to the government, a government that took no risk and put in no hours, no sleepless nights and no blood, sweat and tears. Every time you take away the incentives for people to take risks, we lose more money, more of our best and brightest and, with them, the jobs that they might have generated and the improvements to our way of life that they might have brought to this nation. It kills what built this nation in the first place.

Worse than all of this is the ridiculous rationale behind this tax grab—that they are doing this for the next generation, that it's about housing. I'm sure by now even Labor has seen the public outrage. Surely even the Canberra bubble can't ignore the fact that Australians have seen through this spin, that this is just a big fat tax grab. You want to fix generational housing inequality? Why don't you stop blowing out your own immigration targets every year? It's a novel idea, but how about not bringing in hundreds of thousands of people to compete with first home buyers. Maybe you wouldn't sell them five per cent deposit home loans right before you pull the rug out from under them, leaving them in a negative equity hell. The best lever to pull is the only lever that they won't pull. That is because it is not about helping the young. It is about bringing in more votes.

Even if we were to put all this aside, the new tax rules themselves are unworkable. Calculations of CGT cost bases were complex enough. Capital gains calculations were complex enough. Now we have a situation where Labor are asking people to go and value all of their CGT assets as at 1 July 2027, treat that as a notional sale, defer that until the actual sale and use the new cost base to calculate the new sale based on indexation. Then, once you've done all that, don't just add it to your taxable income like the good old days. It is now its very own category of income that gets its own special tax rate. I hope everyone at home was following that. That's the world that Labor thinks is fair. It's fair for them, of course, not you. They've sold their houses. Destroying the energy grid isn't cheap, you know.

Lastly, I'm speaking to a bill today that is as dense and complex as it is stupid. We have never had major backflips rushed through with just a single day to consider them. Of course, Labor doesn't need anyone to know what they're planning to do, only their coalition partner, their comrades, the Greens. As long as their good mates sitting next to them are happy, the rest of us can just suck it up. To the Labor MPs, I sure hope you've asked your base if they're happy with the Greens setting the agenda, but I doubt it. This will cost you dearly, as it should. More and more Australians have hit their limit with this farcical government. They want to fire the liar.

Now just something else—I was at the opening of the War Memorial last night. I sat through a 15-minute welcome to country, but the national anthem didn't get played and there was one Australian flag there hidden up in the rafters. I think it's an absolute tragic disgrace.

Matthew Canavan (Queensland, Liberal National Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the question be now put.

Steph Hodgins-May (Victoria, Australian Greens) | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the question be put.

A division having been called and the bells having been rung—

I've just received advice from the clerks that, because this was done under a limitation of time, it's not possible to move the closure motion. The division is cancelled.

Matthew Canavan (Queensland, Liberal National Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

The government hasn't been able to manage the budget, and people now know that they can't manage this chamber. They've clearly stuffed up their hours motion, but they're refusing to see common sense and run this chamber in a sensible way. All we're seeking to do today is to make sure that there is sufficient debate on the most unpopular, unloved budget in living memory.

The government wants to try and move this on straightaway today and avoid a committee stage, which should be occurring. That's what we should be debating in this chamber because the Australian people weren't given this debate before the last election, 12 months ago. The Australian people went to the polls under the presumption, because the Prime Minister told them so, that there would not be increased taxes on capital gains, there would not be increased taxes on trusts and there would not be increased taxes on negative gearing. The Prime Minister, himself, said that he'd said that 50 times. Yet, less than 12 months later, the Prime Minister walked away from all of those promises, disenfranchising the Australian people. And now he seeks to gag the people's parliament by limiting debate on these measures today. The reason the Labor Party don't want to debate these measures is that they're embarrassed by them. They're embarrassed by their broken promises, by how these taxes have been received by the Australian people and by the deals they've had to do with the Greens political party that raise taxes even more.

Since becoming Leader of the Nationals, I've been around a lot of the country and I've spent a lot of time in southern New South Wales for the Farrer by-election. I've held four small-business roundtables over the past week—in Rockhampton, Lismore, Bundaberg and Townsville. The thing that has come back to me the most is that people are just desperate right now for a government that helps them deal with costs that are out of control. The cost of everything is going up and up for families and for small businesses, and they're struggling. They're struggling to hang on to their mortgages and hang on to their small businesses. They want a government that just helps with that. They want a government that hears their concerns about these issues and comes up with a plan for small businesses. They are starting to lose confidence in the economy; they're seeing demand fall.

Some of this is connected, of course, to the fuel crisis we see overseas. The uncertainty about the global environment is pulling people back. There's a desperate hunger for a government that has a plan to resolve these issues, to give people hope and optimism that the government will tackle these challenges and make things better.

People don't expect their governments to make things perfect, but they do expect them to try to make things better. Even people that aren't directly affected by trusts, negative gearing or the changes to superannuation—which I'll come to—will scratch their heads. They're confused that the government is focusing on all these issues and not on the cost of living, not on the shocking performance of our economy and not on lifting our worst productivity performance on record. Why is the government distracted by what seems to be a series of class war issues microwaved from a failed Bill Shorten campaign?

Everything we're seeing right now, including the super changes overnight, was rejected by the Australian people twice. It wasn't taken to last year's election; it wasn't taken to the election the Labor Party won in 2022. But, in 2016 and 2019, Bill Shorten and the Labor Party went to the election with a platform to change negative gearing rules, to tax trusts and to change the arrangements for self-managed super funds. They were rejected by the Australian people twice. They were rejected twice when they had that choice, and, now, because the government doesn't have a plan on the economy more broadly, they've reheated these failed policies and said, 'Let's go with that.' They've decided: 'We've got the numbers now. We've tricked the Australian people to vote for us.' They've got the numbers in the House, they've effectively got their numbers in the Senate with their partners, allies and coalition members in the Greens and they're going to force it, ram it, through the parliament with barely any inquiry and not much debate in the Senate. They'll do the same in the other chamber in the next 24 hours.

I don't think what we're debating here is matching the crisis our economy is in right now. When I hear government members speak in this chamber, I don't think they realise the precipice that we are on as a nation. We have never had a four-year period where our productivity growth has been negative until this government, until these last four years. The Labor Party have been in government now for four years, and over those four years productivity growth not only has been negative for the first time ever in our historical record but has gone backwards by five per cent. It has gone way down. It is off the charts—negative, down five per cent in just four years. As I said, it has never been negative before. This is important because the productivity growth rate determines how many things we make from the resources we've been blessed with. And, by God, we've been blessed with a lot of resources in this country. We should be a productive nation; we should be a rich nation. But if that's falling the consequence is that there's too much money in the country chasing too few goods, and when you have too much money chasing too few goods the price of those goods has to go up, the value of money goes down, and we get something called inflation.

So what have we had in this economy? We've now had another outbreak of inflation. Yes, this government inherited an environment where inflation was high, but they took a lot longer to get it down than other countries, that's for sure. The cost-of-living crisis in Australia was one of the worst post COVID out of anywhere in the world. It came back down, and then what happened as soon as the Reserve Bank lowered interest rates a little bit last year and let the economy run a bit to give people a bit of relief and some hope they might spend some more? Inflation broke out again. Late last year, inflation started ticking up. By the beginning of this year, before the Iran crisis, our inflation had gone over four per cent a year—it was the highest in the developed world. So let's just be very clear. The inflation rate in this country was higher than any other developed country in the world prior to the Iran conflict. That's because our economic productivity is not good enough.

So what has the Reserve Bank had to do? They've had to increase interest rates again. They've had to backtrack on their strategy because we have not got a government taking action on spending or economic growth; therefore, the only tool, the only lever, the Reserve Bank has to control inflation is to push interest rates up, which it's doing again. And now we have a situation where instead of trying to fix that fundamental economic issue of productivity, which is related to the high energy costs and massive red tape we've got—the government spending we have as well doesn't help. Instead of tackling those things which are hard—it's hard to tighten your belts. Every Australian family knows that right now. They've had to do that in the last few years since COVID, but this government hasn't had to do that. It's hard to do that. It's hard to cut red tape; it's hard to admit that you got it wrong on energy policy. Despite all your promises that bills will be cut by $275, they've skyrocketed, and they continue to go up.

This week has been terrible. There's a bit of a win drought; prices are through the roof again. You can't plan a business and you can't invest in manufacturing in this environment, so our productivity falls. And, instead of focusing on all those things, the government has continued with what it has been doing, which is the same economic strategy: 'Let's put in more taxes. That'll fix things.' Ironically, there's a part of that which may work to bring down inflation. If we put taxes up high enough, it'll kill economic growth, and we'll have a recession we didn't need to have. Yes, that will lower inflation. That will see house prices fall. We're seeing that right now. I don't want people's house prices to fall because we have an economic recession. I don't want to see our inflation rate fall because people are put out of a job. But that's where we're headed to. If this economy goes south in the next six months, it is on the head of this government. It is on their heads because it is they who have crashed confidence in our economy by unleashing a budget that was not taken to the Australian people—a series of taxes that people did not vote for and a government that has not been able to explain the basic elements of their proposal.

Last week they saw—I've never seen this in my political career—a budget five weeks old be ripped up and the government saying: 'Okay, we got it wrong on elements of the capital gains tax changes. We didn't realise. We forgot to factor in that there are these innovative businesses out there that will be massively disadvantaged.' The government seems completely ignorant of the fact we've had this tech boom. We've got things called tech startups now. When you put on this massive capital gains tax that they're doing—this will be the highest capital gains tax in the developed world. Indeed, the Prime Minister was asked in the other chamber this week to name another country with a higher capital gains tax rate than we would have under your policies. He couldn't name one. So we've got the highest in the world.

We're seeing in all the developments we've got—the technological developments, the AI and all this stuff—that there are a lot of growth opportunities. But anyone that goes for growth now gets absolutely smashed under these tax arrangements. So that chokes that off. Now the government is trying to jury-rig some kind of change last week and say: 'Oh, we've issued a consultation paper now and we're going to define what an innovative business is, and then you'll get the discount. Then these other small businesses will get a capital gains discount too if their turnover is under $10 million.' Why bother then? Why are we bothering with this?

I don't think the major problem for this country is a lack of complexity in the Income Tax Assessment Act. We've got a lot of problems, a lot of problems. But one of them is not a lack of complexity in our income tax laws. Now the government has made those laws more complex, and you effectively need an accountancy degree to understand just the changes the government announced last week. I read through them. It was ridiculously complex. You'll need to go to an accountant at the very least to work out exactly how you should structure your business just to deal with the changes, let alone the broader tax act we've got. How much extra cost? How much impact on productivity is that going to have on the Australian economy?

In the limited time I've got, I want to make two more points. I mentioned here that, instead of raising taxes, we should have an economic plan that seeks to restrain the size of government and pull that back a little bit. I want to put in context why I think that's important. In the last budget before COVID, this place spent $479 billion. In one financial year, $479 billion is a lot of money. That's what we spent in 2018-19, before COVID hit. In this budget that's just been handed down, the government expects to spend $829 billion. That is a $350 billion increase in annual spending. Every year, we are spending $350 billion more than we did before COVID. That's a big number. What does it mean? Well, there are about 10 million households in Australia. That means that, on a household basis, your government, since COVID, is spending $35,000 per household per year more. Every year, we're borrowing this money. We don't have it. So we're putting that on the credit card every year. Can you imagine if you ran your family budget and, over an eight-year period, blew it out by $35,000 a year and had to go and borrow and put on a credit card? I don't know about others, but my credit card is nowhere near that. You'd need to go and take a loan out again or mortgage your house to survive.

Why is the government getting away with this? What has happened? We've ended JobKeeper and ended all this. 'We had to help people out during COVID.' We ended all those schemes, and then the government used the excuse to go to another level and waste more of your money. Now they're coming to you and wanting more of that money from your super, from your property investments, from the small businesses and farmers in this country. They're saying, 'We need more money to waste here in this place.' How about, before we introduce new taxes, we cut our own spending first? How about we take care of our own house first before we go and raid other people's houses? We've got it the wrong way around right now. Because this government doesn't want to make the tough decisions to restrain spending to cut back on waste in this place, they are simply going to raid the piggybanks of other people all around our country. And worse, they didn't even ask those people about those changes first. A basic right of British peoples that our country inherited is that taxation should not be imposed on you without your consent. People fought wars for that, right? We're about to celebrate one of those wars next week on 4 July—250 years. They fought that to make sure they could have no taxation without representation. Well, now in this place if this gets rammed through today, we will have taxation on the Australian people, massive taxation, without any representation, without any consent from the Australian people. If the government had any guts, they would take these proposals back to the people. They ran them through this place without their consent. Have the ticker to go before the people and argue for why you think this is the best thing for the Australian economy, and only then should the Australian people face a higher tax bill. Only if they agree to it, should they. (Time expired)

Larissa Waters (Queensland, Australian Greens) | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak to the Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Reform No. 1) Bill 2026. Six weeks ago, the day after the budget was released and these tax changes were announced, I said, 'Tinkering around the edges of a broken housing system and spending billions for corporations and the one per cent, that will be the legacy of the Albanese Labor government.' Because tinkering is all they can manage and tinkering is this bill does.

When I first heard that the government was finally going to make some reforms to negative gearing and capital gains tax discount, I had some hope because this has been needed for decades. These property investor tax perks have turbocharged Australia's housing market, and we now have one of the most expensive property markets in the world. The graphs are really clear. From the moment these tax breaks come in, house prices shoot up, way up. They diverge from wages incredibly. Now the Greens opposed these changes at the time when prime minister Howard introduced them in 1999 and we haven't stopped campaigning against these unfair tax perks for professional property investors ever since.

So I had hope and then I looked at the data, and the government are keeping the housing tax perks in place for anyone who already has them, and they're simply stopping anyone new from accessing them. Now, it's good that there's an end date on those tax perks, but to bake in inequality—what a missed opportunity to actually fix the housing crisis. All those people who've got 20, 50, 100 investment properties, nothing's changing for them. They keep almost every single benefit that they have now. That is tinkering.

The government should have abolished those unfair tax perks, maybe allowed just one property, but instead they've left $33 billion on the table, in the pockets of those wealthy property investors, who've got three or more investment properties. Labor's low ambition means that the deep inequality in our housing system will be worse for longer, and that this enduring housing crisis will now squarely be of Labor's design. Labor couldn't do a proper job of these tax changes because they refused to take on the one per cent. Housing won't be more affordable for first homebuyers. The housing crisis won't be fixed. Renters will still struggle to buy their first home. In fact, there's no relief in sight for renters because there was nothing in the budget for them. There were no rent caps, no rent freeze, no national tenancy standards, no support. In fact, I might add the only budget allocation for actually building homes was for military homes for overseas military personnel—wow! Ending rather than grandfathering those housing tax breaks would have helped renters get a home of their own. But Labor's telling first homebuyers to wait because wealthy property investors haven't made enough money off the housing crisis.

This budget is a missed opportunity to reduce inequality. The government says they need to raise revenue, but they could have saved $33 billion from not subsidising wealthy property investors with three or more investment properties who don't need the help. They could have saved $33 billion. They could have taxed the greedy gas corporations, who are exporting our gas and making billions off a resource that they get virtually for free because they wrote their own tax laws. That's $17 billion in revenue each year that the government is forgoing because they don't want to make the greedy gas corporations who are fleecing us all pay a minimum 25 per cent export tax. Spending almost $400 billion on submarines from Donald Trump, subs that we might not get ever anyway because the contract's written so poorly, that are all second hand now anyway and that just tie us closer to a dangerous warmonger which makes us all less safe—there are your budget savings.

But, instead, Labor wants to balance the budget by kicking 241,000 people off the NDIS. They are punching down on people with a disability, maybe because they thought they wouldn't fight back but also because they're too gutless to tax the one per cent properly and to tax the super profits of corporations. People working for a living, renters, first home buyers and people with a disability for that matter are under immense pressure, and they've got every right to expect a budget that helps them. But, instead, Labor has once again found room for the wealthy and the well-connected while doing little for everyone else. By choosing to protect existing wealthy property investors, Labor lacked the courage to actually fix the housing crisis.

Politicians and the media try to make out that solving the housing crisis is really difficult and complicated. It's not. It's not about supply or immigration. We are building more homes than population growth. When we paused immigration during COVID, prices didn't come down. Migration is not causing the housing crisis. The problem is treating housing as an investment class, as a vehicle for wealth creation, rather than a human right, and government after government from both of the big parties has allowed it. But who benefits? The ultra wealthy who can buy up these properties and the banks who make record profits off huge mortgages.

If we're serious about tackling the housing crisis, we need to look at the whole problem. We should be implementing rent caps and real rights for renters like longer leases and actual minimum standards so that people aren't living in fear of their next rent increase or forgoing asking for maintenance because they're worried their landlord will decide to end the lease. Those reforms for renters are something that could be done immediately. And if you're talking about supply, well, let's build public housing, good quality public homes, like governments used to. And let's talk about a public property developer that builds homes and sells them at cost, not for profit, not so that developers can land bank or use sunset clauses to make interest off your deposit and keep prices high but to provide homes for people who need them. Essential workers can't afford 96 per cent of Australia's rentals, so, the next time you see a comment from someone on social media suggesting that people just move further from the city, think about that last nurse who took care of you or about your kid's teacher. Shouldn't they be able to afford to live in the community that they work in?

This was an opportunity to show Australians that parliament can still improve people's lives. Instead, Labor wimped out. It chose corporate comfort over structural reform. This government is not concerned with inequality. It's concerned with appearances. It pays lip service. That's why people are fed up. They're fed up because Labor can do something about the problems we face, but they waste every single opportunity to do so. People are sick and tired of the tinkering. People are sick of the gas industry getting the gas they're selling for free and not paying their fair share. They're sick of rents going up and up while wages fall behind. They're sick of worrying about whether their kids will be able to afford to buy a house. These are the signs of an economic system that is broken.

People used to be able to get ahead. Wages kept up with the cost of living. Housing was affordable. Essential services were owned and run for the public, not for the profits of the one per cent. But, over the last decade, corporate profits have doubled. The wealth of Australian billionaires grew by over $29 million per day last year, and now the top one per cent hold more wealth than the bottom 50 per cent. If you're a teacher, a plumber or a nurse or you work in hospitality, you're paying a higher rate of tax on your wage than the big corporations and the ultrawealthy are paying on their extreme wealth. No wonder people are fed up.

The Greens are not going to give up fighting for the third of this country who rent, we're not going to stop fighting for first homebuyers to be able to afford a home and we won't stop calling out the racist dog whistling that pretends that the problems are because of migrants whilst protecting the profits of billionaire donors, because we don't accept that tinkering around the edges is the best that we can hope for, and neither should you.

Andrew McLachlan (SA, Liberal Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Reform No. 1) Bill 2026 and the Income Tax Rates Amendment (Tax Reform No. 1) Bill 2026. This legislation does not find favour with the Liberal Party—it may come as a surprise to you, Acting Deputy President!—for a variety of reasons. I appreciate the calls from the other side of the aisle to hear my wisdom on these bills.

My concern with the approach of the government is that it does not sufficiently appreciate reward for risk, and that ultimately drives any economy. We need to give those who take risk in our economy—those who risk everything, including their financial future---an appropriate reward. So the debate over this legislation is largely a rejection by the Liberal Party of a philosophy of redistribution. Rather, we take the view that we should reward aspiration appropriately to increase our productivity and, as a consequence, grow the pie and make all wealthy and share that wealth equally.

This was put more articulately than I am putting it today by Mr Geoff Wilson in a submission to the Senate Economics Legislation Committee:

If we make productive investment less attractive, we should not be surprised if we get less of it. The economic consequences of these changes are straightforward. When you tax the returns on risk-bearing capital more heavily, fewer people take risk. Fewer risks taken means fewer companies built, fewer jobs created and a smaller productive economy.

Capital is mobile. If Australia becomes a less attractive place to invest, capital will flow elsewhere. Australia needs more entrepreneurship and more innovation, not less.

I appreciate that the government has indicated that it's carving out for innovation, but for all Australians, no matter what their endeavours, if they take risk, our tax system should say, 'Yes, you can be well and truly rewarded.' I think that if this legislation passes then it will have an impact on our productivity. From my perspective, I want Australia to be one of the most innovative countries in the world and meet every Australian's aspirations. Those are the risk takers we should reward. We should not only reward them but celebrate them, and I'm not sure that this legislation, when it passes the Senate and the other place on its return there, will do so. I note the comments of my fellow senator Senator David Pocock in relation to the definition of 'innovation'. I don't necessarily wish to repeat that, but I think creating boundaries or definitions around innovation and what is in or out just makes the tax acts as a collective far more complicated.

I also draw on the comments of Senator Canavan about the complexity of this legislation. This growing complexity really is a retreat, and it has been a long retreat, under many governments, from the principle that our legislation should be read by the average person or the average Australian industry. We've abandoned that principle and, again, we lay on more and more complexity. If you're a small business, you need a coterie of advisers before even working on the idea that you've had to create wealth for you, your family and your community. We should reflect on that in this place that if you cannot simply understand the bill which is before you—I have an unfair advantage in some ways, having come from financial services and a long career in the law, and even I find it extremely complicated—do we really want Australians spending more and more money on advisers rather than investing in their own businesses?

I also note the comments of Andrew Irvine, the National Australia Bank's CEO, who makes a very good point about rejecting or pushing back on the distinction between taxing on wealth and on labour, and points out that we should be focusing on the distinction between taxing passive assets and risk assets. Passive assets do not necessarily produce the same return. We don't want all our collective wealth going into passive assets; we want them going into risk assets, particularly if we are going to address the challenge of climate change. I want our country to produce the solutions for the world for the future, not to adopt the technologies from other countries. I don't commend the bill to the chamber.

Wendy Askew (Tasmania, Liberal Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak on the Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Reform No. 1) Bill 2026 and the associated Income Tax Rates Amendment (Tax Reform No. 1) Bill 2026. I want to start with a very simple point, one that Tasmanians understand instinctively: no-one voted for these taxes. Before the last election, the Prime Minister promised more than 50 times that he would not introduce new taxes of this kind, but what we have seen since budget night is a complete breach of trust; a government that said one thing to the Australian people and then did the exact opposite when it mattered most.

Tasmanians are practical people. We know budgets require choices, but we also know that when a promise is made it should be kept, and when it's broken there should be accountability. Instead, what we have is a set of policies designed not to grow the economy but to manage its decline. Labor can't manage money, so they've come after yours. Across this package we see a pattern: a tax on savings, a tax on investment, a tax on renters, a tax on small business and, yes, even a tax on what families hope to pass on to their children. It is a broad based assault on aspiration. For young Australians, whether they're in Hobart, Launceston, Devonport or Burnie, this budget sends a very clear message that the ladder of opportunity is being pulled up before they even have a chance to climb it. This government calls it intergenerational fairness, but let's be honest: there is nothing fair about making it harder for young people to buy a home, harder to save and harder to build something of their own. That is not fairness. That is intergenerational failure.

When we look at this bill specifically, we see four schedules. Schedule 1 changes the capital gains tax regime. Schedule 2 alters negative gearing. Schedules 3 and 4 introduce a working Australians tax offset and a standard deduction, which we support. But the coalition opposes schedules 1 and 2 because they strike at the heart of investment, confidence and housing supply. This doesn't exist in isolation. This is part of a broader arrangement, a deal between Labor and the Greens, a deal that is injecting even more uncertainty into an already fragile economic environment. Tasmanians watching this unfold would be forgiven for asking who is actually driving economic policy in this country, because what we see is a government that said before the election it would not bow to Greens' demands, particularly around superannuation and property, yet here we are with a government that Australians can no longer trust to stand by its word.

Let me turn to housing, because this is where the consequences become very real. In Tasmania, we already know what housing pressure looks like. We've seen tight rental markets, rising costs and families struggling to find a place to live. Now the government's own budget papers state that 35,000 fewer homes will be built because of these changes. That's not an opposition figure; that is their own number. The reason is simple. When you tax something, you get less of it. If you tax housing investment, you get less housing investment. Less investment means fewer homes. Fewer homes mean higher prices. At the same time, the government continues to increase demand, bringing in more people than we have homes for. It is basic supply and demand, and the government has both sides of the equation wrong.

For renters, the story is equally concerning. Before anyone buys their first home, they rent. That's the reality for young Tasmanians trying to get ahead. Yet the government's own analysis admits these changes will increase rents. Independent economists have warned of substantial increases in major cities, and, while the Tasmanian market is different, we are not immune. When supply tightens, pressure flows across the entire system. Renters are hit first, with higher rents, and then again later when they try to save for their first home. It is a double hit on the very people this government claims to support.

For first home buyers, the picture doesn't improve. Many young Australians today are doing everything right. They're working hard; they're saving; they're investing carefully, whether it's shares, ETFs or other assets, to build a deposit. The government has looked at that effort, that discipline and that ambition and said, 'We're going to tax it more.' That is not encouragement. That is not fairness. That is a disincentive to get ahead. At the same time, the government talks about helping first home buyers by increasing borrowing capacity. But more debt is not the same as more affordability. Higher borrowing simply pushes prices up and leaves young Australians with larger mortgages and repayments they carry for decades. That is not a solution. It is a band-aid that makes the underlying problem worse.

Let me turn to small business. In Tasmania, small business isn't just part of the economy; it is the backbone of our communities. These are the people who open the shop early and close it late, who sponsor the local footy club and who give young people their first jobs. And what does this government say to them? It says, 'After you've taken the risk, built the business, created something of value, we're going to want half.' The effective doubling of tax on sales for many small businesses sends a very dangerous signal—that the reward for success will be heavily diminished. This comes at a time when small businesses are already under pressure, with rising costs, workforce challenges and regulatory burdens. They don't have the resources of big corporations, no armies of lawyers or accountants, yet they bear the same weight of compliance, and, instead of relief, this budget adds to that burden.

For startups and innovators, the outlook is equally troubling. Australia and Tasmania need people willing to take risks, to build new industries and to embrace emerging sectors, including in technology and advanced manufacturing. But these tax settings risk driving that ambition elsewhere. Employee share schemes, which allow startups to attract talent, are being undermined. The signal to founders is clear: take your ideas, your energy and your investment and consider doing it somewhere else. A country that punishes risk will eventually run short of people willing to take it.

Then there is what has been described as a death tax. Tasmanians believe deeply in the idea that, if you work hard, save carefully and build something over a lifetime, you should be able to pass that on to your children and grandchildren. That is not about wealth. It is about legacy. It is about family. It is about giving the next generation a better start. When the government inserts itself into that process and claims a share, it crosses a line for many Australians. When that measure appears buried in the detail rather than clearly explained and openly debated, it raises serious questions about transparency and trust. The coalition takes a very different approach. We believe in an economy that backs people who work hard, take risks and try to get ahead. We will oppose these measures in schedules 1 and 2. If they are passed, we have been clear that they will be repealed by a coalition government, because when you tax investment, you get less investment; when you tax housing, you get fewer homes; and when you tax effort and ambition, you discourage both.

Our plan is straightforward—lower taxes, lower inflation and policies that support not punish the self-starters of this country. We will introduce a tax-back guarantee so Australians are not pushed into higher tax brackets simply because inflation has increased their nominal income. That means fairness, transparency and relief, particularly for working Australians doing it tough. We will restore balance to housing and migration, ensuring that population growth aligns with our capacity to build homes. We will invest in the infrastructure needed to unlock new supply, because the only sustainable way to bring housing costs down is to build more homes. For small business, we will make the instant asset write-off permanent, because when small business invests it grows, and when it grows so does the Australian economy. We will ensure that the tax system rewards effort, encourages innovation and supports those willing to back themselves.

Finally, we will ensure that Australians retain the right to pass on what they have built, without the government taking a share at the end. This debate comes down to a very simple question: what kind of economy and what kind of country do we want to be? Is it one where aspiration is encouraged or one where it is taxed, one where young people are supported to get ahead or one where they face barrier after barrier, one where small business is celebrated or one where it is treated as a revenue source? For Tasmanians and for Australians more broadly, the answer is clear. We want an economy where effort is rewarded, where opportunity is real and where the next generation can look to the future with confidence. This legislation in its current form does not deliver that, and that is why the coalition opposes the harmful elements within it and will continue to stand up for Australians who simply want a fair chance to get ahead.

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) | Link to this | Hansard source

I too rise to speak against Labor's toxic tax agenda and the dangerous deal that they have done with the Greens at the expense of the Australian people. Sadly, Australians were told one thing by the Prime Minister before the election, but, worse than that, they weren't told it only once but time and time again. In fact, over 50 times prior to the last election, the Australian people were looked in the eye by the Prime Minister when he was asked a very direct question, 'Will there be any changes to capital gains tax, if we give you our vote?' He said to them: 'Hand on heart, my word is my bond. No, there will not be.' He was asked the other question, 'If I give you my vote, will there be any changes to negative gearing?' Again, hand on heart, he looked them in the eye and he said, 'My word is my bond. No, there will not be.'

There's a word, sadly, we're not able to say in this place. It begins with an L and it ends in an R. Fill in the two vowels yourself. That is what the Prime Minister is. He has been proven to be time and time again a person who will look the Australian people in the eye and say, quite frankly, whatever he likes and whatever it takes to actually get into power. Then, as he has now said, he will just change his position. Well, shame on you, Prime Minister. Every day between now and the next election, the coalition are going to call out the fact that you told the Australian people one thing 50 times prior to the election, then, as soon as you could, you did a dirty deal with the Australian Greens and, as you've said, you just 'changed your position'.

Australians know they have been misled by this prime minister. This is a government that has now abandoned any form of pretence. This is a government who are now quite happy to say the Australian people: 'Yes, we told you one thing before the election. We said there'd be no changes to capital gains tax. We said there'd be no changes to negative gearing. Guess what? We never, ever meant it. But we sucked you in at the time. You believed us.' Sadly, now, across the board, Australians will pay the price.

What is going to be rushed through the Senate tomorrow under a guillotine, with little to no time for debate? They're not reforms. They're not productivity measures. They're certainly not economic-growth measures. They are taxes, and they are tax increases, designed to fund a government that, sadly, cannot manage its own money. The simple truth—and it has been said time and time again—is this: Labor cannot manage its own finances. The sad reality is that, when it runs out of money, it comes after yours.

Of course, this comes on top of the fact that Australians are already struggling. Families are struggling to pay mortgages. Renters are struggling to find homes, and those who can get into a home are now paying increasingly high rents. You now just need to go for a walk in the morning in local suburbs, and you will see men and women—working, with a dual income, doing the right thing—living in cars with their children. They are casualties of a Labor government that has given up any pretence of actually caring.

Small businesses—you walk down a street in your local community, and what do you see? You see empty window after empty window after empty window—'For lease', 'For lease', 'For lease'. When you inquire, 'What happened to the small business that used to be in there?' they look you in the eye, and they say: 'Cost of living—Labor's cost of living. They couldn't afford their energy bills so they had to close their doors.' And people had stopped going into the small business because they didn't have the money to actually make a purchase, so what happens to the small business? It closes its doors.

At the heart of the Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Reform No. 1) Bill 2026 and the Income Tax Rates Amendment (Tax Reform No. 1) Bill 2026—and I think this is what has upset so many people—are young Australians who are doing the right thing by the government. They were actually saving for home deposits. They were buying shares. They were doing electronic fund transfers. They were putting that little bit away so that, one day, they could have what so many on the Labor side of politics have had and what so many Australians have had—the ability to buy a home, to negative gear it and to maybe one day sell that home so they could have a little bit of money to help fund their retirement. What has Mr Albanese said? He's said, 'Guess what? That's too good for you.' The way so many Australians funded their retirement—as I said, they were doing the right thing by the government. Sadly, that aspiration, that ladder, has now been pulled out from under them.

What's Labor's answer to all of that? More taxes—just like a good socialist government always does. Their answer is more taxes on the people who save, more taxes on the people who invest, more taxes on the people who employ Australians—the good old small businesses out there—and more taxes on the people who take risks. This is a country that was once built on the fact that it didn't matter who you were, where you came from or what your status was in life. If you embraced an opportunity and took a risk, you could be successful in life. Labor's answer to that now is: 'Well, we're going to take a bit of that. Thanks for taking the risk. Because we are no longer able to manage the economy, we're actually going to take a bit of what you've made.' These are more taxes on the very people that we want to see get ahead, such as the tradies, the nurses, the teachers—you name it.

The average Australian just wanted to be aspirational. Labor and the Australian Greens are putting a stake through the heart of aspiration. At a time when Australia should be encouraging investment, Labor has chosen a deliberate path and is punishing it. At a time when Australia should be encouraging aspiration, Labor is attacking it. At a time when Australia should be encouraging people to build wealth and create jobs, Labor is making it harder. That is why these bills are so dangerous. They don't simply affect today's investors; they affect tomorrow's investors.

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

Senator Cash, you will be in continuation. I shall now proceed to senators' statements.