Andrew Bragg (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Housing and Homelessness) | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Wong. Will the government expand its ban on super funds buying houses to APRA regulated institutional and union backed super funds?

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

The terms of the agreement with the Australian Greens to pass a tax package—

Opposition Senators:

Opposition senators interjecting—

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

I would make the point that the Australian Greens are prepared to vote for a tax cut for working people, but the coalition is not. We have made it clear that we would have agreed to support an amendment to ban future borrowing arrangements by self-managed superannuation funds for residential property. I would—

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

What are the terms of the agreement?

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

The Prime Minister has been upfront about that. If you want to vote for a tax cut, let us know. One day the coalition might actually vote for a tax cut. Do you know we've had five tax cuts that the Labor government's introduced that you have voted against?

Sue Lines (President) | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Bragg?

Andrew Bragg (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Housing and Homelessness) | Link to this | Hansard source

I have a point of order on relevance. The question was very clear about whether the proposed ban would apply to APRA regulated institutional and union backed super funds.

Sue Lines (President) | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Bragg, you are absolutely right, but you could assist me by asking your colleagues not to intervene, because there was an interjection, and, as you know, a minister is entitled to address the interjection.

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

I made it clear in my opening response, Senator Bragg, that these arrangements would apply to self-managed super funds in relation to residential property, and I would say less than 10 per cent of self-managed super funds have one of these arrangements. These will all be unaffected.

Sue Lines (President) | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Bragg, first supplementary?

Andrew Bragg (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Housing and Homelessness) | Link to this | Hansard source

Why is the government singling out families and individuals again for punitive tax treatment but leaving major institutions with a tax leg-up?

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

You might, as someone who is interested in tax policy, be aware of a gentleman called David Murray, who did an inquiry in 2014. That inquiry also raised concerns about the risk from these arrangements to retirement savings, as did the Council of Financial Regulators in 2019 and 2022. So I would make the point to you that, if the Council of Financial Regulators and Mr Murray's report in 2014 have raised concerns about this, I'm surprised that you don't apprise yourself of the concerns that were raised when considering your position.

Sue Lines (President) | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Bragg, second supplementary?

Andrew Bragg (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Housing and Homelessness) | Link to this | Hansard source

I think it would aid the Senate if we could not only have the terms of the agreement tabled but also ask this supplementary question: how does the government now defend its position that super funds and foreign investment funds should have significant tax benefits that are no longer available to individual Australians?

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

The Prime Minister has been upfront with the Australian people. He held a press conference. I'd invite you to read the transcript of that press conference, but if we want to talk about arrangements perhaps we could ask Senator Hanson and Senator Cash to talk about the partnership between the coalition and One Nation that Senator Hanson speaks about and that members of your party speak about. You want to be upfront about—

Sue Lines (President) | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Bragg?

Andrew Bragg (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Housing and Homelessness) | Link to this | Hansard source

The point of order is on relevance—whether the government can defend its position that institutions should have a preference over individuals.

Sue Lines (President) | Link to this | Hansard source

The minister was being relevant to your question, but I also advise the chamber that there—

Andrew Bragg (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Housing and Homelessness) | Link to this | Hansard source

No, she wasn't. She was talking about One Nation.

Sue Lines (President) | Link to this | Hansard source

I would think, Senator Bragg, that, when you stand up and ask me for a point of order, you would at least have the courtesy and the respect to not interject when I rule on it. I was going to advise the chamber that there were so many interjections that I could barely hear Senator Wong. She began by being relevant, and then I could not hear what she was saying because of the loudness, particularly from my left but not only from my left—also from my right. I will listen carefully, Senator Bragg, and, if the minister isn't being relevant, I'll remind her to be relevant. Senator Wong.

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

You see, Senator Bragg believes that the status quo on all fronts is working. We can see that because he, along with his coalition colleagues, has consistently voted no to all change. Senator Gallagher reminds me that you voted against changes to superannuation. You propose to vote against tax cuts. You don't want to listen to what Mr Murray said or what the Council of Financial Regulators said, because you just defend the status quo. That is what you think is the way forward. We don't. We think change is necessary, and we look forward to the passage of legislation tomorrow, which will be good for Australians. (Time expired)