The Albanese Labor government's 2026 budget implements comprehensive housing and tax reforms to address Australia's housing affordability crisis. The government has invested $47 billion in housing infrastructure, including $2 billion for enabling infrastructure to unlock 65,000 homes, and has helped over 240,000 Australians achieve home ownership through a 5% deposit scheme. Key tax reforms include changes to negative gearing and capital gains tax to level the playing field between first home buyers and property investors, while maintaining negative gearing for new builds to encourage construction. The government argues these reforms address intergenerational equity by making the tax system fairer for younger Australians who have been locked out of the housing market, with house prices increasing 400% since 1999 while incomes have not kept pace.
Question Time | 14th May 2026Hinzugefügt:
shall move to questions without notice.
Are there any questions? Give the call to the leader of the opposition.
>> My question is to the prime minister.
>> Labour lied to Australians about its plans for new taxes.
>> Will the prime minister rule out changing his mind about taxing the family home?
>> Order.
>> Order. Members on my left, we have asked the question. The prime minister has begun answering. There'll be no interjections.
Prime Minister has the call.
>> Thanks very much, Mr. Speaker. I thank the member for his question about tax policy.
The >> truth is that if the coalition had won the last election, the leader of the opposition had been the one delivering the budget on Tuesday night. We know that it would have contained a tax increase for every single Australian taxpayer.
>> All 14 million of them.
>> All 14 million of them.
order.
>> And what I can say, Mr. Speaker, >> order members on my left, >> is that is that uh we are the party that went to an election with lower taxes.
>> Lower taxes for all 14 million Australians. order.
>> On top of that, of course, they went to an election saying that they'd have higher taxes on the resources manufacturing sectors by getting rid of production tax credits. They said there'd be higher taxes on motorists by abolishing the EV concession. They said there'd be higher student debts for more than 3 million Australians because they opposed the 20% cut that we put in place. higher power bills because they said they'd abolish the home batteries program. They said there'd be more expensive training courses because they'd abolish free tape because they believed if it wasn't free, it wasn't worth having.
>> Prime Minister concluded his answer.
>> The leader of the opposition on the point of order.
>> Relevance, Mr. Speaker. It's not surprising he doesn't want to talk about his own policies and promises, but he should talk about those. The question did not mention alternative approaches.
>> Yeah, very question. the order if everyone can just cease interjecting I'll be able to and the leader of the opposition went further than the point of that's what I was dealing with the manager yesterday of simply raising the point of order and then adding things in that makes it the chair job very difficult point but out of respect by the leader he did that uh so that went further than the point of order the prime minister was asked a specific a question about his position on tax and he's giving information ours but I but I will make sure the prime minister is being directly relevant. He wasn't asked about alternative approaches but he can do some compare and contrast.
That can't be the majority of his answer. Mr. Speaker, I was asked about tax policy and I'm also asked about what we can rule out and I'm ruling out all of the things that this bloke went shadow treasurer went to election on.
But uh >> they also said of course they'd abolish when it comes to housing policy they said they'd abolish bill to rent they said they'd abolish help to buy and they said they'd abolish the housing Australia future fund. Now, in despite of all of this, despite all of this, what they managed to do, what they managed to do was to have a higher deficit in spite of all of that and add to government for social services.
>> The truth is they have no credibility on tax, on cost of living, on the budget or on the economy.
>> And tonight, order The manager on a point of order.
>> Yeah, speaker. The prime minister is now defying your ruling because you said he needed to compare and contrast. There is no compare or contrast.
>> Order. The member for Mchuan is warned.
Prime Minister's got 24 seconds remaining and it'll be directly relevant to the question.
>> Mr. Speaker, I wasn't actually asked about anything that's in our budget >> at all. Nothing at all. That's the point.
>> This is This is the Thursday after >> the Thursday after our budget.
>> The Thursday after our budget, >> the manager of opposition business, >> the member for KC has had a good go, so he's now warned. and they ask about something that isn't in our budget rather than anything that is. Rather than anything that is order comes to order, we'll hear from the member for Dunley.
>> Thank you, speaker. My question is to the prime minister. How does the Albany Labor government's budget give more Australians a fair crack at buying their first home and why are the are those measures important?
>> Call to the Prime Minister.
>> I thank the member for Dunley for her question. Indeed, there is some $2 billion in the budget to speed up approvals and to build connecting infrastructure like roads and sewage.
>> In addition to that, we have the half a billion dollars.
a half a billion dollars which is about speeding up approvals something that those opposite oppose. Now that takes the total investment in our homes for Australia plan to $47 billion.
Now, in the last four years when we came to office, those opposite of course having not had a housing minister for most of their time in office, we wanted to throw everything at supply because we know that's the key. So, we have free TA and $10,000 payments for construction apprenticeships.
We have 100,000 new homes being set aside for first home buyers. We have new social affordable homes through our housing Australia future fund that was blocked for a number of years by those opposite and their partners in the Senate. We have new incentives for states and territories to unlock land for development. And the truth is that we are making progress. we have now had more than 240,000 people have bought their first home with just a 5% deposit and thousands more are participating through help to buy. Yet there are still too many Australians who are missing out because the tax system is working against them and has been for a long period of time. Aspiring first home buyers being locked out of the market. That favor because it favors property investors. After years of inaction, those distortions have become entrenched. What we know is that since 1999, since these changes were made, house prices have increased by 400%.
More than two times as fast as average incomes. And what that means is that younger generations are being locked down. So after months, years throwing everything at this uh we have uh >> a situation where young people so many of them are close to giving up all together.
>> Now we can listen to those stories, take it all in and say well I wish I could help you but I'm only the prime minister.
>> But we're not going to do that.
>> Or you can take action. You can take responsibility which is what we're doing.
>> Making real change that makes a real difference. Even if that does carry a political risk, that is the choice we made in our budget. The right choice, the right decision made for the right reasons in the interests of this gener younger generation and the generations to come.
>> Call to the honorable member for Goldstein.
>> Thank you, speaker.
My question is to the prime minister.
Labour lied to Austral to Australians about plans. No, I'm going to deal with this issue. I'm not comfortable with that term. And I refer to a speaker's ruling on the 18th of February, 2002 with the reference of parties lying. So, I'm just going to ask I raised this yesterday, but if we're going to have this term being used, Speaker Cley, Deputy Speaker Cley informed the member he cannot refer to either political parties or individuals as being liars. So, just want to be careful with that language.
the manager.
>> Yeah.
>> Practice uh a practice yesterday. Uh this is what you said yesterday. Speaker order. I just want to deal with the word lie. We just want to make sure that is not directed to a person. Former speakers have directed it to parties and governments. I'm just going to be careful with the word today to make sure it's not directed to an individual.
Now, >> yeah, >> that wasn't directed to an individual.
>> That was directed to a collector.
>> Now, I've done further research because the you raised it with me.
>> Speaker, >> just just so no, resume your seat.
Resume your seat.
>> Resume your seat. I know point you made.
Order. Members on my left. I'm just That word is being yelled out continuously during the debates and I haven't called up yet.
Or >> order the me for Barker. I'm just saying I don't want that term used and following on from the research that I've done regarding referring to political parties, I'm just going to ask for that to be tempered. So if there's another way that you can refrain rephrase your question to assist the house, it is not it is not helpful for that term to be to be used. So order.
I'm sure the member for Goldstein is understanding what I'm saying, but I'm just not happy with that term being used at all in the chamber and members on my left have been non-stop yelling that term out. Not everyone, but they have been during the debate and I'm not happy with it. And it is about context and it is about the circumstance. So, I'm just asking the House for everyone not to use that term.
>> Yeah. This is a really important speaker. Can I ask you >> the manager >> um to have a look at practice on this because No, no. Can Excuse me. Can I make my point?
>> Yeah, he's entitled without being he's entitled to >> he's entitled to make the point. He is.
>> So just like to make two points on this please speaker. The first of all is you have referred to Deputy Speaker Cley. Y >> um if you look at speakers have allowed this collective approach and I think it's really important that this parliament we don't get pressure from certain people which then causes changes right I think this is really important the second thing is the second thing is that it's actually true it's actually true >> resume your seat >> yeah order. We'll hand we'll handle this.
We'll deal with it. I want the member for Goldstein to ask his question. The leader of the house.
>> Yeah, Mr. Speaker, just to the point of order that's been raised, there's two different ways words can be ruled out.
They can be ruled out on the basis that they're personal reflections, and I think that was the ruling you gave on Tuesday as to whether or not that turn of phrase would be a personal reflection, which it would not be.
There's a second concept of unparliamentary terms which the cause of rule says that this is >> yeah reflecting on members you know and the practice does give the discretionary on page 178 the discretionary powers regarding question time. So I'm exercising those powers.
I'm just going to ask the house not to use that term. I think that's in the best interest for both sides not to be referring to any individuals people parties regarding that term. I think it's a dangerous precedent to go down and I think it's a dangerous area to go.
Now, we're not having any more. Member for Goldstein is going to ask his question and just not use that word and that will assist the house with dealing.
>> Yes, the member for Goldstein will begin his question.
>> Thank you, speaker. Speaker, my question is to the prime minister. Labor misled, deceived, untruthed as to Australians about plans to tax them more. Will the prime minister rule out changing his mind about introducing a death tax?
>> Order. Members on my right. Member for Aston. The member for Aston will leave the chamber under 94A.
highly disorderly to interject in that manner.
>> Prime Minister has the call.
>> Thanks, Mr. Speaker. Um, it is rather extraordinary that just 48 hours after the budget was handed down, uh, you have a coalition, an opposition on the day of the budget reply. The previous opposition leader didn't get to give a budget reply. She did, >> but uh the member for Hume will.
>> The member for Gibsland is now warned.
>> Problem turned out you're the problem.
>> Order.
>> Honestly, can members just reset and show some respect?
>> Prime Minister.
>> Thanks, Mr. Speaker, we on this side of the house have confirmed this week that we are the party of home ownership.
>> What we want is more Australians to have the opportunity >> to have their own roof over their own first home.
>> That is what we want. But what we've had in here is two questions. The first about the family home, which we want more family homes. That's right.
>> We want more family homes.
>> They want to lock young people out of home ownership.
>> And Mr. Speaker, they have said it themselves today. It's time to be honest. As what this bloke said, what he said, the tax system is screwing over young Australians.
Instead, it favors welloff established interests against those trying to get ahead.
>> People who can predominantly live off income from their assets can pay very little tax and get discounts on capital gains from increases in asset values.
That's what the shadow treasurer had to say, which would have been, I assume, with the full knowledge of the leader of the opposition when he chose to appoint him as shadow treasurer >> and that they come in here having run an election campaign on a platform of higher taxes.
>> When we change stage three, they said we should have an election on it. When we introduced on my left >> taxes, tax cuts in our budget last year, they said they would oppose it and repeal it.
>> And now they say they oppose these changes as well to assist young people into home ownership. And they pretend that they care about the family home. I tell you who who will protect the family home for more families including the families not just of today but of tomorrow. It's the Australian Labor Party >> which is why which is why our caucus is growing and theirs is shrinking.
>> Concluded.
>> When the house comes to order, we'll hear from the honorable member for Chisum.
Thank you so much, speaker. My question is to the treasurer. How does the Albany Labor government's budget help people now and strengthen our economy for the future? How does that compare to other approaches?
>> I give the call to the treasurer.
>> Big thank you, Mr. Speaker, to the member for Chisum for the question, but also for the very substantial contribution that she makes to our team and to the budget that we handed down on Tuesday night as well. And in the absence of any questions from the opposition about what was actually in the budget on Tuesday night, I'm especially grateful to the member for Chisum because this was a responsible budget which is all about resilience and reform. It delivers immediate help to get people through this global oil shock and some urgent reform to build an economy that works for more people. Mr. Speaker, and in the budget, we're doing five main things. Responding to the global oil shock, more than having the fuel excise, reducing the heavy vehicle road user charge, securing more fuel internationally through the new facility. We're taking pressure off Australians with permanent tax cuts, $1,000 instant deduction. We got the legislative tax cuts already, building more homes, higher wages, increasing the Medicare levy low income threshold.
We're making our economy more productive, getting compliance costs down by more than 10 billion dollars a year and lifting the investment of firms, particularly young firms, in R&D.
We got the tax reform for workers and businesses and future generations, which is all about making it easier for more Australians and particularly younger Australians to find a tow hold in the housing market and in the economy more broadly. And also, Mr. Speaker, we've got sensible and responsible and substantial savings in the budget. $64 billion worth of savings. A budget which is $44.9 billion stronger than in the midyear update. Mr. Speaker, paying down the debt that we inherited from those opposite, Mr. Speaker, now if you look right across our budget, the budget that we handed down on Tuesday night, it's a very substantial plan. It's about getting through a difficult period in the global economy at the same time as we reform our economy for the future.
And we've seen enough, Mr. Speaker, to know about the sorts of things that the leader of the opposition will talk about tonight. And so we already know this, Mr. Speaker. Ours is a plan to strengthen the economy. His is a poave off one nation. Mr. Speaker, that is the difference between the substantial budget that we handed Dan on Tuesday night through in a considered and methodical way and the latest effort from those opposite this unsemly brawl amongst the three- ring circus of the right-wing parties in this country. We have delivered a serious substantial plan to strengthen the economy. His will be a ploy to stave off One Nation. Now, Mr. Speaker, I saw that the shadow finance minister was out this morning.
Mr. Speaker, and this is what the shadow finance minister said about the budget in reply tonight. She said, and I'm quoting, "I'm sure you will find out that everything is costed and offset in the usual way, Mr. Speaker." So that's the commitment. That's the commitment that the shadow finance minister has made this morning. Let's see if the leader of the opposition follows through.
>> Give the call to before I call the honorable member for McKela. I'm pleased to welcome in the gallery today, Mayor Theresa Lions from the city of Gosnell's who is the guest of the member for Bullwinkle and Mayor Lions is also the chair of the National Growth Areas Alliance. Welcome to question time. Give the call to the honorable member for Mckella.
>> Thank you speaker. My question is to the prime minister. Prime Minister, you've spoken about how the petroleum resource rent tax is designed to ramp up over time, but it seems like the government revenue the gas industry promises is always around the corner. Since 2000, prices of goods and services have doubled. Australia's nominal GDP has quadrupled. Gas industry revenue is over five times higher. And yet, the PRT raises less money than in 2000. Prime Minister, why won't the government accept that this ramp up is never coming and simply tax our gas exports?
>> Call to the Prime Minister.
>> I thank the member for McKela for her question.
Can I say the first point most important one is that the government at the moment is focused very much on getting fuel here. That is the priority that happens when you have a conflict in the Middle East and where around the world there is a massive economic impact on inflation on access to resources and access to fuel. And indeed in many countries in our own region they're having uh compulsory public holidays once a week because in order just to get by. That is what is occurring in Sri Lanka in Philippines and other countries. When it comes to uh tax uh the gas companies are taxed through a range of ways through company tax through uh the royalties that they pay as well as through the PRT. Indeed, in the budget on Tuesday night, contrary to the suggestion in the member's question, PRT revenue was resigned revised up by $1.6 billion in this budget. And that's because the very design of the PRT which we reformed in our first term is designed to ramp up over time because when you have tens of billions of dollars of investment made in order to secure uh resources that are available uh to uh Australians as well as for export uh then over a period of time that makes sense otherwise you won't get the investment. What we also have done of course is announce the details of our gas reservation plan of 20% of exports uh in the east coast that follows on from the Western Australian domestic reservation plan as well. But I make this point about WA domestic reservation. There wouldn't be any gas to reserve were it not for that foreign investment that's occurred. It's as simple as that. That is just a fact. And so populism can occur if the far right or the far left. What our government's job is to do is to make sure that appropriate policies are put in place in this crisis. We are absolutely absolutely focused on getting more fuel here. We're engaging with our partners in the region and we honor of course our existing uh export contracts uh because that is the way that you engage in international trade. uh if you don't do that uh then it comes back certainly to bite you and one of the things that has been uh very positive is that we have benefited from the relationship that we have built in the region whether it be Singapore, Malaysia, Brunai, South Korea, Japan. We have benefited from the consistency in which we operate uh and uh that I think is absolutely important.
We will introduce the domestic gas reservation scheme so more Australians gas stays in Australian homes and businesses. And I note as well that gas prices are down not up at the moment time has concluded.
The call to the honorable member for Mensis.
>> Thank you speaker. My question is to the minister for housing. How is the Albany Labor government helping first home buyers get into a home of their own? Why is this so important and is the minister aware of any alternate approaches?
>> To the minister for housing, the minister for homelessness and the minister for cities.
>> Thanks speaker. I thank the member for menses for his question and I want to acknowledge the massive leadership he is showing our whole parliament on housing.
He's doing a great job in leading our thinking.
Speaker, Australians see a housing system that is stacked against them.
Labor wants them to get ahead and we especially want to see Australians get the chance to own their own home.
Speaker, that's why we've built the most ambitious housing agenda that the Commonwealth has had in 70 years and it's why we built on that agenda on Tuesday night in our housing budget.
Speaker, this budget for housing is about two important things. It's about leveling the playing field for first home buyers and it's about building more homes for our country. Speaker, I was in Tasmania recently with Minister Julie Collins and I got the chance to meet with a young woman named Jessica. Now, Jessica has a really familiar story. She was in renting and she was being pushed out of her home and she was desparing just wondering if she was ever going to get a chance to buy one of her own. She found out about Labour's 5% deposit scheme and speaker, she finally got her chance. She told me when she she walked into her own home for the first time, she almost cried. Now, Speaker, Jessica is one of 240,000 Australians that our government has helped into a home of their own, and we want more Australians like Jessica to have this opportunity. Speaker, the 5% deposit is all about getting you to auction sooner. The budget on Tuesday night is making sure that once you get there, you're fighting on a level playing field.
Speaker, our reforms will help redirect investment towards new housing supply and they'll support another 75,000 renting households into their first home. Now, Speaker, I'm asked about alternatives and it really strikes me, speaker, in the last couple of the days of this debate that the only people in this country who think the status quo is working for Australians are those opposite. every single other person in this country can see that we have got a housing system that is busted for the Australian people and our government is standing up and doing something about it. Now speaker, those opposite have previously talked about their love for aspiration. But speaker, they also say that they are going to tear down these new supports for Australia's first home buyers. Speaker, they say they're going to dismantle the 5% deposit program and they're going to unwind the reforms that we announced on Tuesday night. And speaker, I say very clearly to those opposite. If you oppose helping first home buyers, don't pretend to stand for aspiration. You're standing in the path of it.
>> Speaker, Labor are the party of tax cuts. We are the party of home ownership. And we are the party that is delivering on the aspiration of the Australian people and the 93 poor people behind me. We are damn proud to be doing it.
The Minister for Resources and just about every other member.
Far too much noise from everybody during that conclusion.
>> I'd like to hear from the honorable member for Cook.
My question is to the prime minister. To get ahead, the prime minister bought a property in his 20s. He claimed the CGT discount. He negatively geared his way to a $4.3 million property in Copa Cabana. Now, today, the Australian reports 20 out of 23 of the Labor cabinet, owns more than two properties they can continue to negatively gear.
Why are younger Australians being denied these very same opportunities? The prime minister and his cabinet colleagues continue to benefit from order.
Order. Members on my left.
Order. The Minister for Employment will cease to rejecting. So will the member from Mali.
It's a pretty broad question to be asking then that responsibility, but >> follows on from yesterday. The prime minister has the call.
>> Mr. Speaker, now I wonder why the member for Cork rather than my my opposite asked that question.
>> I wonder why.
I wonder why, Mr. Speaker.
Why why a question about properties or wealth or inheritance or trusts >> wasn't asked by this bloke.
But they get the new kid, >> the member for Cook to ask the question to ask the question.
>> Mr. Speaker, I wonder why that's the case because yesterday when a similar question was asked and I said to the leader of the opposition that you know we have had discussions, >> we have had discussions as well about people's family and being raised in this place. I had that discussion as I've had with other leaders and and and he said he said oh well it wasn't me he said he wanted to ask the question the member for forest on a point of order >> order members on my left the member for BA Order.
Order. I can't. Member for Forest is on his feet. The member for the manager is taking a point of order. Order. Members on my right and left will cease interjecting.
Order.
>> You're pulling up. You're pulling up the ladder. M. You're pulling up.
>> Order.
I'd like to hear from the manager.
>> Members on my right.
>> When the House settles, we'll hear from the manager.
>> I'd like the prime minister to come to the dispatch box and withdraw what he said about the member just before.
Well, >> if the part order if the order >> if the prime minister No, we will deal with this. The We'll just deal with this. The manager is going to We're just going to wait till the House comes to order. The member for Barker will have to leave the chamber after that out outburst. Just order. No.
We will deal with this matter. The manager's rage point. If the prime minister has uh said an unbalanced term, I'll ask him to assist the house withdrawal. I thank the prime minister.
>> Now, this is really important.
>> No.
Resume resume. Resume your seat. Your question was to the member. You didn't specify who it was. Order. I didn't.
Yes. Okay. Okay. Well, I didn't hear what the prime minister because of the noise.
Can I ask everyone I don't know who everyone's pointing to, but okay. Listen.
We are going to settle this house.
Everybody is going to lift their standards. The prime minister was asked to withdraw. He has done just as I have done to members on my left and my right.
I didn't hear the remark. I don't want the remark repeated, but I remind all members to keep their language order to make sure that we follow the standing orders.
The prime minister in continuation.
>> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Uh the premise of the question was completely wrong as well >> because what I did was buy a house >> and lived in it >> in Maricville >> and lived in it.
>> Yeah.
>> And what I've done now >> uh because I have publicly declared um got married last November. Jod and I I note that she is removed from the equation. Jody and I have chosen to buy a home for ourselves for down the track.
>> That is what has happened.
>> All declared.
>> Order.
>> All declared.
>> Order.
>> All All declared.
>> Order. Members on my left.
>> And And for those opposite, for those opposite, >> order. The member for Gibsland's now warned if he interjects one more time, he won't be here. And what we are doing, Mr. Speaker, at the house I bought first in Beum Street, Marrickville, uh the same house that I ended up that my former wife and I raised our son in in Beam Street, Marville. Uh I bought that house and we lived in it and then we sold it. It was our family home. The family home is sacrosanked to me and to everyone else and to everyone else.
>> And that's why we want more people >> to own a family home.
>> Exactly.
>> That is what that is what we want people to do people to do. And it is absolutely extraordinary and shows their failure to actually have any legitimate criticism of our policy that they chose to go down this road.
>> The Minister for Infrastructure and the House comes to order. We hear from the honorable member for Coral.
>> Thank you, Speaker. My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. How does this week's budget strengthen Australia's fuel security and protect families from global energy shocks? What policies would leave Australians more exposed?
>> Call to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy.
>> Well, thanks very much, Mr. Speaker. I thank the honorable member for his question and for the work he does in representing the people of suburban Melbourne in this house and doing it so well, Mr. Speaker. And of course, this budget builds Australia's sovereignty when it comes to energy by building a sovereign fuel stock. held by the Australian government on behalf of the people, but also giving Australians support for the choices they want to make to diversify their choice of energy and to make sure they are secured and protected from energy shocks in the future, Mr. Speaker, because Australian households are doing that in great numbers. They know that if they change their choices, they can protect themselves against shocks in the future.
That's why so many Australians are buying electric vehicles. When we came to office, an Australian bought an electric vehicle once every 50 minutes.
Now it's once every 3 minutes, Mr. Speaker. And also, Australians are doing that in their homes when they're taking up batteries. And I'm very pleased that the budget delivered by the treasurer on Tuesday night continued and locked in that support for Australian households to make the choices they wanted. And I'm pleased to give the a the House a little update, Mr. speaker and tell the house that as of today 398,123 households have installed a cheap home battery. I confess I was hoping to hit 400,000 today but that'll be tomorrow.
Mr. Speaker, just a little forward sizzle. 400,000 houses tomorrow will have installed a battery. Now we know there's another thing which combi which brings all these policies in common. a sovereign domestic stockholding owned by the people, support for electric vehicles, support for cheaper home batteries, all opposed by those opposite, Mr. Speaker, and we'll hear some of that tonight. I hope the leader of the opposition has the courage to tell Australians what he'll do with the cheaper home battery policy, for example. He has said it should be paused. The shadow minister has said it should be frozen. And uh the member, the senator Hume has said it should be means tested. So, let's see what they actually do. The member for Mali uh said recently it should be rained in. And the member for Mali said there has been very low take up of the home battery scheme in Mali while wealthy households in lethal suburbs in Sydney and Melbourne enjoy lower power bills thanks to Albanese Labor government subsidies. Well, Mr. Speaker, in fact, Mali has seen take up of,466 home batteries which is six times Melbourne. Six times Melbourne, Mr. speaker because this is take up in the outer suburbs and regions of Australia with the member for Mali being in so command of mass. Mr. Speaker, I reckon she's a real hot candidate for shadow treasurer because that sort of mass is what this shadow treasurer brings to the table. But this lack of understanding of regional Australia is what all of those opposite share. They don't understand that people in regional Australia want to embrace these opportunities like the people of Mali with a cheaper home battery policy or this government will back the people of Mali and the people of Riverina and all the people who want to take cheap home batteries while those opposite betray regional Australia don't stand up for their rights to make the choices they want to make.
>> Call to gentle member for Mali.
>> Thank you speaker. My question is to the prime minister. The latest data shows around 40,000 nurses, 38,000 teachers, and almost 10,000 police officers have negatively geared properties.
>> Why is order members on my right?
>> Why is members on my right, I can't hear the question. The member No, the member will begin a question again. I can't hear the question. If people persist, they won't be here to hear hear the answer either. Remember Melly begin a question again.
>> My question is to the prime minister.
The latest data shows around 40,000 nurses, 38,000 teachers, and almost 10,000 police officers have negatively geared properties. Why is the prime minister now pulling up the ladder on our nurses, teachers, and police when he's been happy to climb it himself?
>> Call to the prime minister.
>> Member for Bendigo's warn prime minister.
>> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank the member for her question. The premises which of course is completely wrong.
embarrassing.
>> And there are two facts. The first fact is that every one of those police or teachers, >> fire brigade people, whoever they are, can keep their existing arrangements in place.
>> That's the first.
>> That's the first. The second is that they can go and buy more >> and negatively get it and choose either to have indexation or a 50% discount on capital gains as long as they're new homes. What is the difference between the two? People go out there and they invest in investment properties in order to increase their assets and their wealth during their lifetime. Good on them. That contributes to an increase in their wealth and their assets. But when they invest in a new home for >> rather than an existing home, they are also increasing the assets and the wealth of the country >> and that is why we are doing it.
>> So that they not only help themselves, they help the nation and they help the country.
Not by having investments in hidden behind trusts, >> not by having investments through the Cayman Islands, >> but by investing here in properties here. And we encourage that and we celebrate that just like we also celebrate those police officers and nurses being able to own their own home.
>> Because at the moment, if you are a young nurse, or a young police officer, you are going along to an auction before last Tuesday night and competing with an investor >> who has who has the bank of taxpayers assisting them in it. So, it's not an even system. And what we're about is recognizing that and doing something about it. As the shadow treasurer said repeatedly, we should >> the call to the chief government whip.
>> Thank you, speaker. My question is to the minister for health. Can the minister provide an update on what steps the Albanesei government is taking to protect Australians and support passengers affected by the hivirus outbreak?
call to the minister for health and aging, the minister for disability, the minister for the national disability insurance scheme.
>> Uh thank you speaker and thank you to the member for Lawler for the question and the opportunity to provide the house with an update on the Her virus that's connected with the cruise ship MV Hondius. Uh this uh this morning I received a further briefing from the center for disease control and the chief medical officer about any developments in relation to this outbreak. And this morning also the national coordination mechanism between our department, the CDC, NEMA uh and the department of foreign affairs met to finalize the repatriation arrangements for the uh six passengers being repatriated to Australia. That's four Australian citizens, uh, an Australian permanent resident and a New Zealand citizen. The latest World Health Organization advice is that there are 11 people who have contracted the hand virus, three of whom tragically have died. All 11 [clears throat] patients uh are either passengers or crew from the ship. There is no report of any uh virus being contracted by anyone who was not on that ship. The advice remains that human-touman transmission, although it has obviously occurred, is still very rare and requires very close contact with an infected person. But obviously uh our agencies, including the CDC, are monitoring that advice as it develops from this outbreak. I can advise that [clears throat] the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade has secured a flight and a crew to repatriate those six passengers and has also secured all of the necessary approvals and clearances for that flight. Uh that flight will be landing in the Netherlands in a little less than 90 minutes. Uh and we'll take off from the Netherlands about 90 minutes after that.
uh um and will be landing at Rathbase Pierce northeast of Perth sometime tomorrow. As I said, all the six passengers are being monitored very closely. They all remain symptom free.
They have all just been tested and that test proved negative for Hanta virus. Uh there will be very strict conditions for the entire flight for the landing and for the time they spent in quarantine.
Those conditions have been developed by the CDC and have been endorsed recently by the Health Protection Committee, which is the committee of all of the jurisdictions chief health officers chaired by our chief medical officer.
All of the passengers and all crew will be in full PPE for the entire duration of the flight uh including when they land at Pierce. Uh they will then be transported immediately to the center for national resilience, the quarantine center at Bullsbrook, which is effectively next door to the wrath base.
Uh staff from the National Critical Care and Trauma Response Center have already been deployed to that center ready to receive those passengers. They will be quarantined there for 3 weeks at least.
That is the strongest quarantine response in the world that I confined to this outbreak because we are determined to do everything to keep Australians safe and healthy.
>> Call to the member for line.
>> My question is to the prime minister.
The Labor government has fallen 77,000 homes behind their own housing target.
Labor has allowed 1.4 million new migrants to come to our country since they were elected. How many houses have been built for all the new migrants?
>> Good call to the prime minister.
>> I thank the member for her question.
Indeed, uh we do have a housing target of 1.2 million homes by the end of the decade, which is why we're absolutely throwing everything at it. Which is why what we have done is have public housing that those supported through the housing opposed through the housing Australia future fund. Which is why we have a shared equity scheme that those opposed uh that has helped thousands of people into homes. Which is why we also have the 5% deposits that has benefited some more than 200,000 people in homes as well. which is why we have our build to rent scheme which is an incentive for the private sector to build more homes for people particularly for uh affordable uh housing for essential workers that those oppose as well. All of all of these supply measures have been important and that is what we want to do. But in addition to that, of course, uh we also have uh built on our previous support for local infrastructure by putting an additional $2 billion into that fund to make sure that more homes can be built through that as well. In addition to that, one of the policies that we had with education was to ensure that if universities wanted additional places for foreign students, they would have to provide housing for them. that was opposed by those opposite. They oppose that legislation, Mr. Speaker, which goes to the very heart of the question that was asked.
>> This side of the house is the party of aspiration.
>> We want people to get be able to get into a new home. And that was that was emphasized by the existing system uh dampening down aspiration when the shadow treasurer said that the current system to quote him favors well off established interests against those trying to get ahead.
>> Well, Mr. Speaker, we want people to get ahead. We want people to be able to live with the security of their own roof over their head. And that's why as well we have changed our position on capital gains and negative gearing to ensure that not only not only can people invest in housing to get themselves ahead and to increase their assets and their future wealth. They also help to build supply >> because if you have a limited number of funds and you have to invest either either in new builds or existing homes competing against young people trying to get into a home that they actually want to live in, then you need to level the playing field. That's what we've done.
This will also increase supply which is the key order >> to dealing with housing issues but also having housing.
>> Order.
>> We'll hear from the honorable member for Wawa.
>> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Minister for Home Affairs. What were the key updates to migration in the Albany Labor government's budget? Are there any alternatives?
Call to the leader of the house and Minister for Home Affairs.
>> Thanks very much, Mr. Speaker, and I I thank the member for the question and for the extraordinary work she does representing people in southwest Sydney.
>> Tuesday night's budget confirmed that net overseas migration is now 45% lower than it was at its peak. And what's important to remember when it reached that peak, every single migration setting when it hit its peak were the migration settings left by the former government.
>> Every single one of those. The 45% reduction that has occurred has occurred under changes that have been made by this government.
>> Three key changes represented in the in the budget that that was brought down on Tuesday night. First of all, in our permanent intake, 70% of the permanent intake will now be taken by people who are already on shore. Dealing with the fact of the increased numbers of people who have been on one temporary visa after the another who employers want, but we have not been able to find the permanent place. We're now shifting the permanent program to more of those places being taken from people who are already onshore rather than offshore than ever before. Secondly, the to have a ballot system to start to put some limits around the working holiday maker visa, to put some limits around the backpacker visa, a visa which I might add those opposite ruled out making any changes to before the last election. But the third thing that we've done that's represented in the reduction of the numbers is to bring down the numbers on international students. Now, international education functions differently to any other industry in Australia. International education is the only industry where you have to be able to find a home for every single customer. And when we got to those peak levels under their settings of net overseas migration, half half of that peak was international students. Those opposite might have forgotten that we brought in legislation for government to be able to put limits on international students.
>> Those opposite might have forgotten that when we did that we said it was so that we could limit numbers of overseas students to take into account student housing. And what did they do when there was something to limit what was putting the upward pressure on net overseas migration? What did those opposite do for the one piece of legislation that said on the biggest part of net overseas migration, we're going to link it directly to housing? Those opposite voted no. Those opposite declared they were opposed to it.
if they're opposed to doing anything on backpackers opposed to do anything on students for family visas. It's already the case that for a parent visa which you can't apply for a junior 67 it's a 33y year wait the only thing left that they will attack will be the skills that we need >> concluded give a call to member for Mayo >> thank you Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister for Health. 3 million older Australians, including over 400,000 age pensioners with private health and insurance, feel betrayed by the government for ending the rebate that will see premiums soar by up to $1,600 for a couple. Many older Mayo residents have emailed me and said that they can't cut anything else from their budget.
They're left with the choice of cutting food or health insurance. Why is the government treating older Australians so badly? What happened to leaving no one left behind?
>> Call to the Minister for Health, the Minister for Aging, the Minister for the National Disability Insurance.
>> Thank you, speaker, and thank you to the member for the question. I'm happy to explain the the government's rationale for the decisions we put into the budget on Tuesday night and I announced a few weeks ago. I don't accept the figure uh that the uh the member has used [clears throat] in her question. I've seen the industry put out a figure like that. I I can't find any way in which that is going to be real. Uh we've been very clear in the modeling that we have prepared based on different health insurance products out there that the average impact of the change that we've announced would be somewhere between $230 and $250 per year. not the figures that are bandied about by the industry.
Nonetheless, uh we um we have taken this difficult decision in a challenging in a challenging budget environment for these reasons. Uh we don't think there is a strong policy rationale to pay different Australians different levels of support for their priv private health insurance membership when they are on the same income simply because of age.
If there are two households next to each other on the same income, one household working age, raising kids, taking out private health insurance, we don't see any rationale for paying them a lower level of support than a household next door that happens to be on the same income but of an older age. Now, this is a difficult decision. This was a difficult decision, but at a time where this government needs to lean heavily into rising demand for age care, and the member has raised that more than most in this house, we have to find every dollar we can to invest in those age care services. So, of the $3 billion the member has mentioned from these saves, saves that we think are well supported by policy, well supported by equity, every single dollar will be invested in the Minister for Age Care's package of more beds, more packages, and better care for older Australians.
>> Before I call the member for the member for Fischer, Casey Bowman, Gibson, and Bendigo are all on warnings.
Call to the honorable member for forward. Uh >> my question is to the deputy prime minister. How will the Albanese Labor government's record investment in the Australian Defense Force improve defense capability? How does this compare to other approaches?
>> Call to the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Defense.
>> Well, can I uh thank the member for his question? He is such a fantastic advocate for defense industry within his region. Ghostbat is the world's leading collaborative combat aircraft which has been developed by the air force and Boeing Australia and last year in testing at Wra a Ghostbat successfully fired an air-to-air missile hitting its target which gained global attention because it is literally years ahead of any comparable platform which is being developed by our friends and allies.
Ghost Shark which is being developed by the Navy and Andrew is the world's longest range large underwater capable autonomous platform and there are ghost sharks which are in the hands of the Navy right now. Now Ghostbat is a $ 1.4 billion program. Ghost Shark is a $1.7 billion program and together they are part of the 12 to 15 billion dollars which we have provided to autonomous systems and drones for the defense force in the budget on Tuesday night. Now a decade ago it was really clear that drones would become increasingly important. Yet when the Liberals were in government, the most significant step that they took in respect of autonomous platforms was to cut the $1.3 billion SkyGuardian program. So they took us backwards, not forwards, because when they are in government, they definitely did not have their hands on the defense wheel. But how could they have when they cycled six really seven different defense ministers through the portfolio in just 9 years and in the last four years they've cycled another three. When you churn defense ministers like the Liberals do, you cannot provide strategic direction. Now, we have been able to provide this increased spending to drones because since coming to office, the Albanesei government has significantly increased defense spending on four separate occasions, including on Tuesday night, such that there is now $117 billion extra in the defense budget over the next 10 years relative to what we inherited. When the Liberals were in government, they increased defense spending by just they just once.
>> The defense minister and deputy prime minister resume his seat. The manager on a point of order.
>> Stand in order 75. Tedious repetition.
order.
>> The manager is testing my patience. He's he's now warned.
>> Nothing to be funny about.
>> Deputy Prime Minister, >> Mr. Speaker, they're going to hear it a lot more because they effectively increased defense spending by just $10 billion. So in 9 years they did 10 and in just four years we've done 117.
That's the comparison which is why it is the Albanesei Labor government which is keeping Australians safe.
>> Before I call the member for Lindsay, the member for Herbert was warned during the question. He continued to interject.
I didn't want to interrupt the minister.
So he will now leave the chamber under 94A.
>> The order. The member for Lindsay has the call.
>> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the prime minister. Last year, the prime minister said changes to negative gearing quote would push up rents.
Budget papers confirm rents will rise as a result of the government's new housing tax. Why is Labor pushing up rents for all Australians when it promised not to?
>> Call to the Prime Minister.
>> I thank the member for a question and you need to look at the whole housing package that we put together.
>> Our budget >> helps with the cost of living.
>> It builds resilience and it backs aspiration.
We're going to help more Australians achieve the dream of owning their own home.
>> And we do that >> by, as the person next to the member for Lindsay knew when he wrote his book, that you do that by giving young people a crack and by fixing the system. We want people to be able to aspire to a better life for themselves and their families. Importantly, negative gearing will still be available for new builds so people can invest in themselves and invest in the nation. And that's the big difference of the change that we brought in on Tuesday. The change that we're brought in will allow negative gearing to still exist, but because people will invest if they are looking to invest in used negative gearing in new builds rather than old uh properties competing with first home buyers. What it will do is to also boost supply and that is the position that we have. Importantly, >> member for Bowman has now warned >> the package makes it very clear in the budget papers that there will be more houses, not less as a result as a result of the message of the things that are in the budget that are in the budget. And that's on top of the measures that we have spent four years implementing that are now rolling out in spite of those opposite doing everything they could to block the housing Australia future fund.
Everything they could to block build to rent. Everything they could to block help to buy. Everything they could to block all of the measures that we have put in place to help build supply. Now one of the things that we have done is not just housing but of course when it comes to helping people helping people which goes to the question we have the the reforms that are in the budget about Medicare about making sure that cheaper medicines are available that there's more bill building bulk billing record funding for hospitals our budget helps people under pressure right now we've five separate tranches now of tax reform tax relief cutting people's taxes because we want people to earn more and keep more of what they earn.
>> Those opposite those opposite have never ever in their history in their history put in a submission to the Fair Work Commission saying there should be an increase in real wages and they opposed they opposed our tax cuts.
I'll oppose our tax cuts yet again.
>> Call to the honorable member for more.
>> Thank you, speaker. My question is to the treasurer. How will the Albanese Labor government's budget help more Australians into homes and make our tax system fairer? How does this compare to other approaches?
>> To the treasurer.
>> Thanks, Mr. Speaker. The member for Moore is an absolute champion for the working people of the West, and that's what this budget is about. that it's a budget for workers and the tax reform package in the budget is all about leveling the playing field and better aligning the tax treatment of workers compared with people who receive their income from other legitimate sources.
It's about helping more Australians recognize the dream of home ownership by getting a hold in the property market.
That's what makes it a very aspirational tax reform package, Mr. Speaker, because we understand on this side of the house, there's nothing aspirational about stacking the deck against younger Australians. And that's what the tax system does already now in the way that it interacts with the housing market.
Mr. Speaker, we understand even if the leader of the opposition doesn't, who's been interjecting about ladders, not everybody's already born at the top of the income ladder. Mr. Speaker, not everybody inherits their opportunity in this country. We have to make sure that more people can who work hard can get ahead in our economy and in our society.
Mr. Speaker, there's not much point having a ladder if the first couple of rungs are missing, Mr. Speaker. And that's the situation that those opposite want to defend, Mr. Speaker, when they talk about the latter. Now, our changes to tax policy have been broadly supported by a lot of people who know what they're talking about. Mr. Speaker, Richard Holden. Mr. Speaker, I think the negative gearing changes are a step in the right direction to level the playing field between owner occupiers and investors. Westpack, Mr. Speaker, measures to boost housing supply and level the playing field are meaningful, particularly on tax settings. Uh, this does so in a way that still encourages new construction. Bob Roing from the A&U, Australia's most ambitious budget in decades deserves support. the Graten Institute. The budget act the budget does actually take major strides towards dealing with something that's been in the too hard basket. It's a budget we've been waiting for for some time, Mr. Speaker. But perhaps my favorite supporter of the steps that we've taken in the budget was the shadow treasurer, Mr. Speaker. Now, we've heard what he's had to say in his book and in the parliament. I've got another installment, Mr. Speaker. And this is what he said to the parliament. We need to, and I'm quoting, make sure that we don't create a system that entrenches privilege. invested interests and a system where people are able to learn earn more from income from and the growth of their assets than from their labor. This is one of the most fundamental principles of a truly liberal society. He said, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, he says when you actually entrench interest through law, particularly through a rigged tax system that favors the few at the expense of the many, what you do is you turn around to the next generations of Australians and say, "We will at your expense protect those who came before you." Mr. speaker. Now, he'd want to be careful, Mr. Speaker. He'd want to be careful if he keeps this up. He might find himself on the front of the Daily Telegraph with a little hammer and sickle near his face. Mr. Speaker, he's saying a lot of things which we have been saying when it comes to the reform of the tax >> completed.
>> Call to the honorable member for Wentworth.
>> My question is to the treasurer. Your budget is framed around intergenerational equity and I congratulate you for seeking to tilt the balance back towards young homeo home home buyers. A tax system that overburdens young workers is not only unfair, it is also unsustainable in an aging population. But to help young Australians build their wealth, we also need to reduce their income tax rates.
This budget raises more than 77 billion in extra revenue over the medium term.
When will you legislate to return that extra revenue to taxpayers by reducing income tax rates?
>> Call to the treasurer.
>> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. in acknowledging uh the very substantial amount of work and thinking that the member for Wentworth has done when it comes to tax reform and her participation in the reform roundt and in other meaningful ways. Uh as well as the very serious uh input and contributions being made by people on this side of the house. Uh a lot of the uh tax reforms that we have announced on Tuesday night uh come from uh people working through these issues uh in a considered in a methodical way and I acknowledge that that's how the member for Wentworth comes at some of these questions and her question really goes to I think the core of the tax package the tax reform package that we announced on Tuesday night because it is as she rightly identifies in her question it is about better aligning the tax treatment of people who work for a with the people who get their income from other legitimate sources. That really is one of the main motivations for the tax reforms that we handed down.
And the member for Wentworth is right to point out that that has two elements. Uh one element is making things uh easier for people who work for a living.
Another is making sure that the uh tax arrangements for people who earn their income from assets is more sustainable.
That those two things are in closer alignment. That's what we've tried to do with this tax reform package. And so the CGT changes, the negative gearing changes are part of the story but not the whole story. Uh this is a government which has now cut in only being here for four years, we've cut income taxes five times in three different ways. Three uh income tax cuts which come from uh higher thresholds and lower rates. Uh once with uh instant deduction which provides a bit more tax relief and then the third the last piece is the working Australian tax offset. What that does is it creates some new architecture to provide tax relief only to working people. Uh and it means that in the future a government of either political persuasion to be fair uh has a broader range of options when it comes to returning bracket creep as this government has been doing enthusiastically and regularly. Uh and I can hear the I can hear the I can hear the I can hear the illinformed gapors from over there, Mr. Speaker. uh who seem to have forgotten that they went to an election with a policy to increase taxes on every working Australian. So So um you might want to think about that before you interject, Mr. Speaker. But on the serious issues that the member for Wentworth raises, uh of course this is a government that looks to give Bracket Creek back when it's responsible to do that. We've done it five different times already in the four years that we've been in office. Uh we'd like to get the opportunity to do that again into the future. Uh now when it comes to the medium-term outlook which was also cited in the honorable member's question uh the big improvement over the medium-term in the budget position by the end of the 10-year period three times more of a contribution is made by our savings effort than the changes in taxes. But if and when there's more room for to return more bracket creep of course we'll look to do that.
>> Call to the member for BHB.
>> Thank you Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, and Local Government. How is the Albani Labor government's budget supporting local governments to deliver the roads and community infrastructure Australians rely on?
>> Here call to the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, and local government.
>> Thanks very much. And can I thank the member for Boothby for her question. uh particularly as a South Australian, she knows and is aware of the road funding anomaly that has meant that South Australian councils in particular have not gotten their fair share of roads funding through the financial assistance grants. For 20 years, we've been a temporary topup uh in budgets uh and each and every time they've had to come to the Commonwealth to ask for more money. Well, this government is now fixing that permanently uh thanks to the advocacy for the member for Boothby. Not only have we delivered ongoing road funding base for South Australian councils, we've also increased it through indexation. Now councils in South Australia have funding certainly to deliver safer roads and freight routes that their communities need. The budget has of course also delivered for councils right the way across the country. We're delivering $3.6 6 billion in untied funding to local governments through the financial assistance grants, bringing forward 2.9 billion this financial year to help councils with the cost pressures caused by the ongoing Middle East conflict. And now through Minister O'Neal's portfolio, our 2 billion local infrastructure fund, which is an extension of the existing housing support program, we're supporting councils to unlock much needed housing development through infrastructure. This fund will be open to local government and state utility companies to build that critical last mile infrastructure like water, power, and sewage needed to support using new housing development.
Building on our previous $ 1.5 billion program that they copied. Now, half a billion over the next 10 years will also fund new shared paths, cycleways, and other pieces of infrastructure that make it safer and easier for people to walk and cycle. delivered through the active transport fund. That's $50 million each and every single year, primarily going to local councils. We're delivering an additional $750 million for the growing regions and thriving suburbs program, more funding for our local councils and not for profofits to build the spaces our communities rely on. It's building on the two rounds of growing regions and the one round of thriving suburbs that we previously had. that is building 180 parks, town centers, theaters, and sporting facilities right the way across the country. Uh 1.7 billion worth of them overall. And we're continuing our increased investment in local government's roads to recovery, committing $4.4 billion nationally over the current 5-year funding period.
That's $1.8 billion more going to every local council over the NE than the last previous five years. of course delivering increased funding for our black spots program and also the safer local road infrastructure program. And let me assure the house that not a single one of those programs that I have announced today and that are in our budget look at the color of any of the electorates unlike what those opposite did with their regional rots programs.
We're funding every single local council.
>> Call to the honorable the leader of the opposition. Prime Minister, Labor promised not to change housing taxes, >> yet it misled.
Labour promised not to change investment taxes, yet it deceived. Labour promised not to change taxes on farmers and small businesses, yet it bent the truth. The prime minister promised his word was his bond. When did the prime minister decide that the truth doesn't matter?
Call to the order. Members on my left will ceaseing. Members on my right.
Order.
Member for Bendigo's on a warning.
Prime Minister has the call. I thank the member for uh his very broad question >> and of course the member for Hume promised that they'd be better off if they made him leader. [laughter] >> That's going very well. They promised >> he promised >> he he promised that if they made him leader then they would have this wave of success going forward. And what happened of course was that the member for Farah who wasn't even allowed to have a budget reply speech tonight >> who was undermined from day one >> as the first female leader of the Liberal party and then he got together with the member for Canning >> with the member for Canning on the day of the funeral of one of their former colleagues. to plot removing the first female leader of the Liberal Party. And then they wondered why they have a problem with women. Then they wondered why they had a problem with women. But of course, what we know is that the member for Hume has said himself that the best indicator of future performance is past performance.
Well, this is one of the architects.
This is one of the architects along with the deputy leader.
>> Prime Minister will pause the the leader will withdraw.
>> The minister for the minister for infrastructure is now warned as well.
When I'm dealing with the matter and asking some to withdraw that is highly disrespectful just as we dealt with the matter before. I thank the leader of the opposition prime minister.
>> Thanks Mr. Speaker. this together with their new deputy leader were the architects, the policy architects of the debacle that was the last election campaign.
>> And that's why you can look at past performance because they managed to go to an election saying they would oppose and reverse tax cuts.
>> They said they would oppose and reverse tax cuts.
But they still had a higher deficit.
Higher taxes and higher deficits is what they came up with.
>> And then with regard to the budget the other night, >> they've said that uh this will create fights around the family dinner table.
Well, that's where they get aspiration and they get Australians all wrong because not only do Australians want to get ahead, >> they want their children and their future generations to get a hellhead.
>> And this guy interjects inject >> another order. The Minister for Pacific Island Affairs and Defense Industry, the manager >> standing order 64. Would you please show the leader the respect the respect that he deserves? No. No. This has to stop.
>> I'm just going to keep going all day.
>> You know, >> unfortunately, we're well down that path of showing respect today as we just witnessed the leader having to withdraw. So I'm going to ask the prime minister to uphold the same standards to direct his remarks through the chair and not reflect on members.
>> Member for Cany will give him what he deserves very soon.
>> Very soon Mr. Speaker, it's coming >> because they have no policy going forward and they have the hide to interject about division about division.
They are the party that seek to divide Australia.
I give the call to the honorable member for Melbourne.
>> Uh thank you, speaker. My question is for the Minister for Housing. How is the Albanese Labor government building homes for Australians and how will this week's budget further support housing supply?
>> I can't hear the the member for Melbourne's question. She'll begin just as we've done to both sides.
>> She's going to be given the respect that she deserves.
>> I'd like to hear from the member for Mel. She'll begin her question again.
Thank you, Speaker. My question is for the Minister for Housing. How is the Albani Labor government building more homes for Australians? And how will this week's budget further support housing supply? How does this compare to alternative approaches to housing supply?
The >> call to the Minister for Housing, the Minister for Homelessness, and the Minister for Cities.
>> Speaker, that is a great question, and I thank the me member for Melbourne for asking it. Speaker, Australia has a housing challenge because for decades, our country has not been building enough homes. That is why our Labor government has the boldest and most ambitious agenda on housing that a Commonwealth has had for 70 years. Speaker, $47 billion, the majority of which is focused on building more homes. And we're making real progress. Speaker, when we came to office, new commencements for housing were falling by 6.7%. Speaker, get this. In the last year alone, new housing com commencements have gone up 26%.
These are really important improvements, though we've got a long way to go. Now, speaker, we recognize that there's more work to do here, and that's why we just delivered a housing budget with $2 billion set aside for enabling infrastructure. Speaker, this is going to unlock 65,000 homes for the country by delivering the pipes, paths, and power that communities need to support more homes. Now, Speaker, this brings our government's total investment in housing infrastructure up to a record 6.3 billion. Now, Speaker, I want Australians to remember that number, $6.3 billion. It's been dropped by those opposite to the paper that they're coming forward with an overwhelming reform tonight to announce a lesser amount of funding. Speaker, $5 billion for funding. We're already doing 6.3 speaker. And not only that, but we will add to that number as I continue to announce statebased deals for our 100,000 homes policy. Now, speaker, we started this work in our first term and we're building it in our second. Now with with regard to tonight's announcement speaker, whenever I hear a commitment from these sneaky little liberals and nationals, I like to look at the record.
>> I like to look at the record of their past behavior and see whether it stats up.
>> Order. I'm just going to we're not we're not having those sorts of comments. Just going to ask the minister to withdraw that.
>> Okay. I I withdraw I withdraw. Speaking >> order. I've asked all member to temper their language. When when I'm looking to see the authenticity of those opposite, I just like to check on what they did when they are in government. Now, speaker, I've talked about a record $6.3 billion in infrastructure investment, and I want to see if the parliament can guess how many multiples of money that is that was spent by those opposite on housing infrastructure in their time in office. Was it twice as much? Cuz that would be a lot for us to be spending.
Was it three times?
>> Was it 10 times? Speaker, you're not going to believe this. We are investing 50 times as much money as those opposite did in housing infrastructure. I'm not making up speaker. It really is quite extraordinary. That's what happens when you can't even be bothered having a housing minister. Speaker, Labour has a 47 billion plan for the country, and by God were we proud to build on that on Tuesday night's housing budget.
Call to the honorable member for Bradfield.
>> Thank you, speaker. My question is to the treasurer. The budget confirms retrospective changes to the capital gains tax for international investors in clean energy. This may give rise to sovereign risk given 3/4 of all clean energy investment is international.
Offering a discount on sales in the next four years will cause a fire sale of renewable assets and then a chilling of investment after 2030. Why is the government rushing to increase taxes on renewables instead of gas on exports?
And what modeling has Treasury done on expected impacts to clean energy investment?
>> Good call to the treasurer.
>> Thanks very much, Mr. Speaker. We're not rushing. This is a measure that's actually been in uh various uh budgets and updates for a little while now. uh and the purpose of it is to make sure that we uh are not providing additional uh tax breaks that are not enjoyed by Australians.
Uh and it's all about when it comes to the transitional arrangements referred to by the honorable member, it's all about recognizing uh that the transitional arrangements are necessary uh to make sure that we protect some of these investments in clean energy. And I know that that's an interest of the honorable member as it is in the interests of a lot of people here. Uh so the budget that we handed down uh took further steps to transform our energy system making it easier to build and easier to invest. We got the generational reforms to the national electricity market. I pay tribute to the energy minister for the work he does with the state colleagues uh on some of those transformational recommendations in the NEM. We're investing another $500 million to accelerate environmental approvals. That's important too when it comes to building more clean energy. And we're strengthening the super performance test to make sure that there aren't any unintended barriers to investments in areas like renewable energy that can still deliver strong returns for members. Now, when it comes to these tax arrangements for foreign investors, we've been consulting on legislation which is all about ensuring foreign residents pay a fair share of tax in Australia. Uh our land and natural resources belong to all Australians. And what this recognizes is that there's an area of long-standing uncertainty. Some of these uh court cases which have been playing out costing the Commonwealth money are because there is an ambiguity between the intersection of the state arrangements and the Commonwealth arrangements. The ATO's made it clear they're not going to go back a long period and revisit all of these decisions. But where there have been court cases, we have to responsibly step in and clarify the law and make sure that it's working as it's intended to.
So that's what that element of of that is. Um we've heard a lot about the significance of these reforms uh for uh investments which are already in train.
That's why we've got this proposed timelimited targeted concession for clean energy investments which will support the sorts of developments that the honorable member wants to see in our economy as do I. Uh so I welcome her question. Uh we are currently completing a second round of consultation on the draft legislation. I've been doing some of that myself and also the Treasury and we're considering all of those submissions. But overall, Mr. Speaker, I assure the honorable member that we are focused on making Australians big beneficiaries of this energy transformation and unlocking investment in Australia's energy system is a really important part of that work.
>> Now get call from Muan.
>> My question is the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations. How is the Albanesei Labor government supporting Australian workers and easing cost of living pressures?
>> Call to the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations.
>> Well, thank you speaker and I'd like to thank the member for Mchuan uh for the question, but of course for his advocacy for working people in his electorate. Of course, it is only a Labor government that is on the side of working Australians. In this budget that this Labor government delivered, that this treasurer delivered, we delivered tax cuts for working Australians. And this is built on tax cuts we'd already delivered, ones that those opposite wanted to deny working Australians. And it's not just through tax cuts that we are supporting working Australians. We are doing it through the laws that we pass in this parliament. One of those very important laws was our same job same pay laws >> because that was driven by a very very simple principle that working people should who should not be undercut their wages should not be undercut by labor hire. And in good news for working people, these laws are delivering pay increases to more than 8,000 workers and improving job security right across Australia because these jobs these laws are about giving workers a fair go. Now, I want to point out that we are so committed to these laws that we made sure that the Fair Work Commission understood this principle earlier this year when it came to coal mine workers in central Queensland. Yes, it was this government that was on the side of coal miners in central Queensland. And just last week, the Fair Work Commission upheld the principle which has delivered higher rates of pay for hundreds of coal mine workers across central Queensland.
Workers like Loretta. Loretta is a hall truck driver at a central Queensland coal mine who has been doing this work for the past three years as a labor hire employee. Loretta was working the same job as direct employees and went above and beyond clocking in for Easter, Mother's Day, and Christmas Day. But she was still paid less than the people she was working alongside. Loretta fought to be paid equally, not just for herself, but for the hundreds of other labor hire workers she worked alongside.
And she told me with this decision, she finally feels properly valued for the work and is now recognized for the experience she brings because it's our laws that are delivering for workers like Loretta close to $7,000 more per year because it's only Labor. Labor is the only party in this house that will back coal workers in Queensland and back workers right around the country.
The call to the honorable member for me.
>> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Minister for Communications.
In which room at the live music venue, The Jade, did the Minister hold her quote sideline meeting while at the 40th birthday party of her close personal friend, the bar, the garden kiosk, or the room with the pinball machine?
>> Good question. Order give the call to the minister for communications and sport member for her question. As I have said to her in two previous occasions, I've given a full account of that to IPIA. There is a full report available published online and you can refer there for the full account of the trip which was considered completely within the rules.
>> Order. Order.
Give a call to the member for Robertson.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and my question goes to the Prime Minister. How does the Albanesei Labor government's budget build and deliver on the aspiration of Australians? What have been the responses and what alternatives are there?
>> Call to the Prime Minister.
>> I thank the fantastic member for Reed >> for his question and our budget helps with the cost of living. It build builds resilience including during the crisis that's occurred globally as a result of the conflict in the Middle East through our 14.5 billion fuel security plan. But importantly as well it backs aspiration and it's received substantial support for the decisions that have been taken.
Homelessness Australia said this. This is a hard one win for young people who have been fouled by a system that catches them in crisis but never houses them. Westpak's chief economist Lucy Ellis, I think the tax changes on negative gearing and capital gains are really significant. These are changes everybody thought was politically impossible. Suddenly a government has dealt with that. It's an intergenerational issue that they are addressing. St. Vincer Depal. For too long, taxi settings have disproportionately favored property investors over first home buyers and low-income renters.
>> The Property Council of Australia, Mike Zorbass, the budget contains strong pro supply and planning reform measures to bring new homes and communities to life.
The Real Estate Institute say it was positive and necessary steps towards addressing Australia's housing shortage. Civil Contractors Federation.
This funding recognizes that housing affordability and infrastructure delivery go hand in hand. Urban Task Force Australia. The Housing Budget represents long needed support for housing supply. Urban Development Institute of Australia. This is exactly what we need to deliver more housing supply.
And and indeed indeed it's not just from commentators that have backed this in.
Of course uh the member for Canning of course had already said I think we need to overhaul the whole system. We either fix we either fix the system or it's torn down by people like Pauline Hansen.
>> No one's going to reward us for a final last stand for neoliberal politics.
Okay, Mr. Speaker, I'm asked about alternatives. Well, Senator Rustin has said of course in the other place uh that Australians don't know what we stand for and indeed Australians don't.
The deputy leader of the opposition when the current uh the former leader was being campaigned against said this.
We've announced we're against Labour's energy policy. We've announced we're against Labour's housing policy. We've announced we're against Labour's tax policy. We've announced we're against Labour's immigration policy, but what is it that we stand for? I look forward to seeing the fully costed policies that they have committed to tonight. And on that note, Mr. Speaker, I ask that further questions be placed on the notice paper.
Ähnliche Videos
Guess Which Country Trump Is Threatening To Bomb Next! w/ Chris Hedges
thejimmydoreshow
5K views•2026-05-30
Russia Clashes With Romania, U.S. And EU At Security Council Meeting | DWS News | AC1F
dwsofficial
344 views•2026-06-02
Independence Calendar (Episode #25) - With Cory Morgan & Keith Wilson
JohnBoltonAB
3K views•2026-05-31
BREAKING: TRUMP ADMITS HE LIED ON CIA
DarrenMonroePolitics
10K views•2026-06-01
Why Reynosa Is Burning Now: The Truth Explained
THEFACTFACTORYF
560 views•2026-05-30
भिंत #rohitpawar#sharadpawar#ajitpawar#supriyasule#baramati #supriyasulefc#baramatikar#ncp#ncpsp
Aapla_Maharashtraa
9K views•2026-06-02
Bengal News | Another TMC MP Attacked In Bengal A Day After Assault On Abhishek Banerjee
NDTV
80K views•2026-05-31
Karnataka's Biggest Leadership Shift! What Changes Under DK Shivakumar? | South Central | ET Now
ETNow
205 views•2026-06-01
