Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Hansard source

I listened very carefully to that question, as I am sure all honourable members did, and it was very, very hard to follow. It seemed almost as confused as their policy on negative gearing and capital gains. The real point here is very simply this: housing is the single biggest asset in Australia. We know that. It is the most important asset for Australian families. Their net worth is the difference between the value of the house and the level of the mortgage. As housing prices go up they feel wealthier—and they are wealthier—and they can spend. They can go and get another loan to start a business. They get another loan and give some money to their kids. They can afford to go on a holiday. But, as the value of their home comes down and that equity diminishes, so does their confidence. There is nothing more damaging to consumer and business confidence than declining asset values, declining housing values. Every Australian understands that. We all understand that, except, apparently, the economic wizards on the front bench opposite.

Labor proposes a policy that is apparently designed and calculated to reduce housing values, to provide a massive shock to an already subdued housing market where growth is expected to be modest, jogging along a little bit below inflation in some cities and actually going negative in others. In that environment, the Labor Party proposes to take a third of all buyers out of the ring. There will be no investors that would invest in residential property. So, under a Shorten government, when you want to sell your house or your apartment, there will be no investors there; only home owners. The consequence of that—

See this speech in context