Tim Wilson (Goldstein, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I'm elated to speak on this motion, because we saw the choice between the coalition and the Labor Party in the recent budget and the budget reply. In the budget reply by the opposition leader we saw a man committed to putting bandaids over our housing system. I agree that there are a number of problems with our housing market. When people can't afford to own their own home, they use private rentals. When they can't afford private rentals, they then have to go and seek assistance from social housing. The focus from the Leader of the Opposition and the Labor Party is on what we need to do to fix the issues of social housing. It is not to fix the challenges in the private market and higher private ownership, not to fix the problems in terms of private rental, but to fix the problems at the bottom. It's a bandaid that won't deliver long-term solutions for young Australians.

In comparison, the focus of a Liberal government is how we empower young Australians to be able to own their own home: by making sure that this parliament understands that the most important financial decision that any Australian can make is to own their own home. There are, of course, other important financial decisions such as superannuation, but they are not the most important factor. They are the second most important. The current law forces people to put the second-most-important financial decision of their life over their most important financial decision of their life.

And what's been the consequence? The data is clear. In 1980 the average age at which Australians purchased their first home was 24 years old. Today it is 36. We have had young Australians at the time of their life where they have low wages, as they are trying to build up their career, being forced to take 10 per cent of their savings and force it into funds controlled by members of the opposition's mates. And the consequence has been it's harder for them to save up their deposit so they can buy their own home. Of course, if you already own your own home, everything is just peachy because prices keep going up. But young Australians are being betrayed by the opposition, because the opposition are prioritising their own interests and their own control of people's capital ahead of empowering young Australians.

That's fundamentally the choice and the divide between this government and the Labor Party. They want indentured renters; we want empowered owners, and we make no apology about it. That is why we should support home first, super second. The member previously spoke about the problems young Australians have in saving their deposit. I agree with him. Young Australians are finding it hard because their disposable income is being taken from them. It is being forced into funds which they can't then access to buy their own home. An average young Australian couple between the age of 30 and 35 has $76,000 saved up in superannuation which could be utilised towards a deposit to buy their own home. In some areas of the community, they will need more money than that, but savings plus super—and that is what super is: savings—will enable them to bring it forward and buy earlier and cheaper. That means they're not paying forgone rent, they're not paying other costs and they are able to own their own home, which is the foundation of their economic security in their working life and their retirement.

But that, of course, is not what the Labor Party wants. They would rather Australians of any age save for a home after they've prioritised their super rather than putting home first and super second. It is simply a fallacy. Young Australians can save for their retirement once they buy their own home. Australians cannot save for a home in retirement, and that is the absurdity of the model we have now: to put superannuation ahead of homeownership.

Now, I know the Labor Party don't support homeownership. I know in their hearts they actually support an indentured nation of people who are renters. This is not the first time we have had this divide. In 1949, the great political divide between Ben Chifley and Sir Robert Menzies started a watershed of Liberal and coalition governments Ben Chifley argued how we should use federal-state housing agreements to build housing that returned soldiers could rent. Menzies used those agreements and made it crystal clear in his election speeches that those federal-state housing agreements should be used to build houses so that Australians could own. Returned service soldiers could own their own home and then have an investment in the future of the country. They turned little platoons into little capitalists. That's the foundation on which we build the country: from the citizen, the family and community up, not from Canberra and fund managers down.

See this speech in context