Keith Wolahan (Menzies, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

While I am on my feet and the Prime Minister is here, can I congratulate you on your wonderful news last night.

Before I moved this amendment, an amendment was moved by the member for Groom in the name of Mr Taylor, and we recently divided on it. And it was moved because, of course, we recognise that Australians are hurting. Of course we recognise that they need more money in their pockets. That is why we are supporting this amendment. Let's take that off the table; that's not what these amendments are about. I heard all the interjections that were made. But how this change is done matters and the timing of it matters. We know that the timing was about politics and the Dunkley by-election.

This amendment (2) is about a key feature of our tax system that is hurting everyday Australians: entrenching bracket creep. Bracket creep has been described by the shadow Treasurer as 'the thief in the night'. It is a thief in the night because it is a thief that comes for every hardworking Australian.

A lot of things happened with the government over summer. During the government's first summer, the Treasurer decided to reinvent capitalism. This summer the Treasurer thought, 'I'll leave reinventing capitalism and I will turn my mind to changing the narrative that our party'—your party—'doesn't represent working Australians anymore.' There was a real question about that last year. The question put before the Treasurer was: how can we re-engage with the 80 per cent of our electorates who didn't agree with us on the Voice? You're out of touch with your own electorates. That is what is driving this change.

When we speak about aspiration, it's more than just a word or a talking point; it is something that resides in our hearts and minds. All of us in this place go to citizenship ceremonies and welcome new Australians to this country. The thing that drives them here is aspiration for a better life for them, their children and their families. At the moment, housing affordability has made this a key topic of conversation around dinner tables. In Melbourne, where I'm from, there are 354 suburbs. A household on a median income can afford a house in zero suburbs—zero. In 200 of those 354 suburbs, to afford the median house you need a household income of $200,000. So the original reform that was put forward, removing the 37 per cent tax bracket, wasn't just about giving more money to people in those brackets; it was about telling young Australians who aspire to be in those brackets, 'We want you to take that second job, do that extra shift or otherwise work harder so that you will have a better future for yourself and your family and you too can own a little bit of Australia, particularly in the cities of Melbourne, Sydney, Brisbane and Adelaide.' When we put extra brackets back into the system—and that's what the 37 per cent is—we're putting a brake on aspiration and we're telling young Australians, 'You may not be in that bracket now, but that thief in the night will come for you and your family, and the idea of homeownership is that little bit further away.'

See this speech in context