Luke Howarth (Petrie, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Hansard source

Year on year. This is unheard of. Please understand that. Backbenchers in the Albanese government should be going to the Prime Minister and the Treasurer and saying: 'Maybe we've gone a bit too far on this. Maybe that's not a good idea. Maybe my kids'—the fact is that this does not go up each year. Three million dollars is the cut-off. Most things are indexed with inflation or CPI, but no. To all the backbenchers over there who have kids or grandkids: your kids will be impacted by it too. Maybe your kids will run a business or a farm one day to provide food to Australians. The Albanese Labor government is going to hit these people.

And it's moving the goalposts. When Paul Keating, John Howard, Bob Hawke—all those former prime ministers—said, 'Yep; let's go with super. Put money into super so that you're not a burden on the taxpayer when you retire,' they set the goalposts up. They've kicked the ball. The football's in the air. It's heading for the goals, and the Albanese government is getting those goalposts and shifting them 50 metres to the left or the right. The goal misses, and you pay more. It doesn't matter that you're retired. Your farm has gone up. The property in the middle of Perth that you bought for $1.2 million years ago, because it's in the CBD? That's worth $5 million. 'You owe us tax on two million bucks even though you haven't sold it.' That's the reality, and it's a poor example. The Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister should go back to the Prime Minister and say: 'Every Australian has property. We want all Australians to get into their own home. We want them to run their own businesses. Let's not tax them for it. There is no need to do this.' They’re being tricky with this, saying 'Oh, well this will be legislated on 1 July 2025,' it's after the next election, because the next election is due in 12 months, in May 2025, 'We're not breaking an election promise because this doesn't kick in until two months later.' If you really want to do that, take it to the next election in 12 months and win the next election. I hope you don't, but if you win the next election then you'd have a mandate to legislate this. Right now, you don't. There is no mandate. It is a broken promise, and the people of Australia need to know that. The young people in this country need to know that.

With inflation increasing and wages going up, of course, as well—the government crows about that; well done to them if that's the case—the lack of indexation in these proposed bills will impact many, many more Australians, including our kids and our grandkids, because it does not consider homeownership status, combined balances and the level of wealth outside of super. I'll leave it at that, but, unlike the government, the federal coalition opposition and, if given the opportunity at the next election, a Dutton government—under the leadership of the opposition, we're opposed to this. We are opposed to this. We will take a clear policy to an election, and during our term in government we won't break an election promise on superannuation like the members of the Labor Party are doing right now.

There is no argument about the importance of the stability of our retirement system and the importance that it has in ensuring that future Australian governments don't have increasing levels of welfare. We want every Australian to be able to have the support they need and to be able to fund the decent retirement that they need. The stability of that system is being undermined by the Albanese Labor government, and the trust of governments is undermined when prime ministers and politicians break election promises, and that is what this is about. The Prime Minister said one thing before the election, and he's doing a very different thing now that he's in government. It's not good enough, and I'll leave it at that. We'll be voting against the bill.

See this speech in context