Daniel Mulino (Fraser, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

When I see a motion like this, particularly from the Greens political party, it really reinforces to me that it is possible in this place to have aspirations that are quite close. I look at some of the aspirations in this motion—to build more houses, particularly for those who are vulnerable, to have a fairer tax system and so on—and I say to myself, 'I don't totally disagree with some of the aspirations that this motion is pointing towards.' But it takes more than aspirations in public policy and more than aspirations in the real world to get outcomes that mean things for people—the people that we ought to be representing in this place. What I think the Greens political party fails to do is move beyond listing a whole bunch of aspirations to, first, have the depth to come up with practical, well-thought-through solutions, and, second, in the midst of a political environment, move beyond being activists or a university debating club and get lasting outcomes that lead to real-world solutions.

Let me point to an area that is a first-order issue when it comes to people's quality of life, particularly during this course of this parliament, and that is tax policy and tax relief—the stage 3 tax cuts. We can have a motion which says that we should tax more evenly, that we should tax in such a way that we give greater benefits to those who are more vulnerable, particularly in a cost-of-living crisis. What this government actually delivered was tax relief that led to tax cuts for every taxpayer but that was much more skewed towards those on low incomes than what was being presented to the parliament by the previous government. People on less than $45,000 would have received no tax cuts under the previous government's scheme, but under this government received more than $800 a year—meaningful increases in their disposable income during a time when people were feeling particularly squeezed. Eighty-four per cent of taxpayers—indeed, probably a higher proportion of that in my electorate—are better off under our tax cuts.

This government is delivering meaningful, real benefits to people. The Greens political party will put forward all sorts of aspirations when it comes to the tax system: tax billionaires a gazillion dollars. I think that was the response of one of the technocrats out there, but it is meaningless. It doesn't lead to real outcomes for people that deserve them. Another area, perhaps one that best highlights the Greens as activists rather than genuine responsible partners, in government is housing policy. When this government put forward sensible reforms—the Housing Australia Future Fund, the Help to Buy scheme, the Build to Rent scheme—the Greens party, because it wasn't exactly what they wanted, or because it didn't go as far as they thought it should go, blocked it month after month after month. We see the housing difficulties this country is facing are all the more difficult because they prefer activism over getting an outcome. They don't do the hard work on the policy, they don't come up with practical solutions that are actually achievable and, in addition, their mode of operating in the political system and in this parliament is such that they would rather see nothing occur so long as they can keep going out doorknocking and cynically use an issue for political purposes.

This government has achieved so much in housing—$32 billion of initiatives—plus free TAFE places, which have led to something in the order of 45,000 additional people being trained, which is going to do a huge amount for the supply side of this housing challenge. The Greens political party spent a year or more blocking many of these measures along with the Liberal Party. They should hang their heads in shame at the way they behaved this term.

This motion contains a number of parts that I agree are issues which require further action. But, on most of these topics, the government has delivered action, often in the face of ideological, activist and simplistic opposition from the Greens that has been entirely counterproductive. That's what we should look at when we look at the words of those opposite.

See this speech in context