Jim Chalmers (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Hansard source

He has taken a break from trying to chase the aluminium industry out of Australia to interjecting about a policy which has been publicly announced for more than two years now. If he's the shadow Treasurer he should know a couple of things. He should know that unrealised gains are calculated elsewhere in the superannuation system. If he's the shadow Treasurer he should understand that the arrangements for tax on superannuation would still be concessional for the half a per cent of people who would be impacted by the modest change we are proposing.

In fairness to the shadow Treasurer, he has made his opposition to this measure clear. I understand that. So the onus is on him now to find the couple of billion dollars a year that this would raise when it's fully mature, and we know where he'll go looking for those savings—and, again, that goes to the difference between the parties. We think we can make concessional arrangements at the very top end of super a little bit less concessional and raise money to fund our efforts to strengthen Medicare. Those opposite, if they're given the chance to find those couple of billion dollars each year, will go after Medicare again, because they did it last time. They'll go after housing. They'll go after pension indexation.

Those are the choices that are available to both sides of the House, and that's the difference between the parties.

See this speech in context