Peter Dutton (Dickson, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. Will the Prime Minister rule out any changes to negative gearing and capital gains treatment on property during his time as Prime Minister?

Hon. Members:

Honourable members interjecting—

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Members on my right don't need to give commentary when a question is being asked. I don't know how many times I have to tell people that. Order!

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I mean, really, they have had a long time to work out questions in this place. You know what our housing policy is. Our housing policy is $32 billion of a Homes for Australia Plan. That's our plan. That's our plan, not changes to negative gearing or other things. We actually are a political party that is saying what we are doing. I know that's unfamiliar to those opposite, because after three years in the job—

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Prime Minister will pause. The Leader of the Opposition on a point of order.

Peter Dutton (Dickson, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On a point of relevance, the Prime Minister was asked a very tight question; it was one sentence. We ask for a straight answer. Will he rule out changes to negative gearing and capital gains treatment of property during his period as Prime Minister? Can he just say yes or no? Can he be honest with the Australian people?

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Resume your seat. The Leader of the Opposition is entitled to raise his point of order; he's done so. The Prime Minister did directly answer the question. He mentioned negative gearing directly and said it wouldn't be changed, so that's a direct answer. I know what you are after, and he did give you—

Peter Dutton (Dickson, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes or no?

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

He did that, so he's done what you want. So you're going to be quiet now, for the remainder of this question. The Prime Minister will return to the question.

A government member interjecting

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, that's right—the same person who said civility is not a sign of weakness. But, anyway, we'll deal with that. After three years in the job, this bloke has had three ideas: (1) $10 billion to fund long lunches for business, (2) $600 billion to pay for nuclear reactors, and (3) cuts to everything else to pay for them. They are the only three ideas that he has had. And then he comes along here and says, 'Tell us what you won't do.' He doesn't come along here and ask about what we are doing on housing, about the build-to-rent scheme. I note that Chris Minns was in my electorate yesterday—500 new homes in Camperdown, just down the road from where I grew up, Pyrmont Bridge Road and Parramatta Road. Affordable housing for essential workers, no doubt taking advantage of the build-to-rent scheme that was passed by the Senate last December.

It's just like how he doesn't ask about the Housing Australia Future Fund. That's so important—building social and affordable homes for people, providing additional housing for women and children escaping domestic violence, providing additional housing for Indigenous communities. It's just like how he doesn't ask us about Help to Buy or about all those tens of thousands of Australians who've been helped into homeownership as a result of what we have put in place. The Help to Buy scheme is something that was opposed as hostile by those opposite. They know what they're against; they don't know what they're for. That is why they will be rejected. That is why they are floundering not as an alternative government but as this thought bubble that has to find $600 billion to pay for its nuclear reactors.