Jana Stewart (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Thank you. Back to the topic of superannuation—once I calm myself after that disgraceful display. We have made our priorities clear as a government about who we stand for: the Australian working people. Those opposite have made it clear who they stand for: the 17 people with over $100 million as their superannuation balance and one person with over $400 million as their superannuation balance. That's who they stand for. It's 0.5 per cent of the Australian population, some of the wealthiest people in our country, and good on them. But they should be asking taxpayers—who work on the factory line and our nurses and teachers—to be paying the $2 billion in taxes that we will get from these changes in the first year. These are very modest—I know people love the word modest in this chamber—and sensible changes.

We've already heard some quotes today from those opposite who agreed, back in 2016, about having to make some changes to the superannuation in this country. We are the government for the Australian working people. They are the opposition for the half a per cent. It was great to hear Peter Dutton make his first election promise for 2025: reinstating tax breaks for those 17 people with over $100 million in their superannuation and that one lucky person with over $400 million—Peter Dutton is on your side—in their superannuation. We have finally found something the Leader of the Opposition will stand up for and show some spine for. It's certainly not veterans at risk of homelessness. It's not women fleeing family violence. It's not Australian manufacturing. It's not businesses looking for energy security. It's not families seeking cheaper child care. It's not people needing cheaper medicine. It's not households seeking energy bill relief. He says no to any of those things, but, if you're one of those lucky 18, he's got your back. When it comes to the wealthiest half of one per cent, those opposite have your back.

Last week we heard the federal member for Fadden admit at the royal commission that he lied about robodebt because loyalty to his colleagues mattered more than loyalty to the Australian people. What a perfect summary of their entire time in government—loyalty to themselves and not to the Australian people. I think it's a bit rich for those opposite to sit over there and talk to us about trust. I'm pretty sure that a former prime minister just appointing himself to a couple of portfolios might be considered a bit of a broken promise to the Australian people. I don't know. Not being there when the country's on fire or going underwater might be considered breaking a promise to the Australian people to have their backs. It is an absolute indictment. There were more people at the Ed Sheeran concert last weekend—thank you to Senator White for pointing this out—than there will be affected by these changes. It is an absolute disgrace. We know who those opposite are on the side of. (Time expired)