Andrew Bragg (NSW, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

It's a great pleasure to rise to make some remarks in relation to this debate following question time. There were questions on the economy and the recent Voice referendum, and it is regrettable that the Voice referendum went the way that it did. I think it would have been much better if there had been a process which could have maximised the centre ground. There were many efforts to try to encourage the government to consider whether there were opportunities to have, for example, a long-running committee process that could have looked at different constitutional reform models and provided an exposure draft bill to deal with a lot of the issues around the detail. I think that ultimately, though, the problem with this process was that the government never wanted to entertain any compromises at any point in time. The failure to compromise to build common ground has led to the defeat of this referendum.

That, frankly, goes to the government's competence. I regret to say that running a process that was so important to so many people in such a poor way really does reflect very poorly on the government's ability to run things and do things. I think that is disappointing for many Australians, irrespective of how they may have voted in prior elections or how they may vote in future elections. That is the question now—its a question of competence. Can this government bring itself together and address the major economic issues of inflation and productivity? Can it address the major issue of housing in this country? Certainly, we know that the Housing Australia Future Fund won't do very much to solve the major issues in our cities and towns. We should get serious about ensuring that the Commonwealth is doing everything it can to drive more supply, because that is going to be the most consequential factor, here. We should drive more supply by incentivising the states and local governments to provide denser housing in the cities, to release more land and to ensure that developers are not squatting on land. All of those things are going to be important.

Furthermore, there is no reason why we shouldn't let Australians, particularly millennials and zoomers, use their own money in superannuation for a first home deposit. We need to find a way to tilt the scales in favour of younger Australians so that they can also get access to a first home. The greatest determinant of whether or not an Australian will have a successful retirement is whether they live in their own house. If you are a retired renter, you will, by definition, have a much tougher retirement than someone that owns their own house. Putting homeownership on the agenda should be the No. 1 priority for the government. That's alongside combating persistently high inflation—which is much higher than that of our competitors—and flagging productivity. Until we see something very serious on housing supply and addressing the demand issue, this will continue to be a problem.

For many people, the super issue is a big issue. The reality is that Labor feel so conflicted about superannuation because the funds and the people that are involved in the sector are so intimately involved with their political movement that they can't see that this is impeding many millennial and Gen Z people from being able to gather the means for a first home deposit. This is why I very much welcome that we have, on our agenda, the $50,000 policy so that people can have 50 grand of their own super for their first home. I think that policy should be significantly expanded because it is, after all, the people's money. It doesn't belong to the government, the banks or the unions. There's no reason that people who have a large mortgage shouldn't be able to use their own money in super as an offset.

These are some of the ideas we want to see the government pursue. Otherwise, what's the point of being the government? It's all well and good to be the dog who caught the car but we need to see some serious attention on housing and a bigger effort to rein in inflation, and we need to get the government to at least open the Productivity Commission reports on what they can do to improve productivity. That is the most important thing the government can do right now.

Question agreed to.