Treasury Laws Amendment (Building a Stronger and Fairer Super System) Bill 2026, Superannuation (Building a Stronger and Fairer Super System) Imposition Bill 2026

Mr HOLZBERGER (Forde) (10:48): I rise in support of the Treasury Laws Amendment (Building a Stronger and Fairer Super System) Bill 2026 and the Superannuation (Building a Stronger and Fairer Super System) Imposition Bill 2026. As a first-term member, I'm always happy to learn from people who've been here for a long time, and I appreciate that now we can address policies which used to exist but don't exist anymore.

So I'd like to talk about Fightback—former prime minister Paul Keating's dog-eared copy used to sit in that very drawer there—and John Hewson's prosecution of Fightback. Mr Hewson talked about a GST on food—here was the LNP pushing a policy of a GST on food in that Fightback document, which used to sit in that very drawer, a policy which was prosecuted by the other side.

I'm glad that I can have that lesson in what's actually allowed in the parliament. You're allowed to talk about a point which has absolutely nothing to do with the bill—a fantasy which is being pursued by the LNP. This is what's got the other side into trouble.

They're out there pursuing fantasies, pursuing things which the public aren't one little bit interested in. They've got this ideological obsession with certain things that are completely disconnected from reality in the community. That's why they are of ever-diminishing relevance in the Australian political landscape.

I'm very glad that the new shadow treasurer is here. In fact, I can't believe my luck. There are two things that I can't believe.

One is that I woke up one morning and the member for Goldstein was the shadow Treasurer. I couldn't believe my luck on that one. Mr Tim Wilson interjecting— Mr HOLZBERGER: I can't believe my luck now that he actually gets to sit here—unlike the member for Monash, who has had the opportunity to sit through many of my speeches now.

I'm just wondering whether the member for Monash engineers it so he's on the speaking list so he can listen to me as a political— Opposition members interjecting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Dr Freelander ): Order! I just should interrupt. Much as I appreciate the history lesson from both sides, it's not a two-way conversation, please.

The member should be heard in silence. Mr HOLZBERGER: Thank you for the protection, Deputy Speaker. I'm not sure the member for Goldstein has had the unique pleasure of listening to one of my speeches, so I feel very lucky that he is here today to listen to that.

On my own personal and political journey, one of the many books I read—I live by one of the maxims in that, which is 'Seek first to understand and then to be understood'. Unfortunately, standing up in parliament, despite the opportunity for people to interject, isn't exactly a good opportunity for me to listen to what the shadow Treasurer has to say. I would like to talk a little bit about whether I've got it right—what the shadow Treasurer actually believes.

While he may not be able to interject throughout this to set me right, I would like to see whether or not I'm correct on this. I think I know where the shadow Treasurer is coming from. In many ways, he has a very admirable world view.

Even if it is ultra-ideological and totally impractical, I sort of get the theory. There's a little bit of my own story that I'd like to tell through all of this as well. I came into politics quite young, from Broken Hill, a country town.

Mr Tim Wilson: On a point of order on relevance, I don't understand what on earth the member is speaking about, so there is no way it could be relevant to this bill. The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I think that this is a nuanced argument, but I would remind the member for Forde to be relevant to the topic. Mr HOLZBERGER: If it assists the deputy speaker, my point of relevance is this.

We have now woken up, and while in some ways—politically—we can't believe our luck that we've got the member for Goldstein as the shadow Treasurer, the dread that Australian workers should feel that the alternative Treasurer in charge of economic policy, in charge of superannuation— The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I think you do need to be relevant to the topic, in this speech.

Mr HOLZBERGER: Thank you, Deputy Speaker. I will obviously take that. The thing is that superannuation has been under threat.

At every opportunity that the opposition have had to spike it or to sabotage it, they have. That's why the 12 per cent came in last year. The original 12 per cent was scheduled to come in in 2019, but it was deferred by the previous government—by those opposite.

That deferral between 2019 and 2025 would have cost—the actuaries could work it out—billions or hundreds of millions at least. For an individual, it would potentially be a loss of thousands of dollars to an individual's superannuation account. So this bill really does build on the superannuation policies of the government, but really of the Labor Party.

What we have at the moment is very much where I see—I do want to absolutely keep this relevant to this debate. For superannuation as a whole, though, I understand that there is a theory out there that individuals should be able to make decisions about their own financial choices on the road to financial freedom. Mr Tim Wilson: Superannuation is a hole?

Mr HOLZBERGER: As a w-h-o-l-e—so superannuation as a w-h-o-l-e should be able to make decisions about its financial future. In some ways, when government gets involved in that, it distorts the individual need to take care of one's own finances. I sort of do understand that.

But the thing is that, without superannuation, there wouldn't be somewhere around $4.3 trillion in national savings, which people are able to retire into at the moment. Without superannuation, people would be retiring into a bleak future. One of the things that I learned along the way was this idea of pay yourself first.

You should put 10 per cent away so that you can create a pool of savings, which will ultimately act as a buffer if you get yourself into some sort of financial trouble. But sooner or later it will turn into a pool in which you can invest, and then, if you live carefully and frugally and adjust your outgoings so that your incomings match, then you can retire. So I really do understand that if you can take that personal responsibility over your own finances you can achieve financial freedom.

I think that is a goal which is achieved on both sides. Where I think there is a difference of opinion, though, is that there is that ideal, but then there is a reality, and life gets in the way. What compulsory superannuation does is take that 10 per cent—now up to 12 per cent—put it away for people and invest it in something that's not risky and that's sensible so that ultimately people can achieve financial freedom.

While it is a noble goal for people to take charge of their own finances, when you actually look at the whole community, individual circumstances mean that that doesn't happen in practice. That's why I really do implore those on the other side to—they're going to be making decisions about their superannuation policy that they take to the next election. The last policy they took would have been disastrous.

It would have meant that people would have raided their balances, it would have pushed house prices up, and it would have been disastrous. For example, in February 2021, when the now shadow treasurer was the chair of the Standing Committee on Economics, an article in the Saturday Paper said: The Liberal backbencher says that if people could use the money in their super account—all of it, if necessary—they might be able to fund the deposit for a … home.

Mr Tim Wilson: Yes. Mr HOLZBERGER: Yes, so there you go. This is a policy which would have had the twin negative of raiding people's retirement balance, which is what superannuation is for, and not letting them pay themselves first and at the same time pushing up house prices in the community.

Somehow this policy—which the shadow Treasurer just enthusiastically said yes to, which is a bit of a sign that it might be the policy they take to the next election—would have somehow had two, twin, disastrous outcomes. This bill really builds on the long history of superannuation. Let's just remember that superannuation is not something which has been gifted to workers.

Superannuation, when it was introduced in the nineties was exactly their money—as the shadow Treasurer has just said it, It was exactly their money. It was a tax cut which they forgave back nineties. It was a wage rise which they forgave.

It is exactly their money. The shadow Treasurer is shaking his head again. I seek first to understand and then to be understood!

But I was there, I was watching it at the time. I know that it was a tax cut which they gave up and put into super, and it was a pay rise, as part of the accord, which they gave up. So it is indeed workers' money.

From the very inception there, when it was their money, to the increase of 12 per cent, which the opposition fought against, and to allowing it to be used for things like housing, this bill builds on all of that. One of the most important things in this bill is what the LISTO does. Here we have an attempt to right that imbalance between the income tax that a worker would pay and what the tax rate is on that superannuation.

In Forde, for instance, something like 11,353 people are going to benefit from the LISTO to the tune of something like $4.6 million. That's because the LISTO is about helping lower-income earners, somewhere around 60 per cent of whom, in Forde, are women. It is about lifting up the super balances of lower-income earners, particularly women.

Superannuation is one of those things that, if you look historically at gender pay gap, was only really in the last few years held by women. It rose from below 40 per cent, and it is now it is now into the 40s, but it is still not equal. Measures like the LISTO will go towards fixing that imbalance.

In Forde, it is particularly important because in working-class areas like Forde people really have been doing it tough. In fact, for the bottom five postcodes within Forde, the super balance is somewhere around $68,000. The top super balance in Forde is $183,000.

When you compare that to a national average of 160 grand, the bottom of five are $66,000, $78,000, $88,000, $92,000 and $95,000. There is a problem that needs to be fixed up, and fixing the LISTO will go some of the way to fixing this problem. Thank you for the opportunity to talk about super, something which is very important to the Labor plan and to the Labor cause of helping people economically.

I urge you to support this bill.