MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE

Mr VIOLI (Casey) (15:51): I tell you what, it was quite amazing this week and last week that there was a big conversion from those opposite. They're talking about housing like, suddenly, in the last 12 months, housing became an issue for young people. If you believe the logic of those opposite, it wasn't an issue at the last election because they didn't want to change the tax settings when it comes to housing in the last election.

That is a circle that they cannot square. None of them could explain how they went to their communities 12 months ago and said, 'Nope, we're not going to change the tax system. It's all working fine,' and then suddenly, today, everything is tough.

Of course everything is tough, but have the courage to talk about it and change it 12 months ago, if you were going to do that. But there's a reason that these changes were not proposed last year by the Prime Minister and by the Treasurer. The first reason that they didn't want to change it was that it will not actually help young people.

It will deliver less housing for the Australian people. The tax changes in this budget will deliver less housing for the Australian people. Don't take my word for it, look at the budget papers that say it will deliver 35,000 less houses.

These tax changes in the budget paper will deliver 35,000 less houses. It's in the budget paper. Dr Leigh: That's not what the budget says; it's 75,000 more.

Be honest. Mr VIOLI: The minister opposite is questioning the integrity of Treasury by saying, 'Be honest.' The claim I have made, Minister, is in your own budget papers. It says 35,000 less houses under this change.

If you don't like the Treasury budget papers, you can always listen to the Treasurer. The Treasurer himself, in 2024, said in media: 'We do not need to change this system because I haven't been convinced it will increase supply and deliver more housing.' Those are the Treasurer's own words in 2024. His budget papers confirm that these tax changes will not deliver more housing.

In fact, it will make it even worse for the Australian people, confirmed in the budget paper. In the Treasurer's budget paper: 'These tax changes will deliver higher rents for the Australian people.' Again, those are not my words, they're from the Treasurer's own budget paper. That is why we find many criticising these changes, including the Labor premier in WA, Roger Cook, the Labor premier in New South Wales, Chris Minns, the member for Parramatta, in this House, the member for Bennelong, in this House.

They are both members of the government. The member for Chifley, also in this House, said, 'This budget needs to change.' Senator Ananda-Rajah in the other house is also criticising this change. They were the ones on the Labor side that were prepared to put their objections on the record.

But we also know, through reporting in the media, that there were heated discussions and disagreements in one of the caucus committees, where many were asking the Treasurer many questions about these changes. Member for Grey, I have found one Labor premier that does support these changes. The Victorian Premier, Jacinta Allan, supports the changes, so I look forward to those opposite from Victoria getting out on the hustings with Jacinta Allan and getting her to spruik them as their local member.

I don't think the member for Menzies will be doing that, and I don't think the member for Maribyrnong will be hanging out with Jacinta Allan, given the support that Jacinta Allan has in Victoria. There is clear talk here. There are clear challenges that the Australian people face, and that's why we, as a coalition, want to help the Australian people.

It's why we've got a tax-back guarantee that will deliver lower taxes for everyone. It will mean that every time you get a pay increase, every time you work overtime—to put more money in your bank, to put food on the table—you will get an automatic tax cut under the coalition plan. The question for those opposite is are they going to back indexation of tax brackets, or are they going to play the smoke-and-mirrors game of giving money back to people after they've already paid the tax through bracket creep?

That's the reality for the money they're promising—two years time after you're already paid for it.