Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Reform No. 1) Bill 2026, Income Tax Rates Amendment (Tax Reform No. 1) Bill 2026

Mr BUCHHOLZ (Wright) (11:43): What an absolute debacle. We just saw the Manager of Opposition Business come into this place and move a motion that compelled every senior minister, every member of Labor on the other side of the chamber, to speak to this bill—so that they owned it—and he was gagged. He was voted down.

He was told that is not going to happen under a Labor government. I find that procedure in the House absolutely appalling. Nevertheless, I acknowledge and compliment the Manager of Opposition Business for the work that he has done.

I want to associate myself with this bill with my colleagues from the LNP—the Liberal-National Party—who have made contributions, and I want to be really clear, for the people of Australia, on what our position is when it comes to this bill. This bill has four schedules. The first schedule introduces changes to the capital gains tax regime.

Schedule 2 introduces changes to the negative gearing regime. Schedule 3 introduces a working Australian tax offset. Schedule 4 introduces a $1,000 standard deduction for work related expenses.

The coalition oppose schedules 1 and 2, and we support schedule 3 and 4. The reason I'm coming in and I'm making sure that this is on the record—and I'm looking straight down the camera when I make these pledges—is that we will support schedules 3 and 4, the schedules that reward hardworking Australians. But what we cannot do is support the changes that were articulated to negative gearing and the capital gains regime.

They were not road tested with the Australian public. The way our system works, the way democracy works, is that you go to the Australian public at an election and you campaign on the issues that you believe in. You campaign to convince the Australian public that you have the greater policy platform.

I share with those in the chamber that that courtesy was not extended to the Australian public on these measures. Previous Labor governments, such as under previous leader Bill Shorten, did that. They took these measures to the Australian public, and the Australian public overwhelmingly said, 'We do not support those measures,' and as a result his leadership finished.

So the Australian public is right to be suspicious. The Australian public is right to be cautious about a leader who says, for the 50th time, 'We're not going to touch capital gains,' and then the government delivers a budget that does exactly that. That is deceitful.

That is taking the Australian public for mugs. My job here today as a member of the opposition is to get it on the record that we will support parts of this. The way we will support that is that, when it comes to voting on this bill, the Manager of Opposition Business will walk in and he will ask for the bill to be separated so we can vote with the government on schedules 3 and 4.

But do you think they will support us? Do you think they will let us split the bill? That doesn't suit their clandestine ruse.

They will not support that. The reason we want to split the bill is so that we can show our support to the Australian public and take these principles to an election. I'm really concerned about the number of government members who have come in and spoken to their talking points but have mentioned nothing—I have heard zero—in the way of an apology to the Australian public for betraying their confidence—for saying one thing before an election and doing completely the opposite afterwards.

We will hold this appalling government to account. Labor says that this is good policy. If they believe that it is good policy, that's great.

That is within their right. That is within their purview. If it is so good, test it with the Australian public.

Let them be the deciders of that. MPs gave lectures on ambition during this debate. None spoke of honesty.

None spoke of transparency. None spoke of integrity. I have heard the Treasurer and the Prime Minister during this debate and prior to it speak on these issues and acknowledge that there will be collateral damage.

They know there will be political collateral damage as a result of what they are doing—the way they are handling this. I ponder what collateral damage looks like. What does political collateral damage look like?

Is it the new members on that other side and those members on low margins that the Prime Minister and the Treasurer are prepared, as collateral damage, to cluster up and lose because of the strong majority that the government has? Is the sense of hubris and arrogance now so awful on the other side of this parliament—it's shameful—that they are now openly talking about political collateral damage?

I fear for our country. It's not my intention to hold the House up. I didn't want to speak other than get on the record the coalition's support for schedule 3 and 4.

What I will be doing is making sure that Australians in my electorate get extracts of our support for those schedules. Then I will cut, when we bring to the House for the bills to be separated, that those on the other side may or may not support it. My instinct is that they will not support the measures to separate the bills, but I would counsel those who, on the other side, are potentially political collateral damage that, if they want to save themselves, when we bring the motion to the House to separate the bill, they should consider supporting us and consider walking across the chamber and saying, 'If they're going to support parts of the bill that we like'—guess what?

This has all being broadcasted. You're not going to be able to walk back on this. This coalition will keep hammering today the fact that you did not road test this with the Australian public and that you did not seek a mandate on these issues.

In fact, it was quite the opposite. The government, the Treasurer, said, 'We're going to touch tax laws, we're not going to touch capital gains, and we're not going to touch negative gearing,' 50 times. 'How many times do I have to tell you?' were the words of the Prime Minister. Every day between now and the next election, I will continue to remind the Australian public of the deceit of those on the other side and watch with anticipation how many frontbenchers, how many Labor ministers, refuse to come into this chamber and defend what is possibly one of Labor's most appalling policy positions.

Watch how many of them refuse to put their name to this bill. I can already see the speaking list of those waiting to come into this chamber and speak. The speaking list on our side runs off the page.

For government members, there are only a couple left. That was what the motion, moved by the Manager of Opposition Business, we just dealt with before was about,. It compelled government members to come in and put their name to this disgraceful piece of legislation.

I will keep the fire on you because the people of my electorate of Wright, the great people of Queensland, deserve a better government than what they've got at the moment.