MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE

Mr HOGAN (Page—Deputy Manager of Opposition Business) (15:07): We've all spent the last four or five weeks in our communities. My colleagues—and it's been great to see them again on this side of the chamber—have all, without exception, been saying to me that, as we walk our high streets with our retail businesses, as we go to shopping centres, as we walk around our industrial estates and as we go to sporting events, everyone is telling us that they are doing it really tough.

In fact, some of them are saying their cost-of-living pressures and the pressures on their houses, their budgets or their small business have never been so tough. That's what we are hearing unanimously, the length and breadth of this country, of how tough small businesses are doing it and how tough families are doing it with their budgets. What is this prime minister doing in response to this, besides making crass remarks about Kylie Minogue and the Japanese prime minister—it was atrocious—and not apologising for that?

Besides doing that, what is the Prime Minister and this government doing around these extreme problems that businesses and houses and housing budgets have? We know what they're doing about this. Just three months ago, in the budget, when all these things were happening, their solution to cost-of-living pressures for households and family businesses was to do a few things, and they all included raising taxes.

Why would that side of politics think that raising taxes is good for families and good for budgets for small business when times are tough? Because it's just in their DNA. They can't think of any other way except to take hard earned money off other people so they can spend it.

What this has meant is we now have one of the highest capital gains taxes in the world. I'll repeat that: we now have one of the highest capital gains taxes in the world. What that side of politics has done is it has changed the risk-reward ratio in this nation.

It used to be that, if you had a business, if you started a business and took a bit of a risk, you got the reward. That's what's driven this country for hundreds of years—you take the risk and you keep some of the reward. Well, that has now changed.

Young entrepreneurs and entrepreneurs in this country now know that you take the risk and that side, the Albanese Labor government, will take the reward. That's now how this is working. Now, you might ask: What's their thinking?

How would they arrive at that type of mentality and that type of thought process? Good question—I've asked that myself. Do you know what I've come up with as the answer to why they think like that?

It's because not one of them, or certainly not, when you look at the Prime Minister and the Treasurer—neither of those people nor a lot on that side have ever worked in private enterprise. The Treasurer's and the Prime Minister's first jobs, outside of politics, were—wait for it—for a Labor minister. Their work record is: work for a Labor politician, work for a Labor minister, and then become a Labor MP.

So they don't get it; they don't understand it. It's a DNA thing. A lot of people on this side understand what it means to work in private enterprise and to own or start your own business, when paying your salary and, indeed, the salaries of other people is up to your entrepreneurship.

But those opposite don't understand it—they don't get that—which is why they thought raising taxes was a good idea. The other one, obviously, was the increased taxes on trusts. Again, they wouldn't understand, because they've never done it.

Over 350,000 small businesses in this country operate under trusts, so they are now paying higher taxes. We have a shortage of housing; we have a shortage of homes being built in this country, so, of course, they think it's a good idea to raise a tax, or put a tax, on negative gearing in this country. They also thought it was a good idea—when you're building some units, or building some apartments, a lot of people buy off the plan.

A lot of that is done through self-managed super funds. They've banned them from doing that and leveraging into that, because, again, they just don't understand. I'll repeat this, and I've said this before in this chamber.

Not only have they done this—we can argue about the merits of why we think that's bad policy, and we'll reverse those policies. But the other shame about this is that they deceived. Every single person who's here right now, just remember—you deceived your communities and you deceived the Australian community.

You said you wouldn't do this. Not only have you done this but, before the election, as the Prime Minister—he's on the record as saying he would not do this, and the deceit of that will not be forgotten. Well, the good news is that, on this side of the chamber, we understand the pressures on family budgets and we understand how small business works, or how business works, and that's why we have given a pledge for the tax-back guarantee.

Now, what is the tax-back guarantee? We know what bracket creep is. Inflation is out of control in this country too because of this government, so people are going into higher tax brackets as they go into higher wage ranges.

We have guaranteed that we will increase the tax ranges and increase bracket creep levels so that people don't pay higher taxes. That will be worth over $1,000 for the average household after four years, after we get into government and bring this in—a real tax cut, something that that side of politics just doesn't understand. The other thing that's happening—I have children; a lot of us have children.

Some know people or have family members or friends who just can't afford—or there are not enough houses in this country being built. And it's been really exacerbated over the last five years. One of the reasons why the housing crisis has been exacerbated over the last five years in this country is that, in the first two terms, after six years of this government—we're coming up to the fifth year—it is projected that two million people will have arrived in this country.

When you have two million people arrive with a net overseas migration and you're not building the houses for that amount of people, shock, horror, gasp—rents go up. Shock, horror, gasp—there's less housing supply for people, and rents have gone up. Again, the good news is that, on this side of the chamber, we understand that issue, and our policy will be to tie migration to new housing being built.

We understand that and we will limit it to that. The other big pressure and the other thing causing issues for houses and businesses in this country is the inflation rate. I want to give you some core inflation rates, which strip away volatile fuel costs.

I want to give you the inflation rates of a few countries: Australia, 3.6 per cent; France, one per cent; Japan, 1.6 per cent; Italy, 1.6 per cent; Canada, two per cent; Germany, 2½ per cent; UK, 2.6 per cent; and US, 2.6 per cent. What does that say? We have one of the highest inflation rates in the world.

It's not me saying this. Prominent economists are saying that is the result of this government's reckless spending. It's not me saying it; that is economists saying it.

Again, the pressure that puts on higher grocery prices and on budgets is astronomical. The other thing I want to talk about, because we can't forget this, is a big part of cost-of-living prices: the energy costs in this country. We remember, when you talk about deceit, that this prime minister said on numerous occasions—I think 90 times—that he was going to lower your energy bill by $250 per year.

That should have come in by now, because that was going to be five years after they got elected. That should be by now. The average energy bill for the average family has gone up more, closer to $1,000, rather than down by $250.

Again, that is deceit from this government. Why is that? That is the net zero 2050 folly of this government.

The net zero 2050 policy of this government is putting pressure on energy prices in this country and risking the energy reliability of our transmission system. I remind everyone opposite that, when you're talking about carbon emission reductions, the three biggest emitters in the world—China, the US and India—are not signed up to net zero 2050. Why do I say that?

Because Australia emits just over one per cent of carbon emissions, yet this government, in ideological folly, is risking the energy transmission system of this country and forcing prices to be higher because of that folly. I'll just finish very quickly. This is a government that is out of touch.

This is a government that is arrogant. But we have the policies of linking migration to housing and the cost-of-living measures that we will bring in to make life better for this out-of-touch, arrogant government.