Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Reform No. 2) Bill 2026

Senator DUNIAM (Tasmania—Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) (09:58): We are truly a hot ticket today with the amount of people that have come to observe debate in this place. As I rise to speak to the Treasury Laws Amendment (Tax Reform No. 2) Bill 2026, I find myself asking whether what happened here was intentional or whether it was an oversight, especially when it comes to matters related to the so-called widows tax, which, thankfully, we have seen the government pivot on as a result of a sustained campaign by the opposition and, frankly, by the community around bad policy.

This policy was punitive, this policy was in no way humane, and this policy, I'm fearful, was designed to hurt vulnerable Australians, all in the name of something this government is renowned for, and that is tax grabs. They were looking for money to prop up a budget that is beset by bad management and overexpenditure. This is a government that has not been able to rein in its bloated expenditure and has not been able to find the discipline required to manage the books in this country.

Instead of reducing expenditure, they find ways to take other people's money. This very cynical attempt at doing that was something they were caught out on, something that Australians noticed and that we, as an opposition, proudly railed against—with support from the crossbench. To that question: was this intentional or was it incompetence?

Was it something they overlooked and was not intended? Either way, it is a very alarming set of events to have occurred for a government that is supposed to be in charge and doing the right thing by the people of Australia. All of this is happening against the backdrop of an economic crisis in this country.

We've already heard others talk in this debate to some of the issues faced by Australians as a result of this government's policies. While there is somewhat of a reprieve in parts of this bill—and we'll come to those details shortly—it is worth revisiting some of those things Australians are experiencing right now. Let's start with what's happening to Australian homeowners.

Let's start by looking at what's happening to first home buyers. Let's start by considering what experts are telling us about the rental market in this country, and the response by this government. The denial that there is an issue when it comes to house prices—and, therefore, the value of the most secure and stable asset most Australians will ever own going through the floor—and pretending that there is no issue here, and that it's a correction and something to be celebrated, is alarming.

As a result of government policy, people's No. 1 asset—in most cases, their homes—has seen a massive dip. When we're seeing auction clearance rates plummet, when we're seeing the number of houses brought to market similarly plummet, when we are being told this by experts and banks like the NAB—backed in by real estate agencies and Australia's largest property management agency, Ray White—you get this concern outlined that rental prices are going to increase by 30 per cent.

That is something Australian households cannot afford. When prices are going down, people are not going to be selling their assets if they don't have to; they're going to get less than they want for the asset they're seeking to sell. This is as a result of government policy.

Was this the intention or not? I've heard government ministers having a bet each way—that they want to bring down house prices but then running away from that claim when confronted by members of the press gallery on whether what we are seeing is as a result of government policy. I assert that it is.

I assert that the economic carnage we are seeing inflicted upon Australian households is precisely that. Back to the elements of this bill. Against that backdrop of economic carnage, of Australian communities being let down by this government, which has no capacity to manage our budget, no capacity to grow the economy, no capacity to rein in its expenditure—it is frankly gobsmacking.

The widows tax, as Senator Chandler rightly pointed out, was a tax that would have penalised people who lost a partner—a widow or widower—and who, through the transfer of an asset, would have been pinged by Labor's approach to this tax. The exemptions previously available to this cohort of people no longer exist. This bill changes that.

This bill wasn't coming. We were told by government ministers that this was not an issue, that it was something we were running a scare campaign on. But the facts bear out.

The biggest fact of all, the fact that the government have backflipped, demonstrates that this was an issue all along and that that denial, that pretence that this was not an issue, was completely false—and they knew it all along. The fact they were willing to consult on this and take as long as they did demonstrates that they knew there was an issue. But I guess we'll never get to the bottom of whether this government knew what it was doing or was completely incompetent and out at sea on this issue, penalising widows across the country or people who are going through that terrible life-changing event of a divorce or escaping domestic violence, penalising these people who are going through something they don't have a choice in—and attracting a higher rate of tax on the transfer of an asset because of the dissolution of a relationship.

How is that a government with heart? How is that compassion? How is that anything that is good for the Australian community?

It's not. It's a blatant tax grab. It was this government coming after your money hoping no-one would notice—hoping that no-one would see—that this was the intention of its policy.

They hoped that, under the cover of a big budget, which had a lot of terrible measures in it, people wouldn't notice it. But, unfortunately for this government, it was spotted. People across the country saw exactly what was going on here, and I am proud of my colleagues for having sustained a campaign to call on the government to wheel back this punitive set of taxes, to make the changes necessary and to restore some humanity to the budget for vulnerable communities in this country—people that, frankly, should not have had to experience this.

Again, I have a question that remains outstanding and that is: did this government intend to do this or was it an oversight? Either way, shame on this government. I commend Angus Taylor, the Leader of the Opposition, for sustaining this campaign to bring about change, and I do therefore commend the bill to the Senate.