-
Georganas supported the bills, highlighting investments in housing, healthcare, and infrastructure to address cost-of-living pressures. Georganas noted that recent budget measures, including tax offsets and urgent care clinics, were helping Australians manage financial strain. Georganas emphasised the delivery of social and affordable homes through the Housing Australia Future Fund and local infrastructure projects in his electorate. Georganas argued that these initiatives provided stability and improved community productivity.
-
Boyce opposed the budget, describing it as punitive towards workers, veterans, and regional communities. Boyce criticised the capital gains tax changes as unfair and warned they could result in taxes exceeding actual profits for diversified investors. Boyce highlighted cuts to veteran allied health services, private health insurance rebates for seniors, and regional infrastructure funding. Boyce argued the government prioritised ideological net zero goals over practical economic needs and regional development.
-
Campbell supported the bills, focusing on cost-of-living relief and housing reforms. Campbell detailed the expansion of Medicare urgent care clinics and cheaper PBS medicines as key benefits for households. Campbell explained that changes to negative gearing and capital gains tax were designed to make the housing market fairer and help first-home buyers. Campbell also highlighted local infrastructure investments, including an overpass project to improve road safety and traffic flow.
-
Watson-Brown moved an amendment calling for a 25 per cent gas export tax, arguing the budget failed to address public demand for corporate accountability. Watson-Brown contended that the government's refusal to tax gas exports undermined trust and exacerbated economic pressures on everyday people. Watson-Brown urged members across parties to support the amendment to raise revenue for public spending. Watson-Brown framed the issue as a choice between corporate interests and democratic responsiveness.
-
Briskey supported the bills, defending the budget as a plan to level the playing field for younger Australians. Briskey explained that limiting negative gearing to new builds and indexing capital gains tax would help first-home buyers without penalising existing investors. Briskey highlighted ongoing investments in Medicare, cheaper medicines, and tax cuts as essential cost-of-living relief. Briskey rejected opposition claims about migration, emphasising the positive contributions of diverse communities to the economy.
-
Landry opposed the bills, arguing they neglected regional Australia's infrastructure and economic needs. Landry criticised tax changes affecting family trusts and capital gains, stating they added uncertainty for small businesses and first-home savers. Landry highlighted cuts to agriculture, drought resilience, and regional road projects, contrasting them with funding for urban initiatives. Landry called for sustained investment in regional freight corridors, water security, and local services to support economic productivity.
-
lead
Thwaites argued that the budget addresses structural barriers to homeownership for young Australians by reforming tax settings and increasing housing supply. Thwaites highlighted investments in social and affordable housing, including new projects in her electorate, and cost-of-living relief measures such as tax cuts and fuel excise reductions. Thwaites emphasised the government's commitment to strengthening Medicare through permanent urgent care clinics and capping prescription costs. Thwaites contrasted these measures with the opposition's focus on divisive politics and support for coal, asserting that the budget builds long-term economic resilience.
-
Steggall criticised the budget for insufficient investment in climate resilience, noting that disaster recovery costs far exceed prevention spending. Steggall supported winding back tax advantages for investment properties but opposed extending capital gains tax changes to business investments, shares, and startups, arguing this would harm productivity and young people's ability to build wealth. Steggall also highlighted the failure to increase JobSeeker payments, leaving vulnerable Australians behind, while welcoming investments in child support reform to address financial abuse.
-
Miller-Frost defended the budget as a responsible package that delivers tax relief and strengthens Medicare, including funding for urgent care clinics and public hospitals. Miller-Frost highlighted significant investments in aged care to meet growing demand and measures to boost housing supply through infrastructure funding and tax reforms. Miller-Frost argued that removing negative gearing on established homes and adjusting capital gains tax would level the playing field for first-home buyers and increase housing stock.
-
Birrell argued that the budget expands government size and punishes entrepreneurial success through changes to capital gains tax and negative gearing. Birrell contended that these reforms would discourage risk-taking and drive entrepreneurs overseas, while failing to address the root causes of housing affordability through supply-side constraints. Birrell also criticised cuts to regional infrastructure projects like Inland Rail and warned that bracket creep would negate the benefits of proposed tax cuts.
-
Neumann highlighted the budget's tax cuts and cost-of-living relief, including the working Australians tax offset and instant deduction, which he argued would benefit millions of workers. Neumann defended the fuel security measures and gas reservation scheme as essential responses to global instability. Neumann emphasised that tax reforms to negative gearing and capital gains would rebalance the system, helping first-home buyers enter the market and directing investment towards productive sectors rather than property speculation.
-
Wood argued that the budget breaks previous promises regarding tax policy and will lead to higher taxes, increased debt, and reduced rental supply. Wood claimed that changes to negative gearing and capital gains tax would disproportionately affect small landlords, retirees, and businesses using trusts, causing complexity and financial strain. Wood also raised concerns about the impact of these reforms on young Australians and cited issues with corruption in state infrastructure projects as evidence of broader governance failures.
-
lead
Zappia argued the budget was responsible amidst global uncertainty and praised the commitment of $230 million for South Australian road funding over ten years. Zappia highlighted improved fuel security with over $10 billion committed to reserves and noted increased stockpiles of petrol, diesel, and jet fuel. Zappia supported health reforms including bulk-billing payments, Medicare urgent care clinics, and $25 billion for public hospitals. Zappia also endorsed tax cuts, small business write-offs, and $47 billion in housing initiatives to increase supply.