Budget

Ambihaipahar argued that the housing system was broken, with house prices rising significantly faster than wages since 1999. Ambihaipahar shared personal and community experiences of young people struggling to enter the housing market, including a 17-year-old who had resigned themselves to never owning a home. Ambihaipahar stated that the government's reforms were necessary to ensure that homeownership remained a realistic goal for future generations.

Violi criticised the government for not proposing these changes during the election, arguing that the budget papers themselves indicated the reforms would result in 35,000 fewer houses and higher rents. Violi cited the Treasurer's previous statements that the system did not need changing to increase supply. Violi promoted the coalition's tax-back guarantee as a way to automatically cut taxes for workers and avoid bracket creep.

Moncrieff highlighted the government's ambitious housing agenda, including $47 billion for new homes and support for first-home buyers. Moncrieff noted the government's efforts to reduce taxes for 13 million workers and strengthen Medicare through urgent care clinics and hospital funding. Moncrieff urged the opposition to support these measures rather than blocking them, citing their past record of opposing tax cuts and housing investment.

Wallace shared an anecdote about local business owners considering relocating due to the tax changes, arguing that the government lacked the courage to take these policies to an election. Wallace claimed that removing negative gearing would increase rents, making it harder for young people to save deposits, and cited budget papers that accepted this outcome. Wallace promoted the coalition's plan to index tax thresholds to combat bracket creep.

Ng argued that the combination of negative gearing and the capital gains tax discount had turbocharged housing prices, leading to a decline in homeownership rates, particularly among younger people. Ng described doorknocking experiences where both young and older residents supported the changes to address wealth inequality and lock-in effects. Ng emphasised that negative gearing would remain available for new homes to boost supply.

Venning accused the government of breaking pre-election promises regarding capital gains tax, stating that such guarantees were made repeatedly before the election. Venning argued that the reforms would harm regional economies, small businesses, and families, and claimed that the government had engaged in political deceit by hiding these plans. Venning asserted that the Australian people would remember this breach of faith at the next election.

Witty argued that the opposition was running a scare campaign due to a lack of economic plan, while the government was delivering tax cuts and cost-of-living relief. Witty highlighted the working Australians tax offset, instant tax deductions, and investments in Medicare and housing as evidence of the government's commitment to working people. Witty urged the rejection of the motion, stating that the government was acting to address real challenges in housing, cost of living, and public services.