Economic Reform Roundtable

Ananda-Rajah argued that the roundtable addressed intergenerational inequity and the housing crisis, highlighting the $43 billion Homes for Australia package. Ananda-Rajah noted that over 100,000 households had used the Home Guarantee Scheme and that the government was accelerating its implementation date to 1 October. Ananda-Rajah defended the expansion of the scheme and the Housing Australia Future Fund, contrasting these measures with Coalition policies that she claimed would raid superannuation savings.

McKim expressed concern that winding back regulations could weaken environmental protections and increase power bills through less energy-efficient homes. McKim warned that road user charges might disincentivise electric vehicle uptake if not designed carefully. McKim stated that the Greens were open to collaborative reform but urged the government to end tax breaks for property speculators and fossil fuel subsidies, suggesting a fossil fuel export levy to support those facing cost-of-living pressures.

Roberts claimed that One Nation originated the idea to pause National Construction Code changes to save construction costs. Roberts attributed the homelessness crisis to high immigration levels and proposed deporting non-compliant visa holders and stopping foreign ownership of homes. Roberts advocated for reducing regulations, ending net zero targets to lower energy prices, and allowing access to superannuation for home deposits, arguing that super funds should be able to invest in members' own homes.

Hume argued that the roundtable failed to deliver tangible measures for business confidence, red tape reduction, or power price relief. Hume cited statistics showing productivity and living standards had declined under the government, with the Reserve Bank warning of further falls. Hume criticised the adoption of Coalition policy on the building code as insufficient and opposed changes to the superannuation performance test, arguing it would force funds to invest in government projects rather than seeking the best financial returns for members.

Mulholland defended the roundtable as a constructive discussion with stakeholders, contrasting it with the Coalition's lack of engagement. Mulholland highlighted economic improvements under the government, including low inflation, rising real wages, job creation, and record-low unemployment. Mulholland argued that the government was actively working to improve living standards and productivity, while accusing the opposition of pursuing extreme policies and abandoning net zero commitments.

Hodgins-May argued that the roundtable ignored the barrier to productivity posed by a lack of access to quality, affordable child care. Hodgins-May stated that a universal, low-cost early childhood education system could grow the economy by over $100 billion. Hodgins-May criticised the government for prioritising fossil fuel corporations over families and noted the establishment of a Senate inquiry examining the safety and quality of early childhood education.

Sharma argued that the summit achieved little, with the government dismissing calls for fiscal discipline and budget guardrails. Sharma cited warnings from Treasury and former Reserve Bank governors about unsustainable expenditure growth, which the government reportedly rejected. Sharma claimed the outcomes were underwhelming, consisting mainly of a potential tax on electric vehicles, the adoption of Coalition building code policy, and changes to superannuation investment rules that prioritised government projects over member returns.