Answers to Questions

Cox defended the budget as responsible, focusing on resilience, relief, and reform. Cox criticised the opposition for building only 373 homes during their tenure and for failing to address cost-of-living pressures. Cox highlighted investments in Medicare and aged care, noting that 14 urgent care clinics in Western Australia had been made permanent.

Kovacic argued that the government's approach was unfair to young Australians, who were denied access to negative gearing and capital gains tax discounts. Kovacic claimed the Prime Minister had misled voters by stating these policies were off the table before the election. Kovacic cited Reserve Bank of Australia warnings that the five per cent deposit guarantee would increase entry-level dwelling prices without sufficient supply-side measures.

Whiteaker stated that the budget included $47 billion in housing investment and would build 65,000 more homes. Whiteaker noted that tax reforms would help 75,000 young people own homes and that 19,000 Western Australians had already purchased homes through the five per cent deposit scheme. Whiteaker criticised the opposition for lacking a housing plan during their decade in government.

Smith argued that the budget imposed a 'youth tax' through increased national debt, projected to reach $1.2 trillion with annual interest payments of $42 billion. Smith claimed that changes to negative gearing and capital gains tax would reduce rental supply and increase rents by at least 10 per cent. Smith promoted an alternative plan from the opposition to reduce taxes and restore living standards.