Privatisation

Tyrrell highlighted government achievements including tax cuts, superannuation reforms, and expanded healthcare and childcare support. Tyrrell argued that effective service delivery matters more than ownership status, citing failures in Tasmanian public assets under Liberal state management. Tyrrell claimed the Tasmanian Liberal government had mismanaged the TT-Line ferry service and TasInsure, leading to significant cost overruns and service issues. Tyrrell concluded that competent governance, rather than just public ownership, was required to deliver quality services.

Roberts argued that nationalising essential services would violate constitutional requirements for just compensation and be financially unaffordable. Roberts mocked the Greens' policy proposals, suggesting government-run supermarkets would be inefficient and ideologically driven. Roberts stated that One Nation supported some public ownership, such as for rail and banking, but opposed total nationalisation. Roberts claimed the motion represented an extreme left-wing agenda that ignored economic realities.

Shoebridge presented data showing that prices for privatised services like electricity, education, and insurance rose significantly faster than general inflation over two decades. Shoebridge argued that privatisation allowed corporations to extract profits while increasing costs for consumers, citing Telstra and Qantas as examples. Shoebridge claimed that former public assets were now generating wealth for executives and shareholders rather than funding public goods. Shoebridge asserted that both major parties had sold off public assets to benefit corporate donors.

Allman-Payne argued that privatisation led to continuous price increases in sectors such as aged care, NDIS, and electricity. Allman-Payne cited specific examples of corporate pricing strategies, including airline baggage fees and energy retailer deals in Queensland. Allman-Payne questioned why consumers bore the burden of shopping for services while corporations faced no obligation to limit price gouging. Allman-Payne advocated for ending privatisation to ensure essential services were provided as public goods.

Faruqi argued that decades of privatisation had harmed household budgets and compromised safety in sectors like childcare and aged care. Faruqi claimed that profit-driven models led to neglect, underpaid workers, and cut corners in essential services. Faruqi stated that minor regulatory tweaks were insufficient to fix systemic issues caused by corporate ownership. Faruqi asserted that governments without plans for public ownership failed to meet the needs of ordinary people.

McKim argued that historical public ownership of infrastructure and services had built the country, but subsequent privatisation led to higher bills and worse services. McKim claimed that privatised assets became tools for profit extraction, with executives earning high salaries while service standards declined. McKim stated that governments now outsourced responsibility and relied on private consultants to manage problems created by asset sales. McKim called for the return of public assets to public control to ensure they served the community.