Mr McCORMACK (Riverina) (18:40): The Treasurer has some explaining to do. He really does, because this legislation bells the cat on his failure. On his watch, what we saw was a proposal by the Australian Labor Party to put in an unrealised capital gain. Who would that have hurt the most? It would have hurt farmers, who already do it tough with the vagaries of the weather, of markets and of international volatility. They were going to be hit with an unrealised capital gains tax. Let’s call it what it was: a tax, a proposed slug on them, which would have been so very unfair.
With that unrealised gain, what we would have seen would have been farmers whose properties went up in value, increased in worth, then being hit with a tax bill on the price of that land going up even though they weren’t going to sell it. Because it had increased in value, they were going to be hit with a tax bill. What were they supposed to do—hive off a paddock or three to pay the tax bill that those opposite wanted to slug them with? Thankfully, public perception and people power has seen that particular element of this particular piece of legislation removed, and thank goodness for that.
The government has agreed to index the $3 million threshold, preventing bracket creep from slowly expanding the tax base over time. What we see through those two concepts alone—the unrealised paper gains, protecting SMSFs holding farms and small businesses from being taxed on gains that they have not made, and the indexation of the $3 million threshold—is the government and its Treasurer admitting they got it badly wrong. Thankfully, they could admit that that error needed amending, and it has been amended. But will you hear any member opposite, in their contributions on the Treasury Laws Amendment (Building a Stronger and Fairer Super System) Bill 2026, admit that? No, I don’t think you will.
I certainly don’t think you will hear any admission that this was going to be an unfair slug on our farmers, who are already, particularly in Western Australia, facing the reality that, if they sell sheepmeat to the Middle East, they won’t have a trade in the future, with the live export ban. Farmers in the Murray-Darling are facing the prospect of less water because more productive water has been taken and used for the environmental purposes that this government is pushing. Farmers are already faced with the prospect of paying higher fuel costs because of the situation in Iran, and let’s not forget the high energy prices which just keep going up and up. The people that that hurts most are small-business owners and farmers, farmers who grow our food and fibre.
Another thing that you won’t hear from those opposite in their speeches on this important bill is the situation surrounding Shield and First Guardian and the collapses in the managed investment schemes. I appreciate that the government is planning to tighten the rules around MISs and to give the corporate watchdog, the Australian Securities and Investment Commission, more power to demand information. But those Shield and First Guardian collapses cost people their life savings. It destroyed some people, unfairly and tragically so. Can you imagine, Mr Speaker, being one of those people on the cusp of a well-earned retirement, looking forward to your twilight years, knowing that you had that nest egg there, and all of a sudden having it taken away? It’s so very unfair, and it’s on Labor’s watch—on this government’s watch.
In a 10 February 2026 ABC news article, business reporters Ben Butler and Nassim Khadem wrote:
About 12,000 Australians poured $1.1 billion in retirement savings into the two funds, which collapsed in 2024 and 2025 amid what incoming ASIC chair Sarah Court has described as ‘industrial scale misconduct’.
They’re not my words. They go on:
Investors in First Guardian, many of whom switched from highly regulated super funds into the product, face little prospect of recovery directly from the fund, with liquidators in December saying just $1.6 million of $446 million tipped into it had been recovered—not enough to pay their fees.
In order to recover money for investors, the corporate watchdog has instead launched a series of lawsuits against companies responsible for overseeing the fund.
Have we heard the Treasurer explain what was going to be done for those investors? Yes, many of those investors switched from highly-regulated super funds, but they did it based on good information, and, let’s not forget, they did it during a period that Labor was in government.
Labor talks about being the party and the government of superannuation. They’re proud to beat their chest about it and proud to spruik it. They condemn us for supposedly not supporting it. I listened carefully to the contributions of the member for Holt and the member for Moreton. The member for Holt talked about $36 billion being taken out during COVID. She said it ‘had depleted or emptied’ some of their superannuation pools of money. But what she didn’t say is that it’s investors’ money. What Labor people never understand is that it’s actually the money of the investors. It’s not their companies’ money. It’s not the unions’ money—although she did mention the unions, because Labor members are always beholden to unions. I can say that, having been a member of a union for 21 years; nobody can criticise me in that regard.
Mr Pike: Shame!
Mr McCORMACK: Yes, I was! I see that there has to be balance, and I appreciate the role unions do play, Member for Bowman. I do, but it’s all in moderation and in balance.
What we saw during COVID was a period of time where people were desperate, and the coalition had their back. I would hate to think what would have happened during those dark days had Labor been in power. They wanted us to spend more money. They go on about a trillion dollars worth of Liberal Party debt, which is not true at all—also it was the Liberals and Nationals; I should throw the Nationals into any discussion about who was actually in power—but it was money that kept business doors open. It was money that kept Australians safe. It was money that kept people alive. No Labor member should ever downplay the role that was played by the coalition government, led by Scott Morrison. The Johns Hopkins centre said that Australia was the second-best in the world for COVID preparedness, and part of that was allowing people to access their own money—that is, superannuation.
The member for Moreton talked about the title of the bill. I admire whoever it is in the Labor Party who writes the titles of their bills, and I’m being genuine here. It’s always rainbows and fairy floss and unicorns; it always seems like, ‘Why hadn’t we thought of this before?’ They are always beautifully scripted, ‘building a stronger and fairer’ insert word here ‘system’ or ‘program’ or whatever the case might be.
The member for Moreton talked about this being a core Labor value. She talked about equity and fairness, and every other Labor member will come in here will repeat the same dogma. They will repeat the same lines because that’s what they are told to do. It’s got to be fairer because it’s a core Labor Party value, as if nobody else cares. And here we have the modern-day Robin Hoods taking from the rich to give to the poor. Well, this isn’t Sherwood Forest. This is the House of Representatives and there are people on both sides of parliament—I’m sure even on the crossbench too—who care about people in retirement having a dignified quality of life because they have their own money and they can access it. That’s important. It is.
This is a government which, as I said at the start, has been found out and it is very much waving the white flag of retreat under pressure when it comes to the unrealised capital gains issue and the indexation issue. This was not a proposal that was in any way, shape or form about fairness when it came to the unrealised capital gains. It was not. And certainly I would really like to hear what is being done by the government to help those investors in Shield and First Guardian, those investors who now face a very bleak, certainly not a dignified, quality of life in retirement.
Australia needs a good superannuation system. And I would agree with the Labor members opposite who say we have a country that is the envy of the world. It is. But it’s not for those poor Shield and First Guardian investors. They are faced with the prospect of not seeing money that was theirs because of what happened with the collapse of those two super schemes. We don’t, and we won’t, hear Labor members talking about that.
Equally concerning as the unrealised capital gains was the government’s refusal to index the $3 million threshold. We have an inflationary situation at the moment that is being made worse by this Treasurer, the member for Rankin, and his willingness to pour debt petrol on the inflation fire. I’m not against spending; I never have been. I was in charge of $110 billion worth of spending when I was the infrastructure minister. There’s good spending and there’s bad spending, and, at the moment, unfortunately, we’re seeing too much of the latter on this treasurer’s watch. Failing to index thresholds was a silent tax hike. It was. Thankfully, he has acknowledged that with the concessions made in this particular bill.
Over time, more Australians would have been captured, not because they were wealthier in real terms but because inflation eroded the value of the threshold. It’s bracket creep by design and a flawed policy, and Labor, through taking that aspect out, has admitted that. But you won’t hear Labor members mentioning it. You’ll just hear them talking about fairness, equity and core Labor values while reading out the title of the bill as though asking, ‘Why hadn’t the coalition thought about this?’ They’ll regurgitate history, as Labor members always do, and they’re very good at that. But I’ll tell you what. They might be good at the politics—Labor members always are—but, I have to say, they’re not very good at the policy, and this shows it once again.