Michael Sukkar MP

Interview with Peta Credlin – Sky News Australia

THE HON MICHAEL SUKKAR MP – SHADOW MINISTER FOR SOCIAL SERVICES, NDIS, HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS

TRANSCRIPT

INTERVIEW WITH PETA CREDLIN – SKY NEWS AUSTRALIA

Thursday 26 September, 2024

TOPICS: Housing, Negative Gearing, Capital Gains Tax, Victorian Liberal Party

E&OE

Peta Credlin: But first, let’s return to the potential hit impacting millions that will come if Labor breaks its promises on negative gearing and capital gains tax discounts. For more on this, I’m joined now by Shadow Housing Minister Michael Sukkar. Michael, welcome to the program. We’ve had a messy couple of days for the government. The PM and the Treasurer though today are at pains to say we’re not looking to change the position. Not that they will, not that they won’t, but they’re not looking to change the position on negative gearing in the CGT discount. But given their history, why should people believe them? And getting this worked up by Treasury, it just doesn’t happen by mistake, does it?

Michael Sukkar: No, it doesn’t. I can tell you, as a former Assistant Treasurer, Peta, the Treasury Department doesn’t just go off and find work for themselves where they haven’t been asked to do so. And secondly, let’s be frank, we all know that if Labor thought they could get away with increasing taxes and abolishing negative gearing, increasing housing taxes, they would do it. In fact, nearly the entire cabinet has argued in favour of abolishing negative gearing and doubling capital gains tax on housing in previous elections. So, I think we all know if they thought they could get away with it, they would do it. Yesterday, we had the farcical scenes of the Prime Minister saying he didn’t even know if the Treasurer had asked. This Prime Minister is slippery. We’ve seen this horror movie before. If they think they can get away with it, they’ll do it. And our job will be to make it very clear to Australians that this would be devastating for millions of very ordinary Australians, not the top end of town that Labor tries to make property investors out to be.

Peta Credlin: Is this why the Prime Minister kicked out his tenants not so long ago and sold his investment property?

Michael Sukkar: Well, it’s pretty curious timing. If you look at who owns investment properties in this country, the two of the three largest categories are teachers and registered nurses. So this idea that it’s being used by the so-called top end of town is utterly false. And the point I’ve been trying to make over the last 24 hours, Peta, to Australians, many of whom would have realised this, if you accept that about a third of Australians rent and I don’t think anyone thinks that that’s likely to change. It’s been at about a third for quite some time now. The question is who do we want to own those homes? Who do we want to be the landlords of those third of Australians who rent? We think Australian mum and dad investors are the right people to own those homes. The Labor Party think the large foreign corporate funds should be the ones who own those homes and they’ve got a bill in front of the Parliament as we speak, Peta, that seeks to reduce taxes for foreign corporate funds to own investment properties in Australia and yet seemingly are doing work to increase the taxes on mum and dad investors. So fewer Australian mum and dads owning investment properties, more foreign corporate funds to own them. Because I think the Labor Party’s view now is they want Australians to rent forever and they want large corporates owning those homes. We’re opposite, we want Australians owning those homes. And in the end, if you increase taxes on housing, you’ll have fewer homes built, you’ll have higher rents and you’ll have worse outcomes for all Australians.

Peta Credlin: And just to underscore that point you made there about renters, you’ve got experts out today, the Grattan Institute and Deloitte saying it’s not going to have a big impact in terms of reducing house prices. It might be 2 to 4 per cent. But Melbourne Uni says it’s really going to increase rents, it’s going to hit those who can least afford it. So this is underscores the point. Why would you do it? Well, you do it perhaps by a deal on the other side of an election if you have to make an accommodation to the Greens, if you’re in a hung parliament. But what’s the likelihood that they’ll go through this campaign like they did in 2022 saying we’ve got no plans, we’re not going to touch stage three, and do it any way. Go through the election this time saying we’re not going to do any of this stuff on negative gearing, knowing that they will if they have to on the other side.

Michael Sukkar: Well, I think the timing is pretty curious, there’s been a confected fight between the Labor Party and the Greens in the Senate, and the Greens have been using this as a demand to pass legislation and would obviously be a pretty important chip for Labor to bring to the table in order to get the Greens’ support on the other side of an election. And we’ve seen, as I said, this horror show before. So one thing before Election, get yourself elected, then do something very different afterwards. But to go back to your analysis, Peta, the truth here is you would see a spike in rates. That’s why Paul Keating, when he abolished negative gearing, quickly reversed course because we saw a huge spike in rents. And secondly, in the long run what you’ll end up seeing is worse affordability for first home buyers because as I said, if you want less of something, you tax it more. If you want people to smoke less, you tax tobacco. If you want people to build fewer homes for first home buyers, you tax it more. And housing’s already one of the most highly taxed asset classes in this country. The idea that the solution to Australia’s housing crisis, largely created by Labor’s uncontrolled migration, is higher taxes – is just farcical. So we’ll be fighting it all the way, Peta, and making very clear to the Australian people that if you don’t want higher taxes on housing, you’ve got to vote for the Coalition at the next election.

Peta Credlin: Michael Sukkar, what do you make of comments made by Peter Dutton the other day with Neil Mitchell that says, you know, the Liberal Party in Victoria should be at least ten points ahead of where they are now? They should be doing as well in Victoria, given how bad the Government is down here as the LNP is doing in Queensland. You’re a long term Victorian, you’re doing well federally, but you struggle at a state level. Why is that?

Michael Sukkar: Well, of course I support what Peter said. I think for any Victoria witnessing this train wreck of a Labor government we’ve got down here, I think it’s, you can only conclude one thing and that is that Victorians are yearning to vote against this government and they need to see a viable alternative and I don’t think you need to be a rocket scientist to highlight that, you know, this week of all weeks, this is not one of those times where our state team are putting their best foot forward. And if we look at what I hope will, what many of us are hoping will happen in Queensland in a matter of weeks with a change of government, that’s the sort of thing that we should be seeing here in Victoria and in the end, staying true to our values, having courage, fighting for the things that people elect Liberal governments to do, takes a bit of courage at times, but you’ve got to stand up to the government, stand up to people like Daniel Andrews and Jacinta Allan. Show that courage and if you do, people will get behind you and I’m very hopeful that the state team will do that in the lead up to the next election.

Peta Credlin: Michael Sukkar, thank you for your time.

ENDS