logo
Huge change to super that no Aussie wants as Peter Dutton is dealt a brutal blow to policy promise

Huge change to super that no Aussie wants as Peter Dutton is dealt a brutal blow to policy promise

Daily Mail​23-04-2025

Peter Dutton 's plan to allow first home buyers to access $50,000 from their super has proved unpopular with a new poll showing three-quarters of Australians opposed.
The Opposition Leader made accessing retirement savings a keynote announcement at the Liberal Party's campaign launch in south-west Sydney.
'We will allow Australians to access up to $50,000 of their super towards a deposit for their first home,' he said.
'Your super is your money – not the government's.'
But a new survey from housing welfare group Everybody's Home found 75.68 per cent were opposed to the idea of allowing Australians to withdraw super from compulsory employer contributions.
Report author Maiy Azize said the Liberal Party's policy would only worsen the housing affordability crisis by pushing up house prices.
'Critics argue that it will do little to ease housing stress, while risking long-term harm to retirement savings and pushing prices even higher in an already overheated market,' she said.
Economist Saul Eslake, the principal of Corinna Economic Advisory, told Daily Mail Australia the Liberal Party's plan to allow early access to super would simply push up property values.
'The idea that you can take up to 40 per cent of your superannuation savings - up to a maximum of $50,000 - and put that towards the purchase of a home, will inevitably result in people taking out bigger mortgages than they otherwise would,' he said.
'This will result in higher house prices, which will be to the benefit of those who already own homes and the disadvantage of those who don't.'
Everybody's Home found a similar sentiment among Aussies surveyed about the Liberal Party's early access to super policy, with three-quarters of respondents saying they were 'extremely concerned' or 'very concerned' about it.
'Many respondents indicated that the scheme would not solve the root causes of Australia's affordability crisis,' it said.
'Some suggested it would simply add more money into an already overheated market, driving up prices rather than easing them.
'It is not simply a matter of preserving super balances, but a broader recognition that housing affordability will not be fixed through individual withdrawals from retirement savings.'
The Opposition is also proposing to allow first home buyers to claim interest repayments on tax - on the first $650,000 of their mortgage for five years - provided it is a brand new property and they are owner-occupiers.
It will be available for individuals earning up to $175,000 and for couples on a joint income of $250,000 at the time they are approved for the tax deduction scheme.
The Opposition's housing spokesman Michael Sukkar argued this would help turn renters into home owners.
'We know there are a couple of really big challenges for first-home buyers - they can't service a mortgage and therefore they can't get finance; and the deposit hurdle is too high,' he told the ABC's Insiders program on Easter Sunday.
'Our plan is the only plan that seeks to address both and not by providing them a grant but by giving them some of their own tax back.
'Being able to put that on the repayments on their mortgage gets them through that difficult period and is ultimately going to convert Australians from renters into home owners.'
Labor also has policies for first home buyers, with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese announcing all property newcomers would be able to get a mortgage with a small, five per cent deposit instead of the usual 20 per cent equity.
Mr Eslake, a former federal president of the Young Liberals, said first home buyer grants have been inflating house prices since Australia's longest-serving prime minister Robert Menzies introduced the first scheme in 1964.
This was at the urging of future PM John Howard, who at the time was president of the NSW Young Liberals.
'We have 60 years of evidence that shows that anything that allows Australians to spend more on housing than they'd be able to results in more expensive housing and a small proportion of the population owning it,' he said.
'And this is just another example of the sort of policies that, far from solving the housing problems we've had a for a long time, have actually made them worse.'
The Everybody's Home survey wasn't a scientific poll, however, based on gathering a random sample of views.
The housing welfare lobby group admitted the 740 responses were drawn from 'supporters of the Everybody's Home campaign, meaning respondents were drawn from a sample that is already concerned about housing and housing affordability'.
Existing laws don't allow Australians to access compulsory employer contributions to super to buy a first home, with level rising from 11.5 per cent to 12 per cent on July 1.
But first home buyers can access their voluntary superannuation contributions to buy a first home under the First Home Super Saver Scheme.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Fate of NSW Liberal party to be decided at crunch meeting after federal takeover
Fate of NSW Liberal party to be decided at crunch meeting after federal takeover

The Guardian

time6 hours ago

  • The Guardian

Fate of NSW Liberal party to be decided at crunch meeting after federal takeover

The fate of the New South Wales Liberal party will be decided at a crunch meeting on Tuesday, where the party's federal executive will weigh up whether to end or extend its control over the division. The federal Liberal party forcibly took over the NSW division in September last year after the NSW branch failed to lodge nominations for 140 candidates in 16 councils before the local government elections. A committee was appointed to replace its state executive for a period of 10 months. On Tuesday, the Liberal party federal executive will decide the next steps for new Liberal leader Sussan Ley's home state division in one of her first major challenges. Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email In the lead-up to the meeting, a small NSW-focused committee remaining in control of the state branch has been firming as the most likely outcome. That would mean replacing the three-person committee backed by Peter Dutton and supported by Tony Abbott. The administrative committee – whose term runs out on June 30 – ignited a internal furore after one of the members, Alan Stockdale, said Liberal women were 'sufficiently assertive' and perhaps men needed a leg up. The federal executive is also expected to agree to launch two separate reviews after the party's worst election defeat in its 80-year history – a conventional post-election inquiry and a broader probe into the party. Arthur Sinodinos is expected to be among the senior party figures to lead the campaign review, although Guardian Australia understands the former Liberal minister, staffer and US ambassador has yet to be formally approached for the task. John Howard-era cabinet minister and former rightwing power broker Nick Minchin was another name that was floated. The Queensland senator, James McGrath, is the frontrunner to lead the deeper dive into the party, according to multiple Liberal sources. The federal intervention has rankled all three factions in NSW – the moderates, the centre-right and the right – and all are perturbed with the lack of progress and consultation. A three-person committee made up of Victorian party figures Stockdale and Richard Alston and former NSW state MP Peta Seaton was installed to manage the branch, including reviewing the party's constitution, overhauling the administrative machinery and helping to conduct the federal election campaign. As a decision on the future of the intervention neared, a compromise in which the federal executive agreed to continue with a committee but install more NSW members has garnered a level of support across the factions. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion The most likely shape of the new committee would be an elder statesperson from NSW as the chair – and the three remaining vice-presidents from the NSW state executive. 'It's very much a Speakman-Ley proposal,' said one senior Liberal, referring to Ley and the NSW opposition leader, Mark Speakman. 'They have been working very closely together,' he said. This option would have the advantage of being more acceptable to the NSW party members because local figures would be in control. Ley would not comment before Tuesday's meeting but sources close to the Liberal leader disputed suggestions she was working with any faction on a particular model. The compromise is not certain to succeed as it requires 75% support from the 22-strong federal executive, which is compromised of Ley's federal parliamentary leadership team, state division presidents and federal branch officials. 'We're about two-thirds there,' said one insider, noting that most of the state representatives on the federal executive were instinctively likely to favour more state control. If the vote for either the old or the compromise committee does not achieve 75%, the control of the NSW division will automatically revert to the NSW state executive.

Majority of Australians think China will be world's most powerful country by 2035, poll finds
Majority of Australians think China will be world's most powerful country by 2035, poll finds

The Guardian

timea day ago

  • The Guardian

Majority of Australians think China will be world's most powerful country by 2035, poll finds

A majority of Australians expect China will be the most powerful country in the world by 2035 as trust in the US tumbles, new research has found. Just over one in three Australians (36%) trusted the US to act responsibly on the world stage, representing a 20-point fall from 2024 and the smallest proportion since the Lowy Institute began polling in 2005. The thinktank's 2025 report found only one in four respondents had any confidence in president Donald Trump's approach to world affairs – less than half of the 46% who expressed faith in Joe Biden the previous year. Confidence in the Chinese leader, Xi Jinping, rose four points to 16%, and Australians were evenly split on whether Xi or Trump was a more reliable partner. Australians were just as likely to view China as an economic partner than as a security threat for the first time since 2020 – though a high proportion of voters still distrust China and believe it will become a military threat to Australia in the next 20 years. 'There's slightly more trust, slightly less threat perceptions, [but] it's still a pretty bleak picture for how Australians look at China,' said Ryan Neelam, the poll author and a director at the Lowy Institute. A majority of respondents believed the US would come to Australia's defence if it were attacked, with 63% agreeing, a drop from the 75% agreement recorded in similar questions in recent years. Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email But Australians nonetheless continued to support the strong military relationship, despite a loss of trust likely inspired by Trump's 'shocking' and 'norm-breaking' foreign policy, according to Neelam. 'It's almost as if the Australian public are separating those two things in their minds: the instability and unpredictability of Trump's approach to world affairs, from the institution of the alliance.' Since the 2024 survey, the gap between Australians' trust in the US compared with China has more than halved, as perceptions of China continued to improve from their nadir in 2022, Neelam said. 'That's quite remarkable for Australia's key security ally to have such a low level of trust,' he said. 'The weight of expectation is that China will be more powerful and more predominant in the global system.' Just over one in four respondents believed the US would be the most important and powerful nation in 10 years' time, with more than half expecting China to take the lead. Four in five voters said the alliance with the US was important for Australia's security, similar to the support observed in 2023 and 2024. Support for the Aukus nuclear-powered submarine deal was also steady with two-thirds of those polled in favour, similar to the level observed since 2022. Coalition voters and residents of Queensland and Western Australia were especially supportive, each recording about four in five people in favour, while Victorians and Labor voters were more lukewarm, at three in five. Respondents were polled in March, prior to the US defence department's announcement of a review of the Aukus deal, which Anthony Albanese described as 'appropriate' ahead of a possible meeting with Trump on the sidelines of the G7 meeting in Canada. Three in five people expressed confidence in Albanese's approach to world affairs in the Lowy poll, putting the prime minister just behind France's Emmanuel Macron and New Zealand's Christopher Luxon. Luxon was the most trusted world leader, though nearly a quarter of those polled expressed no view, most of whom saying they did not know who he was.

The left needs to act more boldly or we are all doomed
The left needs to act more boldly or we are all doomed

The National

time3 days ago

  • The National

The left needs to act more boldly or we are all doomed

According to immigration lawyers, agents arrested people – including families with small children – and held them in a stuffy office basement for days without sufficient food and water. Given the brutal nature of these raids, and the failure to uphold basic human rights (such as the right to due process and the right to legal representation), it is no wonder that protests have taken place. However, unlike the 1992 LA riots, the protests sparked by the actions of ICE have been overwhelmingly peaceful, and have been confined to a six-block stretch of downtown LA. READ MORE: Israel launches second wave of major strikes on Iran Yet, despite this, Donald Trump ordered the National Guard to be deployed against the California governor's wishes – the first time since 1965 that a president had deployed National Guard troops to a state without a governor's request. Although it is heartening to see ordinary Americans beginning to make a stand against the inhumane, illegal, and downright cruel actions of the Trump administration, we cannot forget the path that led the United States here – corruption, obscene inequality, and the deliberate fanning of the flames of racism and bigotry. I find myself grateful on a daily basis that I do not live in America, only to be reminded that these issues are much closer to home than many of us care to admit. Over the last several nights, Ballymena in Northern Ireland has been rocked by racist riots. They began after a vigil held for a teenage girl who was allegedly sexually assaulted by two 14-year-olds. (Image: Brian Lawless/PA Wire) When rumours spread that a Romanian interpreter was in the court, it was enough to ignite the racism that has long been simmering away. Police said the unrest escalated into racially motivated violence, with mobs targeting foreign residents by breaking their windows, and setting fire to their homes. The justification given for these racist riots is that residents feel their community is being 'overrun' by foreigners, and that it has happened very quickly. For context, 3.4% of Northern Ireland's population are from ethnic minority backgrounds compared to 12.9% in Scotland and 18.3% in England and Wales. Northern Ireland is the least diverse part of the United Kingdom. The rioters claim immigrants are 'freeloading' off taxpayer-funded resources, and are committing crimes. Again, this is an age-old claim which barely masks the racism motivating it. But when a young, white, Irish or British person moves to somewhere like Australia or Spain to start a new life, we encourage them and wish them the best. We do not assume they are scroungers looking to suck resources away from native Australians, so why is it different when people come to the UK for a better life? Equally, the vast majority of sexual assaults in the UK are committed by white men born in the UK – where are the riots then? The anger and despair that people feel when they see their communities decline, their opportunities disappear and their national institutions disintegrate is completely understandable and justified. The problem comes when that righteous anger is manipulated and aimed at entirely the wrong people. While standards of living in the UK continue to decline, while social security is dismantled piece by piece – no matter which party is in government – when the waiting lists for NHS appointments and decent housing seem to only ever grow, it is fair to feel angry and attacked. However, when the richest people in society are getting richer while ordinary people are simultaneously told that they must, again, tighten their belts, it seems obvious to me where that anger should be directed. And it certainly is not at immigrants just trying to live their lives. This same manipulation of that anger and despair that we have seen in the US, and in Northern Ireland, can also be seen much closer to home in Scotland. Nigel Farage's Reform UK came third in the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election. It was once unthinkable that Farage would ever enjoy even close to that level of success in politics, never mind in Scottish politics. As I have said previously, something is going to eventually give way. People are desperate for change from the status quo, and they will vote for whoever they perceive to be deviating the most from it, no matter how false that perception is. Given that the status quo has been moving increasingly further to the right, it is the perfect time for left-leaning political parties to think and act boldly. If they don't, then we are all doomed.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store