❓ Mr. Buswell questions the Treasurer on the decreasing support for first home buyers regarding stamp duty, while Mr. Ripper deflects by questioning the opposition's stance on payroll tax and arguing the ineffectiveness of stamp duty relief in a booming market.
AnsweredQoN 800Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
STATE HOUSING STRATEGY
I refer to the draft state housing strategy, developed over five years and four ministers at the rate of 20 pages per annum. Given that strategy 2.3 recommends that the state government ensure that stamp duty tax relief remains effective, and given that in 2004 first home buyers at the median house price paid $3 300 in stamp duty, receiving a first home buyer discount of 65 per cent, and today the same first home buyer will pay $18 200 in stamp duty, an increase of 450 per cent, and receive absolutely no first home buyer discount, why is it that first home buyers in today’s housing market do not deserve the same level of support as those who were buying in 2004? When will the Treasurer be implementing his own housing strategy? Mr E.S. RIPPER
I refer to the draft state housing strategy, developed over five years and four ministers at the rate of 20 pages per annum. Given that strategy 2.3 recommends that the state government ensure that stamp duty tax relief remains effective, and given that in 2004 first home buyers at the median house price paid $3 300 in stamp duty, receiving a first home buyer discount of 65 per cent, and today the same first home buyer will pay $18 200 in stamp duty, an increase of 450 per cent, and receive absolutely no first home buyer discount, why is it that first home buyers in today’s housing market do not deserve the same level of support as those who were buying in 2004? When will the Treasurer be implementing his own housing strategy? Mr E.S. RIPPER
AnswerView source ↗
My first response to that is to ask the Deputy Leader of the Opposition whether he supports Michael Chaney’s call for the abolition of payroll tax. Mr T. Buswell : No, but I support some of his other calls. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Does the Deputy Leader of the Opposition support his call for a reduction in payroll tax? Mr T. Buswell : Possibly. Mr E.S. RIPPER : There you are, Mr Speaker. Any cut in payroll tax obviously reduces the amount of money that can go towards stamp duty relief. We cannot spend the same dollar twice. If we were to listen to Mr Chaney and abolish payroll tax, we would have nothing at all left over for stamp duty relief, let alone money for hospitals, schools, roads, rail, ports, electricity, water and all the infrastructure that the community needs for services and economic growth in the future. I will come to my second response. When the Deputy Leader of the Opposition quoted from the housing strategy recommendation, did members note the word “effective”? What is effective about giving a temporary advantage to first home buyers, which would last about a second, would immediately result in housing prices going up and would give no benefit at all to first home buyers? What we have to give is practical assistance to first home buyers. Advocating a stamp duty cut right now might make the Deputy Leader of the Opposition feel good politically and it might make him feel as though he is doing something, but at a time when the housing market demand is booming and outstripping supply, despite the very good figures that the Minister for Housing and Works revealed about lot creation, all that would do is increase housing prices. Therefore, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is advocating an increase in housing prices; he is advocating a benefit for the sellers of houses; and he is advocating a benefit for real estate agents, who receive percentage-based commissions. Despite his protestations, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is not advocating an effective initiative for first home buyers, which is what we are interested in. That is why the timing of stamp duty relief, which I support, is a critical matter. Rather than seeking to make political hay out of this issue, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition ought to think more carefully about what his economics training would tell him about the relationship between demand and supply and its effect on price.
Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: My first response to that is to ask the Deputy Leader of the Opposition whether he supports Michael Chaney’s call for the abolition of payroll tax. Mr T. Buswell : No, but I support some of his other calls. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Does the Deputy Leader of the Opposition support his call for a reduction in payroll tax? Mr T. Buswell : Possibly. Mr E.S. RIPPER : There you are, Mr Speaker. Any cut in payroll tax obviously reduces the amount of money that can go towards stamp duty relief. We cannot spend the same dollar twice. If we were to listen to Mr Chaney and abolish payroll tax, we would have nothing at all left over for stamp duty relief, let alone money for hospitals, schools, roads, rail, ports, electricity, water and all the infrastructure that the community needs for services and economic growth in the future. I will come to my second response. When the Deputy Leader of the Opposition quoted from the housing strategy recommendation, did members note the word “effective”? What is effective about giving a temporary advantage to first home buyers, which would last about a second, would immediately result in housing prices going up and would give no benefit at all to first home buyers? What we have to give is practical assistance to first home buyers. Advocating a stamp duty cut right now might make the Deputy Leader of the Opposition feel good politically and it might make him feel as though he is doing something, but at a time when the housing market demand is booming and outstripping supply, despite the very good figures that the Minister for Housing and Works revealed about lot creation, all that would do is increase housing prices. Therefore, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is advocating an increase in housing prices; he is advocating a benefit for the sellers of houses; and he is advocating a benefit for real estate agents, who receive percentage-based commissions. Despite his protestations, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is not advocating an effective initiative for first home buyers, which is what we are interested in. That is why the timing of stamp duty relief, which I support, is a critical matter. Rather than seeking to make political hay out of this issue, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition ought to think more carefully about what his economics training would tell him about the relationship between demand and supply and its effect on price.
My first response to that is to ask the Deputy Leader of the Opposition whether he supports Michael Chaney’s call for the abolition of payroll tax. Mr T. Buswell : No, but I support some of his other calls. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Does the Deputy Leader of the Opposition support his call for a reduction in payroll tax? Mr T. Buswell : Possibly. Mr E.S. RIPPER : There you are, Mr Speaker. Any cut in payroll tax obviously reduces the amount of money that can go towards stamp duty relief. We cannot spend the same dollar twice. If we were to listen to Mr Chaney and abolish payroll tax, we would have nothing at all left over for stamp duty relief, let alone money for hospitals, schools, roads, rail, ports, electricity, water and all the infrastructure that the community needs for services and economic growth in the future. I will come to my second response. When the Deputy Leader of the Opposition quoted from the housing strategy recommendation, did members note the word “effective”? What is effective about giving a temporary advantage to first home buyers, which would last about a second, would immediately result in housing prices going up and would give no benefit at all to first home buyers? What we have to give is practical assistance to first home buyers. Advocating a stamp duty cut right now might make the Deputy Leader of the Opposition feel good politically and it might make him feel as though he is doing something, but at a time when the housing market demand is booming and outstripping supply, despite the very good figures that the Minister for Housing and Works revealed about lot creation, all that would do is increase housing prices. Therefore, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is advocating an increase in housing prices; he is advocating a benefit for the sellers of houses; and he is advocating a benefit for real estate agents, who receive percentage-based commissions. Despite his protestations, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is not advocating an effective initiative for first home buyers, which is what we are interested in. That is why the timing of stamp duty relief, which I support, is a critical matter. Rather than seeking to make political hay out of this issue, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition ought to think more carefully about what his economics training would tell him about the relationship between demand and supply and its effect on price.
Mr T. Buswell : No, but I support some of his other calls. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Does the Deputy Leader of the Opposition support his call for a reduction in payroll tax? Mr T. Buswell : Possibly. Mr E.S. RIPPER : There you are, Mr Speaker. Any cut in payroll tax obviously reduces the amount of money that can go towards stamp duty relief. We cannot spend the same dollar twice. If we were to listen to Mr Chaney and abolish payroll tax, we would have nothing at all left over for stamp duty relief, let alone money for hospitals, schools, roads, rail, ports, electricity, water and all the infrastructure that the community needs for services and economic growth in the future. I will come to my second response. When the Deputy Leader of the Opposition quoted from the housing strategy recommendation, did members note the word “effective”? What is effective about giving a temporary advantage to first home buyers, which would last about a second, would immediately result in housing prices going up and would give no benefit at all to first home buyers? What we have to give is practical assistance to first home buyers. Advocating a stamp duty cut right now might make the Deputy Leader of the Opposition feel good politically and it might make him feel as though he is doing something, but at a time when the housing market demand is booming and outstripping supply, despite the very good figures that the Minister for Housing and Works revealed about lot creation, all that would do is increase housing prices. Therefore, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is advocating an increase in housing prices; he is advocating a benefit for the sellers of houses; and he is advocating a benefit for real estate agents, who receive percentage-based commissions. Despite his protestations, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is not advocating an effective initiative for first home buyers, which is what we are interested in. That is why the timing of stamp duty relief, which I support, is a critical matter. Rather than seeking to make political hay out of this issue, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition ought to think more carefully about what his economics training would tell him about the relationship between demand and supply and its effect on price.
Mr E.S. RIPPER : Does the Deputy Leader of the Opposition support his call for a reduction in payroll tax? Mr T. Buswell : Possibly. Mr E.S. RIPPER : There you are, Mr Speaker. Any cut in payroll tax obviously reduces the amount of money that can go towards stamp duty relief. We cannot spend the same dollar twice. If we were to listen to Mr Chaney and abolish payroll tax, we would have nothing at all left over for stamp duty relief, let alone money for hospitals, schools, roads, rail, ports, electricity, water and all the infrastructure that the community needs for services and economic growth in the future. I will come to my second response. When the Deputy Leader of the Opposition quoted from the housing strategy recommendation, did members note the word “effective”? What is effective about giving a temporary advantage to first home buyers, which would last about a second, would immediately result in housing prices going up and would give no benefit at all to first home buyers? What we have to give is practical assistance to first home buyers. Advocating a stamp duty cut right now might make the Deputy Leader of the Opposition feel good politically and it might make him feel as though he is doing something, but at a time when the housing market demand is booming and outstripping supply, despite the very good figures that the Minister for Housing and Works revealed about lot creation, all that would do is increase housing prices. Therefore, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is advocating an increase in housing prices; he is advocating a benefit for the sellers of houses; and he is advocating a benefit for real estate agents, who receive percentage-based commissions. Despite his protestations, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is not advocating an effective initiative for first home buyers, which is what we are interested in. That is why the timing of stamp duty relief, which I support, is a critical matter. Rather than seeking to make political hay out of this issue, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition ought to think more carefully about what his economics training would tell him about the relationship between demand and supply and its effect on price.
Mr T. Buswell : Possibly. Mr E.S. RIPPER : There you are, Mr Speaker. Any cut in payroll tax obviously reduces the amount of money that can go towards stamp duty relief. We cannot spend the same dollar twice. If we were to listen to Mr Chaney and abolish payroll tax, we would have nothing at all left over for stamp duty relief, let alone money for hospitals, schools, roads, rail, ports, electricity, water and all the infrastructure that the community needs for services and economic growth in the future. I will come to my second response. When the Deputy Leader of the Opposition quoted from the housing strategy recommendation, did members note the word “effective”? What is effective about giving a temporary advantage to first home buyers, which would last about a second, would immediately result in housing prices going up and would give no benefit at all to first home buyers? What we have to give is practical assistance to first home buyers. Advocating a stamp duty cut right now might make the Deputy Leader of the Opposition feel good politically and it might make him feel as though he is doing something, but at a time when the housing market demand is booming and outstripping supply, despite the very good figures that the Minister for Housing and Works revealed about lot creation, all that would do is increase housing prices. Therefore, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is advocating an increase in housing prices; he is advocating a benefit for the sellers of houses; and he is advocating a benefit for real estate agents, who receive percentage-based commissions. Despite his protestations, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is not advocating an effective initiative for first home buyers, which is what we are interested in. That is why the timing of stamp duty relief, which I support, is a critical matter. Rather than seeking to make political hay out of this issue, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition ought to think more carefully about what his economics training would tell him about the relationship between demand and supply and its effect on price.
Mr E.S. RIPPER : There you are, Mr Speaker. Any cut in payroll tax obviously reduces the amount of money that can go towards stamp duty relief. We cannot spend the same dollar twice. If we were to listen to Mr Chaney and abolish payroll tax, we would have nothing at all left over for stamp duty relief, let alone money for hospitals, schools, roads, rail, ports, electricity, water and all the infrastructure that the community needs for services and economic growth in the future. I will come to my second response. When the Deputy Leader of the Opposition quoted from the housing strategy recommendation, did members note the word “effective”? What is effective about giving a temporary advantage to first home buyers, which would last about a second, would immediately result in housing prices going up and would give no benefit at all to first home buyers? What we have to give is practical assistance to first home buyers. Advocating a stamp duty cut right now might make the Deputy Leader of the Opposition feel good politically and it might make him feel as though he is doing something, but at a time when the housing market demand is booming and outstripping supply, despite the very good figures that the Minister for Housing and Works revealed about lot creation, all that would do is increase housing prices. Therefore, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is advocating an increase in housing prices; he is advocating a benefit for the sellers of houses; and he is advocating a benefit for real estate agents, who receive percentage-based commissions. Despite his protestations, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is not advocating an effective initiative for first home buyers, which is what we are interested in. That is why the timing of stamp duty relief, which I support, is a critical matter. Rather than seeking to make political hay out of this issue, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition ought to think more carefully about what his economics training would tell him about the relationship between demand and supply and its effect on price.
I will come to my second response. When the Deputy Leader of the Opposition quoted from the housing strategy recommendation, did members note the word “effective”? What is effective about giving a temporary advantage to first home buyers, which would last about a second, would immediately result in housing prices going up and would give no benefit at all to first home buyers? What we have to give is practical assistance to first home buyers. Advocating a stamp duty cut right now might make the Deputy Leader of the Opposition feel good politically and it might make him feel as though he is doing something, but at a time when the housing market demand is booming and outstripping supply, despite the very good figures that the Minister for Housing and Works revealed about lot creation, all that would do is increase housing prices. Therefore, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is advocating an increase in housing prices; he is advocating a benefit for the sellers of houses; and he is advocating a benefit for real estate agents, who receive percentage-based commissions. Despite his protestations, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is not advocating an effective initiative for first home buyers, which is what we are interested in. That is why the timing of stamp duty relief, which I support, is a critical matter. Rather than seeking to make political hay out of this issue, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition ought to think more carefully about what his economics training would tell him about the relationship between demand and supply and its effect on price.
Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: My first response to that is to ask the Deputy Leader of the Opposition whether he supports Michael Chaney’s call for the abolition of payroll tax. Mr T. Buswell : No, but I support some of his other calls. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Does the Deputy Leader of the Opposition support his call for a reduction in payroll tax? Mr T. Buswell : Possibly. Mr E.S. RIPPER : There you are, Mr Speaker. Any cut in payroll tax obviously reduces the amount of money that can go towards stamp duty relief. We cannot spend the same dollar twice. If we were to listen to Mr Chaney and abolish payroll tax, we would have nothing at all left over for stamp duty relief, let alone money for hospitals, schools, roads, rail, ports, electricity, water and all the infrastructure that the community needs for services and economic growth in the future. I will come to my second response. When the Deputy Leader of the Opposition quoted from the housing strategy recommendation, did members note the word “effective”? What is effective about giving a temporary advantage to first home buyers, which would last about a second, would immediately result in housing prices going up and would give no benefit at all to first home buyers? What we have to give is practical assistance to first home buyers. Advocating a stamp duty cut right now might make the Deputy Leader of the Opposition feel good politically and it might make him feel as though he is doing something, but at a time when the housing market demand is booming and outstripping supply, despite the very good figures that the Minister for Housing and Works revealed about lot creation, all that would do is increase housing prices. Therefore, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is advocating an increase in housing prices; he is advocating a benefit for the sellers of houses; and he is advocating a benefit for real estate agents, who receive percentage-based commissions. Despite his protestations, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is not advocating an effective initiative for first home buyers, which is what we are interested in. That is why the timing of stamp duty relief, which I support, is a critical matter. Rather than seeking to make political hay out of this issue, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition ought to think more carefully about what his economics training would tell him about the relationship between demand and supply and its effect on price.
My first response to that is to ask the Deputy Leader of the Opposition whether he supports Michael Chaney’s call for the abolition of payroll tax. Mr T. Buswell : No, but I support some of his other calls. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Does the Deputy Leader of the Opposition support his call for a reduction in payroll tax? Mr T. Buswell : Possibly. Mr E.S. RIPPER : There you are, Mr Speaker. Any cut in payroll tax obviously reduces the amount of money that can go towards stamp duty relief. We cannot spend the same dollar twice. If we were to listen to Mr Chaney and abolish payroll tax, we would have nothing at all left over for stamp duty relief, let alone money for hospitals, schools, roads, rail, ports, electricity, water and all the infrastructure that the community needs for services and economic growth in the future. I will come to my second response. When the Deputy Leader of the Opposition quoted from the housing strategy recommendation, did members note the word “effective”? What is effective about giving a temporary advantage to first home buyers, which would last about a second, would immediately result in housing prices going up and would give no benefit at all to first home buyers? What we have to give is practical assistance to first home buyers. Advocating a stamp duty cut right now might make the Deputy Leader of the Opposition feel good politically and it might make him feel as though he is doing something, but at a time when the housing market demand is booming and outstripping supply, despite the very good figures that the Minister for Housing and Works revealed about lot creation, all that would do is increase housing prices. Therefore, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is advocating an increase in housing prices; he is advocating a benefit for the sellers of houses; and he is advocating a benefit for real estate agents, who receive percentage-based commissions. Despite his protestations, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is not advocating an effective initiative for first home buyers, which is what we are interested in. That is why the timing of stamp duty relief, which I support, is a critical matter. Rather than seeking to make political hay out of this issue, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition ought to think more carefully about what his economics training would tell him about the relationship between demand and supply and its effect on price.
Mr T. Buswell : No, but I support some of his other calls. Mr E.S. RIPPER : Does the Deputy Leader of the Opposition support his call for a reduction in payroll tax? Mr T. Buswell : Possibly. Mr E.S. RIPPER : There you are, Mr Speaker. Any cut in payroll tax obviously reduces the amount of money that can go towards stamp duty relief. We cannot spend the same dollar twice. If we were to listen to Mr Chaney and abolish payroll tax, we would have nothing at all left over for stamp duty relief, let alone money for hospitals, schools, roads, rail, ports, electricity, water and all the infrastructure that the community needs for services and economic growth in the future. I will come to my second response. When the Deputy Leader of the Opposition quoted from the housing strategy recommendation, did members note the word “effective”? What is effective about giving a temporary advantage to first home buyers, which would last about a second, would immediately result in housing prices going up and would give no benefit at all to first home buyers? What we have to give is practical assistance to first home buyers. Advocating a stamp duty cut right now might make the Deputy Leader of the Opposition feel good politically and it might make him feel as though he is doing something, but at a time when the housing market demand is booming and outstripping supply, despite the very good figures that the Minister for Housing and Works revealed about lot creation, all that would do is increase housing prices. Therefore, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is advocating an increase in housing prices; he is advocating a benefit for the sellers of houses; and he is advocating a benefit for real estate agents, who receive percentage-based commissions. Despite his protestations, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is not advocating an effective initiative for first home buyers, which is what we are interested in. That is why the timing of stamp duty relief, which I support, is a critical matter. Rather than seeking to make political hay out of this issue, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition ought to think more carefully about what his economics training would tell him about the relationship between demand and supply and its effect on price.
Mr E.S. RIPPER : Does the Deputy Leader of the Opposition support his call for a reduction in payroll tax? Mr T. Buswell : Possibly. Mr E.S. RIPPER : There you are, Mr Speaker. Any cut in payroll tax obviously reduces the amount of money that can go towards stamp duty relief. We cannot spend the same dollar twice. If we were to listen to Mr Chaney and abolish payroll tax, we would have nothing at all left over for stamp duty relief, let alone money for hospitals, schools, roads, rail, ports, electricity, water and all the infrastructure that the community needs for services and economic growth in the future. I will come to my second response. When the Deputy Leader of the Opposition quoted from the housing strategy recommendation, did members note the word “effective”? What is effective about giving a temporary advantage to first home buyers, which would last about a second, would immediately result in housing prices going up and would give no benefit at all to first home buyers? What we have to give is practical assistance to first home buyers. Advocating a stamp duty cut right now might make the Deputy Leader of the Opposition feel good politically and it might make him feel as though he is doing something, but at a time when the housing market demand is booming and outstripping supply, despite the very good figures that the Minister for Housing and Works revealed about lot creation, all that would do is increase housing prices. Therefore, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is advocating an increase in housing prices; he is advocating a benefit for the sellers of houses; and he is advocating a benefit for real estate agents, who receive percentage-based commissions. Despite his protestations, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is not advocating an effective initiative for first home buyers, which is what we are interested in. That is why the timing of stamp duty relief, which I support, is a critical matter. Rather than seeking to make political hay out of this issue, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition ought to think more carefully about what his economics training would tell him about the relationship between demand and supply and its effect on price.
Mr T. Buswell : Possibly. Mr E.S. RIPPER : There you are, Mr Speaker. Any cut in payroll tax obviously reduces the amount of money that can go towards stamp duty relief. We cannot spend the same dollar twice. If we were to listen to Mr Chaney and abolish payroll tax, we would have nothing at all left over for stamp duty relief, let alone money for hospitals, schools, roads, rail, ports, electricity, water and all the infrastructure that the community needs for services and economic growth in the future. I will come to my second response. When the Deputy Leader of the Opposition quoted from the housing strategy recommendation, did members note the word “effective”? What is effective about giving a temporary advantage to first home buyers, which would last about a second, would immediately result in housing prices going up and would give no benefit at all to first home buyers? What we have to give is practical assistance to first home buyers. Advocating a stamp duty cut right now might make the Deputy Leader of the Opposition feel good politically and it might make him feel as though he is doing something, but at a time when the housing market demand is booming and outstripping supply, despite the very good figures that the Minister for Housing and Works revealed about lot creation, all that would do is increase housing prices. Therefore, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is advocating an increase in housing prices; he is advocating a benefit for the sellers of houses; and he is advocating a benefit for real estate agents, who receive percentage-based commissions. Despite his protestations, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is not advocating an effective initiative for first home buyers, which is what we are interested in. That is why the timing of stamp duty relief, which I support, is a critical matter. Rather than seeking to make political hay out of this issue, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition ought to think more carefully about what his economics training would tell him about the relationship between demand and supply and its effect on price.
Mr E.S. RIPPER : There you are, Mr Speaker. Any cut in payroll tax obviously reduces the amount of money that can go towards stamp duty relief. We cannot spend the same dollar twice. If we were to listen to Mr Chaney and abolish payroll tax, we would have nothing at all left over for stamp duty relief, let alone money for hospitals, schools, roads, rail, ports, electricity, water and all the infrastructure that the community needs for services and economic growth in the future. I will come to my second response. When the Deputy Leader of the Opposition quoted from the housing strategy recommendation, did members note the word “effective”? What is effective about giving a temporary advantage to first home buyers, which would last about a second, would immediately result in housing prices going up and would give no benefit at all to first home buyers? What we have to give is practical assistance to first home buyers. Advocating a stamp duty cut right now might make the Deputy Leader of the Opposition feel good politically and it might make him feel as though he is doing something, but at a time when the housing market demand is booming and outstripping supply, despite the very good figures that the Minister for Housing and Works revealed about lot creation, all that would do is increase housing prices. Therefore, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is advocating an increase in housing prices; he is advocating a benefit for the sellers of houses; and he is advocating a benefit for real estate agents, who receive percentage-based commissions. Despite his protestations, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is not advocating an effective initiative for first home buyers, which is what we are interested in. That is why the timing of stamp duty relief, which I support, is a critical matter. Rather than seeking to make political hay out of this issue, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition ought to think more carefully about what his economics training would tell him about the relationship between demand and supply and its effect on price.
I will come to my second response. When the Deputy Leader of the Opposition quoted from the housing strategy recommendation, did members note the word “effective”? What is effective about giving a temporary advantage to first home buyers, which would last about a second, would immediately result in housing prices going up and would give no benefit at all to first home buyers? What we have to give is practical assistance to first home buyers. Advocating a stamp duty cut right now might make the Deputy Leader of the Opposition feel good politically and it might make him feel as though he is doing something, but at a time when the housing market demand is booming and outstripping supply, despite the very good figures that the Minister for Housing and Works revealed about lot creation, all that would do is increase housing prices. Therefore, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is advocating an increase in housing prices; he is advocating a benefit for the sellers of houses; and he is advocating a benefit for real estate agents, who receive percentage-based commissions. Despite his protestations, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is not advocating an effective initiative for first home buyers, which is what we are interested in. That is why the timing of stamp duty relief, which I support, is a critical matter. Rather than seeking to make political hay out of this issue, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition ought to think more carefully about what his economics training would tell him about the relationship between demand and supply and its effect on price.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.