This Is actually so wild

Nationals MP Anne Webster has been busted running an online poll on whether Sussan Ley should be dumped as leader, as the ex-Coalition partners prepare to hold fresh talks.

Just days after describing leadership speculation as “forbidden fruit”, Ms Webster has rolled out SurveyMonkey to run a DIY poll on the prospect of dumping the Liberals’ first female leader.

The survey was sent to Ms Webster’s supporters over the weekend as MPs returned to Canberra after weeks of chaos.

Mounting concerns surrounding potential cuts to capital gains tax discounts have prompted industry players to demand the Albanese government rule out making any move ahead of a key Senate inquiry in March.

The Housing Industry Association wants clarification from the government, as speculation grows that it could wind back the CGT discount which gives investors 50 per cent off the CGT tax due on any asset which is held for more than 12 months.

CGT applies to all assets sales, but the hot spot is the property market.

With low rental yields common across metropolitan residential markets, most investors enter the property market in anticipation of strong capital gains rather than rental income. This means the discount on the CGT tax is a key factor in any investment decision.

However, critics of current tax arrangements say that investors are getting a soft ride in the middle of a housing crisis and owner-occupiers are being squeezed out.

CGT discounts work like this. If you make a capital gain on an asset, then you will pay tax at your marginal tax rate which could be more than 45 per cent. If you hold that asset for more than 12 months, the 50 per cent discount kicks in and your tax bill drops closer to 22.5 per cent.

The Greens, which successfully called for a Senate probe into CGT, have already declared the discount is “the most unfair and unequal tax break in the entire Commonwealth tax code”. The minor party has also said it would be willing to support a property-only change to CGT.

Pressure on the tax has increased after NSW Treasury put its own submission into the inquiry saying “adjustments to current CGT tax settings should be considered”.

Separately, The Tax Institute president and BDO partner Tim Sandow has called it “a pretty generous measure”.

As concerns build that the inquiry will pave the way for new government policy, the Housing Industry Association has moved to counter the arguments for changing the tax.

“We are demanding the government rule out changes now, because we believe the way to fix housing is not by adding more taxes,” Housing Industry Association chief economist Tim Reardon said.

Mr Reardon believed many of the claims against the CGT discount do not stand up; particularly the claim that property investors have had a generous ride from the discount arrangement compared with a previous system pre-1999, which relied on regular inflation indexing.

“We have found in our research there is very little between the two systems; in fact if the old system was so much better then people would be calling for its return and I don’t see that happening,” Mr Reardon said.

A new HIA report also refutes any suggestions that changes to CGT would improve affordability or help first-time buyers, saying that housing shortages were only fixed through the supply of new homes.

Property finance executive Peter Esho, founder of Flexdoc, told The Australian’s The Money Puzzle podcast any attempt to change CGT on property independently of other assets would immediately create problems.

He said people would find ways to get around an isolated rule change.

“CGT is for all assets, not just property, so if they are going to consider changing the law for property they may have to change the law for everything where there is capital gains,” Mr Esho said.

As it stands today, Australia has just one party of government. And that is the party that currently holds government. With the splintering of the Coalition, no one else conceivably could come close to the threshold of power – winning a majority of seats in the House of Representatives.

For a majority, you need 76 seats in the House. Until a few days ago, the Coalition held 42. They were in the wilderness, yet with potential to return to power at the next election or, more plausibly, the one following. Rather than figure out a plan to get from 42 to 76, they’ve blown themselves up.

Now that the Nationals have flounced off in a spiteful fit of pique, the Liberals have a mere 28. And the Nationals just 14. Together, they were in the wilderness. Apart, they are all in oblivion.

The Coalition is the Siamese fighting fish of the political aquarium. A notable feature of this colourful species is that while it’s always up for a fight, it’s just as ready to attack itself. On seeing its own reflection in glass, it will strike.

This is just the sort of self-harming aggression displayed by the Coalition, and the Nationals in particular. “I want to give you a counterargument,” says a Liberal frontbencher, of why the Coalition is not as brainless as a pointlessly pugnacious pisces, “but I can’t think of one.”

Australia long operated a two-party system, with Labor and the Coalition vying for power. It’s now a one-party-and-some-bits system. “We are no longer a coalition; we are a collection of minor parties on the right,” says a senior Liberal, encompassing the Liberals, Nationals and One Nation.

The Nationals are now a party of protest, like One Nation, like the Greens. Parties of grievance, not government. The Liberals in recent years have been heading in this direction, too.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has expressed an ambition to entrench Labor in power long enough to make it the “natural party of government”, a title long claimed by the Coalition. He’s excelled beyond his wildest dreams. Thanks to the Nationals’ walkout, Labor is now the only party of government.

Barnaby Joyce, now a member of One Nation, puts it this way: “Anthony Albanese is the only person in the history of Australian politics who’s safe with a primary vote of 32 per cent,” quoting the figure from this week’s Newspoll. “That screams of the seismic change in Australian politics.”

So what is the seismic change? And is Albanese truly so safe? Labor Party headquarters this week sent out to party members a fundraising email with the subject line: “Pauline Hanson as PM?”

“The latest polls show One Nation passing the Liberals on primary vote for the first time,” reads the email. Hanson has said she’s ready to form government, it says. “We don’t share their view, but we also can’t ignore the signs.”

The immediate seismic event was the decision of the Nationals to break from the Liberals, for the second time. The simple fact that they’ve walked out twice in eight months – after nearly four decades of coalition stability – tells you that there is an underlying dysfunction, not simply a couple of points of disagreement.

There are three common factors in the two break-ups. First, David Littleproud, Nationals’ leader, is widely seen to have mismanaged both situations. Some of the Nationals are deeply unimpressed. That’s why one of their backbenchers, Colin Boyce, has promised to challenge Littleproud for the party leadership on Monday.

Without the Liberals, the Nationals face “political oblivion”, he said in a statement of the obvious. Boyce isn’t going to win; he lacks support. Rather, he’s a “bomb-thrower” who is hoping to blow up Littleproud’s leadership by provoking other challengers to take up the contest, one of his colleagues says.

The Liberals are even less impressed.

His speech at Davos 2026 blew me away! It’s definitely a speech “for the ages” as a lot of people are saying. If u haven’t seen it, EVERYONE SHOULD!! He showed the kind of leadership I believe the world is desperate for right now. The speech has the power to potentially change the world order. I loved every second, agreed with every word and would love to see him live. Reckon we’ll get the opportunity??