Premier Ben Carroll’s attempt to reset Labor’s economic message has been overshadowed by confusion over his land tax plan, while Pauline Hanson has escalated the political temperature by backing calls for former premiers Daniel Andrews and Jacinta Allan to be “held accountable”. With a state election approaching, tax, debt and government spending are emerging as major battlegrounds.
By the online newsroom
MELBOURNE — Victorian politics is entering a more aggressive phase, with the state’s finances, taxation and the record of successive Labor governments increasingly shaping the campaign.
New Premier Ben Carroll attempted to put cost-of-living relief at the centre of Labor’s message by promising to progressively reverse the land tax increases introduced under Daniel Andrews.
But within hours of the announcement, Labor was forced to clarify the wording of its policy after the Opposition argued that the proposed timetable could actually keep part of the higher tax regime in place beyond its original expiry date.
At the same time, One Nation leader Pauline Hanson has intensified her attack on the previous Labor administrations, backing calls for former premiers Daniel Andrews and Jacinta Allan to face consequences over government spending decisions.
The result is a political debate increasingly focused on one question: who should pay for Victoria’s debt, and who should be held responsible for the decisions that created it?
Labor’s land tax problem
The controversy centres on the land tax changes introduced in 2023 as part of Victoria’s COVID debt repayment strategy.
Under the scheme, the threshold at which land tax begins was dramatically reduced from $300,000 to $50,000.
Properties between $50,000 and $100,000 attracted a $500 surcharge, while those between $100,000 and $300,000 faced a $975 surcharge. Owners above the $300,000 threshold were also hit with the surcharge and an additional increase in the land tax rate.
Thousands of Victorians who had previously paid no land tax were brought into the system.
For a property around the median value cited in the debate, the annual liability reportedly rose from about $2,740 to $4,368.
Carroll promises a new direction
Carroll has presented himself as a break from the previous Labor leadership.
His message is straightforward: lower land tax, provide cost-of-living relief and demonstrate that his government is moving in a new direction.
Labor’s initial plan proposed increasing the tax-free threshold by $25,000 a year until it returned to $300,000.
But that immediately created a political problem.
The existing COVID debt levy is scheduled to end around mid-2033. At increments of $25,000, returning the threshold from $50,000 to $300,000 would take ten annual increases.
Opposition Leader Jess Wilson seized on the discrepancy, arguing that Labor was effectively presenting an extension of the tax as a tax cut.
Following the criticism, the wording published by Labor was amended to state that the $300,000 threshold would be fully restored by the 2033-34 financial year, under a six-year implementation.
The Premier’s office rejected suggestions that the policy had been misleading and said the timetable had been communicated to the media from the beginning.
A difficult political message
The episode is politically awkward for Carroll because the policy was designed to show voters that the new Premier understood their concerns over household costs.
Instead, the first discussion became focused on whether the announcement itself had been clear.
For Labor, the challenge is larger than one tax.
Victoria’s debt, major infrastructure spending and the legacy of the pandemic years are likely to remain central themes throughout the election campaign.
The Opposition is already attempting to frame Labor as a government that taxes heavily to pay for years of excessive expenditure.
Labor, meanwhile, wants voters to see Carroll as a new leader prepared to change course without abandoning the government’s broader economic program.
One Nation enters the Victorian fight
The debate is becoming even more heated with the growing involvement of One Nation.
At the party’s Victorian campaign launch, Pauline Hanson was asked whether she supported calls for former premiers Daniel Andrews and Jacinta Allan to be jailed.
Hanson backed the sentiment and argued that politicians and senior bureaucrats should face stronger accountability when public money is wasted.
She also linked that argument to the political task of “taking Victoria back”, saying electoral change had to come first.
The comments are political rhetoric rather than the outcome of any criminal finding. Nothing in the material presented establishes a legal basis for imprisoning either former premier.
But the language illustrates the increasingly confrontational tone of the Victorian campaign.
Debt and accountability becoming central issues
Hanson argued that billions of dollars in taxpayer money had been wasted and called for a detailed examination of where public funds had gone.
That theme overlaps with a broader concern being pushed by both One Nation and the Coalition: accountability for government spending.
The political strategies, however, are different.
The Coalition is concentrating heavily on taxes, debt and economic management.
One Nation is using a more populist argument, portraying the issue as a failure of the political establishment and calling for stronger personal consequences for those responsible.
Labor’s response is likely to be to focus on services, infrastructure and targeted cost-of-living relief while presenting Carroll as a leader willing to correct unpopular policies.
The election battle is taking shape
The Victorian election contest is therefore beginning to crystallise around several interconnected issues: taxation, government debt, household costs and trust in political leadership.
Carroll needs to convince voters that he represents a genuine change from the Andrews and Allan eras while still defending Labor’s broader record.
The Coalition will argue that the problems were created by Labor and cannot be solved by the same party.
And One Nation will attempt to convert dissatisfaction with the major parties into votes by pushing a much harder message on political accountability.
The debate over land tax may appear technical, but politically it goes to the heart of the coming campaign.
Who pays, how long they pay, and whether Victorians believe the government is being transparent about it could become far more important than the tax threshold itself.