John Alexander (Bennelong, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

From time to time 'vision' is raised by commentators, usually as a criticism against politicians, yet this slap is quickly replaced by issues of the day—juicy morsels substantiated by 'unnamed members of cabinet' or 'a source close to the PM' on travel rorts, royal commissions, leadership whispers and endless debate on same-sex marriage. Would a determination to develop a great vision for Australia and a commitment to its realisation see these side issues find their rightful place?

Government aims to find the right proportion of caring for today, planning for the future and divining the pathway and the pace of evolution. It is important for the visionary to have had experience in the trenches and on the battlefield prior to elevation to a position where the forces can be assessed, the challenges seen clearly and the best course of action agreed and implemented. We are a country that honours and reveres our war heroes and sports men and women for their bravery and willingness to have a go, yet when our freedom is secure we pursue cautious strategies, strangled by the fear of a gotcher moment. In the national debate recently more time has been spent on both a helicopter trip and an invitation to a royal commissioner to speak at a dinner than matters of far greater importance to Australians. If we were at war, not one moment would be spent on such trivia.

Historically low interest rates have seen an unsustainable rise in house prices largely driven by investors advantaged over the homebuyer, with unfair tax laws allowing them to amass great holdings at the expense of the Australian dream for many. What of the flow-on effects when interest rates rise and investors, unable to fund their losses, are forced to sell? Homeowners can also get caught in the debt trap and also be forced to sell. Yet, are we preparing for the battle? Are our forces fully deployed? What are our fallback positions?

With no great vision or strategic plan, over many decades Australia's development has been random, inefficient and littered with lost opportunity. It is time to take stock, to be honest with ourselves and to get out of the petty skirmishes that distract. The people elect us to climb out of the trenches and up to a position of commanding view to assess the challenges and the opportunities, and to have a go. If we fail to make an honest assessment, our cities will continue to be burdened with the enormous deficit in infrastructure and cost of living, while our regions will quietly die of neglect. It is absurd that a country whose greatest asset is land is suffering housing shortages and some of the most expensive housing prices in the world. Infrastructure must have purpose and not be driven by politics.

We need to strategically plan settlement that is created by appropriate infrastructure in both our cities and our regions. The current imbalance between our cities and regions, and the disparity in house prices, combine to create a perfect storm of opportunity. Cities must now be master planned, with the retrofitting of infrastructure combined with appropriate zoning to drive affordable supply convenient to the workplace. Regions must be provided with high-speed rail services to deliver decades of sustainable growth that is not limited by the capacity of just a few cities.

Master planning must have a companion of master funding. The government must be more actively involved in development. The world is now funding infrastructure through a simple concept of value capture. Regrettably, this is not yet part of our strategy of funding growth and infrastructure, leading to recent infrastructure projects in Sydney where extraordinary unearned benefits have been taken by homeowners located close to the planned transport hubs. With no capital gains tax applicable to the sale of privately owned homes, these fortunate few are walking away with millions as a result of expensive infrastructure projects—value escape, if you will.

It is overdue for federal, state and local governments to unite to capture all unearned benefits that arise as a result of infrastructure and rezoning in order to fund the infrastructure that is actually driving the uplift. This is both logical and fair. Why should the taxpayer fund entirely the infrastructure that is making some very rich? And for those fortunate few who stand to benefit, will they really mind paying capital gains tax on their windfall? In my mind, no fair-minded Australian would.

See this speech in context