Joanne Ryan (Lalor, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I'm pleased to rise to speak on the appropriation bills. For those playing at home, this gives all members of the House an opportunity to look at the government's priorities as expressed through its budget processes. It allows us to stand here and represent the electorates that put us in this place and look through that local lens on this government's priorities. I'm pleased to follow the member for Paterson who, like me, was born and raised in her electorate and speaks proudly and loudly for the people that she represents.

One of the priorities that I'd like to talk about today that this government has got completely wrong is housing affordability. What we've seen from this government is an absolute drought in terms of ideas about how to tackle housing affordability. In question time they'll ask whether there are other ways, or is there an alternative for this? In housing affordability there's a clear alternative. There is the absolute lack of action from this government compared to the work that's been done in policy in this space by those on this side of the chamber. In my community, we've just ticked over 250,000 residents in the City of Wyndham. That makes us larger in population terms than the City of Greater Geelong. That has been the back end of 20 years of sustained and dramatic growth. As you can imagine, the housing industry is fairly important in my neck of the woods. It employs a lot of people locally.

I am really proud to say that the Labor Party's policy around housing affordability, the changes that the Labor Party would make in relation to the taxation provisions, will not impact on new housing stock. This is a critical fact that people need to understand, particularly if they've been listening to those opposite suggesting that Labor's policies will make housing prices go up on one day and the next day arguing they'll make housing prices drop dramatically. Labor is proposing fair changes that will mean that, when young people in my electorate go to buy a first home, they will not be bidding against somebody investing in their sixth property. But it won't put a brake on new housing stock because that will still attract those tax concessions.

Labor's approach is logical. It is also indicative of how serious this government is in tackling housing affordability. This side of the House is about fairness. We understand electorates like Lalor because we represent them. We understand when people sit with us and tell us that they're worried that their children won't be able to afford to buy a home. In modern Australia it seems to be the most desirable thing; it seems to be more desirable than it's been since 1920 that people be able to buy their own home. It's about security. Working-class people seek security. Low- and middle-income families want the security of owning their own home, and Labor's about ensuring that that is possible in modern Australia.

The other area that shows us a really strong contrast between the government and the opposition is energy prices. In my electorate, as in most electorates, we are feeling the heat when it comes to energy prices. No-one is safe when it comes to skyrocketing electricity and gas bills. Local residents, small and large businesses alike are all struggling because of unsustainable increases in the cost of electricity and gas. I've spoken many times in the House about the direct effects felt by businesses and residents in my community, and I'll take this opportunity to do so again. Manufacturing businesses like Miltech Martin Bright and Victoria Wool Processors, among others, have spoken to me and to the Leader of the Opposition, Bill Shorten, about these issues. I spoke last week about Andrew's Choice smokehouse, who are looking at a 130 per cent increase that they've signed to in their new contract. It is verging on the point where energy is costing business more than labour, more than the people who work in these companies. This government needs to address this issue. They need to be taking action, not having cups of tea, not having hard chats with the industry, but taking action, using the federal levers to ensure that we have certainty in this space. We know that some of that's going to be about renewable energy. We know some of that is going to be about certainty for investors in renewable energy. We know that some of that's about pulling the federal triggers around national interest when it comes to gas pricing. But it is all important, and this bill obviously demonstrates that the government has failed to do all these things once again.

There's another area that I raised in August last year. I moved a private member's motion around the failings in the retirement village sector. The motion received bipartisan support. Members in this place, from both sides of the chamber, were calling for a national approach to address concerns about 100-page contracts that were very difficult to understand, about a lack of consumer protections, about complaint resolution procedures. We know that COAG met on these issues, yet we've still had no action in this space.

The only thing I can report to the House in terms of what has happened here is that the Retirement Living Council has released a draft code of conduct, perhaps in response to some of the controversy around retirement villages that was raised in August last year. If you remember, the ABC was very interested in this. A light was shone on some very shoddy practices, particularly highlighting those in Victoria. In the electorate of Lalor we have 10 retirement villages, and that number is growing. An area that is seen to be affordable is obviously a place where retirement villages are going to be established.

So, since that controversy we've had a draft code of conduct. Now, I have heard from the Consumer Action Law Centre in the last week, and I'd like to thank them for the work they've done in following up on these issues and keeping a light shining in this space. They've done a bit of a review of this code of conduct, and I want to put this into the public record. They're not impressed, as it's plain to see:

Overall, the Code has a disproportionate focus on promoting industry interests and fails to address the harm caused by bad practices in the retirement industry. Much of the Code reads as a public relations exercise without genuine regard given to how resident outcomes might be improved or measured. Importantly, it fails to address key resident concerns, which include:

…   …   …

• lack of mandatory training and qualification standards;

• inadequate skills and poor attitude of management;

• problems with maintenance including delays, poor quality work and lack of clarity about responsibilities; and

• lack of resident consultation and limited opportunities to participate in village/park decision making.

This code of conduct is driven by the industry in response, I believe, to the controversy. But it's important to note here that we've seen no action from the government, and, going on the Consumer Action Law Centre's appraisal of that code of conduct, we're not in for any good news soon. I raise this because it's an important issue in my electorate. I call on the government to address these issues as soon as they practically can, because although the controversy may be off our television screens it is certainly not off the agenda—and certainly not off the agenda in the communities that I represent.

Another area that's been attracting a little bit of attention of late is payday lending. Vulnerable Australian families are being taken advantage of by payday lenders; 650,000 financially stressed households are now paying payday loans. I don't have an electorate-by-electorate breakdown, but I can only imagine that many of these will live in my electorate. These people are paying interest rates of up to 800 per cent. For example, for a clothes dryer, which retails at $345, families are paying back over $3,000. That is equal to an interest rate of 884 per cent. This needs to be addressed as a matter of urgency. I note the work of my colleagues on this side of the House in the last few weeks in raising this issue. I note, too, that the government had made recommendations about this. They had made some decisions. They had had a look at this. Yet here we are, two years later, and they have failed to act. Two years ago the review of the small amount credit contract laws was released. The government is yet to introduce legislation that would clean up this industry, taking advantage of vulnerable families. And I say that because many of those families will be in my electorate.

This is an area where this government needs to act with a sense of urgency. It is an area where businesses are taking advantage of vulnerable people, offering them a quick fix with a big price tag in the longer run. The government must introduce legislation, and if they will not then on this side of the House we will take action.

See this speech in context