Scott Buchholz (Wright, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Going broke—as the member for Fisher would well know, being a former builder and a barrister in the industry. He knows only too well. But the point I was going to make about the supply side is that, when I talk to builders and developers, the first thing they talk to me about is the extraordinary costs that have increased over the years, sometimes three hundredfold, when it comes to developing land so that construction can happen on it. Construction costs as a result of Labor's inflation since they came to office have had unmitigable consequences in the building sector, particularly in situations where people sign up to contracts. Prices shift, the builder's locked into it and they go broke because there's no way they can deliver the product at the price that was agreed to. The landowner often loses their deposit. There are no winners in that situation.

As I said in my opening comments, I want to acknowledge what we have done and what the member for Deakin, the former minister, who choreographed some of the most amazing policies, has done, which is stick no less than 300,000 people into homes with the policies that he and our government helped choreograph. The coalition supported almost 60,000 first home buyers and single-parent families into homeownership through the Home Guarantee Scheme, consisting of the First Home Loan Deposit Scheme, the First Home Guarantee and the Family Home Guarantee, with deposits of as little as two per cent and five per cent. Those are real savings that help people get into homes. By all accounts, the Home Guarantee Scheme is now supporting one in three homebuyers in this country. The coalition needs to be acknowledged for that legacy that has been left behind. It's an amazing product.

We protected the residential construction industry with more than 137,000 HomeBuilder applications that generated no less than $120 billion worth of economic activity. We provided $2.9 billion of low-cost loans to community housing providers to support 15,000 social and affordable dwellings, saving $470 million in interest payments to be reinvested in more affordable housing. We unlocked just on 7,000 social, affordable and market dwellings through the coalition's $1 billion infrastructure facility, making housing supply more responsive to demand. We established the First Home Super Saver Scheme, helping 27,600 first home buyers accelerate their deposit savings through their super. That was a great product as well.

Since 1 January 2020 the Home Guarantee Scheme, consisting of the First Home Loan Deposit Scheme, the New Home Guarantee and the Family Home Guarantee, has assisted almost 60,000 first home buyers and single-parent families get into their homes with a deposit of as little as five per cent or two per cent. It was a 2019 election commitment that was delivered. Fifty-two per cent of the 60,000 guarantees have been taken up by women, which is great news. It's well above the market average, which was 41 per cent of women entering into homeownership. We provided an environment where, under that scheme, it was 52 per cent. One in five guarantees issued went to essential workers—people who work on our front lines. Thirty-five per cent of them were nurses and 34 per cent were teachers. Eighty-five per cent of Family Home Guarantees were used by single mums. Our policies worked.

The First Home Super Saver Scheme addressed the deposit hurdles. It's the most challenging aspect of getting onto the property ladder, which is why first home buyers can accelerate their deposit savings through super with an increased release of up to $50,000, up from $30,000. This means that the average couple would be $20,838 better off under the coalition's First Home Super Saver Scheme than if they used a standard savings account. There are a number of different programs that we implemented that have had a profound difference.

Often you will hear people make comments that they can't tell the difference between the policies of Labor or the Greens or the coalition and that they're all the same. Can I point them to no less than this particular piece of legislation? There could not be a more stark contrast in our political DNA and in our political footprints. When you have a look at the Greens, particularly in Brisbane, there's not a building application in that area that they will not oppose. They walk into this place and they'll fight for projects like this, but quietly, in their electorates, they'll be running their social media campaigns opposing developments and opposing low-cost affordable housing in their electorates. It's absolute NIMBYism—nothing in my backyard. 'We don't want extra people putting pressure on our services and infrastructure.' It's a disgrace.

We commend Labor for bringing this piece of legislation to the House. You need to commend them for having a crack, but I just can't see how this legislation, without having those legislative instruments in the states, will have the bite that it's supposed to.

Our policies worked. Our policies are proven. Our policies have got no less than 300,000 homeowners into the Australian dream, and it's only our side in government, with prudent management, with proven leaders sitting in this chamber at the moment, that will lead our country to higher homeownership. Those on the other side of this chamber talk the talk, but I can guarantee you they can't walk the walk.

See this speech in context