Josh Burns (Macnamara, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this House:

(1) recognises that every Australian should have access to safe and secure housing;

(a) the rate of home ownership continues to decline due to this Government's inaction and lack of leadership on federal housing policy;

(b) the rising cost of rent is pushing more Australians into rental stress;

(c) more investment in social housing is needed immediately to address the growing waitlists and increasing number of people facing homelessness; and

(d) the homelessness sector is desperate for more funding to support those needing crisis accommodation, especially women fleeing domestic and family violence; and

(3) calls on the Government to take responsibility and implement policies that respond to the serious issues facing access to safe and secure housing in Australia.

The legacy of the Liberal government is flat wages for eight years at the same time as we have had housing prices and the cost of housing in this country skyrocket—flat wages and the price of housing increasing. The gap in housing affordability has never been bigger in the history of Australia. It is harder to get into the housing market now than it has ever been in the history of our great country.

Why is it important that Australians can get into the housing market? Because, if you retire, your net worth on average—the median net worth of people who are able to get into the housing market in Australia—is $980,000 in assets if you're able to have some sort of property asset in this country, but, if you don't, that number is $40,000. It is a great wealth creator in this country. Housing and property is a great way for Australians to find financial security in retirement. But, under this government, what we have seen is that fewer and fewer Australians are able to have this opportunity in their working lives to secure their financial future and to be able to retire with the amount of financial security that Australians deserve.

Who is this affecting the most? It is affecting Australian women. The fastest-growing cohort of homeless Australians is women over 55. If you look at some of the structural inequalities in our economy, it is clear to see what is driving that. Women are working for less. The gender pay gap has not been closed under this government. They are working in lower-paid industries more generally—services based industries—and they are also taking breaks from the workforce. They're doing more than their fair share of looking after kids and also caring responsibilities. Australian women are doing more than men in caring for families and taking breaks from their employment, which means superannuation is being reduced.

What's this government's response to some of the structural inequalities, with flatlining wages and women being unable to get into the housing market or to find safe and secure housing? This government says, 'We're not even going to try and fix wages flatlining.' We saw last night in the budget that this government is content with flat wages over the forward estimates. They don't want to see wages increase. They don't want the gap in what Australians earn and what they can afford in housing to close. What this government has presided over is a widening of that gap in what Australians can afford and what Australians are earning and the cost of housing.

Of course, when it comes to superannuation, what do they desperately want you to do? They want you to raid your superannuation to put it into housing. What that's going to do is bump up the cost of housing, and it's also going to leave more and more Australians, especially Australian women, with less retirement savings when they retire. Housing affordability is a crisis in this country. But as more and more people are unable to enter the housing market, it's pushing them into the rental market. The cost of rental is becoming more and more in this country. Forty per cent of renters are paying more than 30 per cent of their income on rent, which is causing financial stress. Australians are paying more than they can afford, to live in the rental market. This is a real problem, because at the other end of the scale, in the social housing market, less than one per cent of people on the JobSeeker allowance can afford to be in the private rental market.

The government last night talked about all of these incentive programs: 'Look how great we're doing on housing affordability.' What they are doing is a drop in the ocean. There are 200,000 people in Australia on the social housing waitlist. There are hundreds of thousands of Australians facing rental stress. Less than 40 per cent of people at the age of 30 can get into the housing market. Housing affordability under this government is becoming a crisis. It has never been less affordable in the history of our country to get into the housing market. And what we're seeing is more of the same, more of the same marketing and spin. What we need is to attack supply, attack the problem of the number of houses out there and make housing more affordable for everyday Australians.

Trent Zimmerman (North Sydney, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Is the motion seconded?

Anne Stanley (Werriwa, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.

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

I thank the member for Macnamara for starting this important debate. Housing is a significant part of Australia's identity. While the American dream aspires to high office, wealth and independence, the humbler Australian dream is just a block of land that you can call home, your castle. It is not a coincidence that the Menzies years, which were remembered as the halcyon days after the war, when Australia finally stood on its own two feet, are also years that prioritised home ownership and saw home ownerships rise to their highest levels ever—our foundation of common wealth.

Those years are far behind us now, and every year the number of homeowners shrinks compared to investors. Headlines across the media are discussing the huge rises we have seen in recent weeks, and real estate websites and their affiliate newspapers are rejoicing as the records tumble every week. But behind every headline celebrating a suburb's record being beaten there are dozens of aspiring first home buyers, once again, going home empty handed, redoing their sums to see how much more they must save to have a chance at homeownership.

It was only a year ago that many were predicting house prices could fall by up to 30 per cent. The dream of first home buyers was within grasp again, but now it is further away than ever. Initially, the boom was led by homeowners, specifically first home buyers. That was fine, but sadly those days are behind us. Data released last week shows that in the past month alone investors were up 12.7 per cent and first home buyers fell by 0.9 per cent. Interest rates are at record lows and the cheap money is fuelling these price rises. Back in 2019 interest rates were at a record low too, and we saw exactly the same outrageous growth at that time. As long as interest rates are below rental returns, investors continue to flood into the market, and while support grants are exceptionally healthy they address symptoms not the cause.

Gallingly, strong house prices are being cited as an economic stimulant, responsible in part for the economic confidence we are feeling right now. Housing is the wealth effect that encourages Australians to spend and keep the economy moving, which is why regulators are reticent to act. Soon we will see that the price has been worse than the result and we'll wish we had acted sooner. We'll wish that we had acted now. It is not hard, as we know what to do. We've done it before. It was in 2019, during the greatest-ever growth in housing prices. APRA stepped in and brought curbs to investors, like enforcing a 20 per cent deposit for investors. This, in part, did the trick and soon prices were having the sort of measured decline that was so needed. Unfortunately, in a market that rarely falls, this downturn scared many, and by the time COVID had reared its ugly head the reforms were scrapped. Why can't APRA bring this back? Why does this have to be a binary on-or-off option? Why not allow loan-to-value ratios to fluctuate, set on a monthly level like the interest rates are? Investors could be incentivised or disincentivised to join or leave the market, and this adjustable lever could offset the incentives inadvertently created by interest rate reductions. Housing should not be an asset to make a quick buck. It needs to have solid foundations and to prioritise those who need shelter over those who wish to get rich. Curbing investors, to the benefit of home owners, may impact some, but, inherently, the only people it hurts are already fortunate, and it's to the benefit of those who really do need help.

It is clear from the statements in the budget last night that housing is a priority of this government, which is great news. The support for first home buyers is necessary and will help those who receive it. But I have concerns that, for as long as interest rates remain this low, more structural change will be needed before we can really have confidence that our housing market is delivering for the people that need it most.

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am very pleased to rise to speak to the motion moved by the member for Macnamara, which really highlights the crisis in access to safe, secure and affordable housing in Australia. The issue has never been so critical. This is not the first time I've had to speak in this chamber about the dire state of housing in Australia, and I know it's not going to be the last.

Recently I met with the women's crisis centres in my electorate of Newcastle. Those fearless women who have been running those centres for decades now told me that it has never been so bad. Thirty-five years of experience, one worker had, and she looked me straight in the eye and said, 'Sharon, it is dire.' Heartbreakingly, their key message to me was that, as I said, the housing crisis for vulnerable people is the worst they've ever seen it and that there is absolutely nowhere for those women to go. Those crisis centres are maxed out for accommodation. There are waiting lists for social housing in Newcastle extending for more than eight years now, and the private market has utterly failed vulnerable families—utterly failed. It is so bad that, when women escaping family violence present to these centres in Newcastle, if they arrive in a car the centres are secretly rejoicing because they know that at least that woman can sleep in her car for the foreseeable future, because God knows that's where she's going to be. There is nowhere for her to go. This is an unacceptable state of affairs for this nation.

The housing crisis in Newcastle is dire not just for vulnerable people now. Even families on two incomes are finding themselves rendered homeless. Rental vacancy rates have dropped as low as 0.3 per cent in parts of our region this year, and homeless services have been completely overwhelmed. I was recently contacted by a young couple in my electorate who, in June of last year, were evicted from their rental property, as the owner wanted to do renovations. They received their eviction notice. They immediately started applying for rental properties in Newcastle. After three months, they'd had zero success but had to move out of their property nonetheless. They moved in with their grandparents for another six months as they continued to apply for properties, again with no success. Circumstances changed for their grandparents and they couldn't stay there any longer, so they now live in a tent in a caravan park. This is a couple who are both in full-time work, in hospitality and health. This is the changing face of the housing crisis in Australia. There are too many stories like this couple's. The private rental market in Newcastle has failed. People are offering months of rent upfront and giving landlords an additional 50 or 60 bucks a week, on top of what they're asking, in order to secure a property. So, as you could well imagine, that means anyone on income support or in a vulnerable state has not a hope in hell of competing in that kind of market.

Last night's budget did nothing to address the housing crisis we are facing and the fundamental lack of affordable housing in this nation. There were announcements like the family home guarantee to help single parents buy a house, but this will only help 2,500 of the one million single parents in Australia, with the government only investing a measly $300,000 a year. You heard me—I'm not talking about millions of dollars; I'm talking about $300,000 from the Commonwealth of Australia. That's the support single parents are getting from this government to enter the housing market.

Australians need the Morrison government to take some responsibility now. I am sick of listening to this government say: 'Housing? That's a state and territory matter. We don't have anything to do with that.' Well, you know what? If you want to see a productive nation, you've got to make sure your citizens are housed in safe, secure and affordable housing; otherwise, they cannot participate in this economy. They don't get to be productive citizens of our nation, and we cannot afford to lock those people out. We've got very good social reasons for why we want to house people, but goddamn there are some strong economic reasons as well. Never has housing been less affordable in this nation, and never has a government been less interested. (Time expired)

Jason Falinski (Mackellar, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I don't agree with this motion. Malcolm Gladwell says that, when good people meet bad environments, the environment always wins. Mr Burns is a good person, and this motion is a very, very bad motion. The fact of the matter is that the Labor Party cry tears for those who cannot afford or find housing, but they do everything they possibly can to make sure that that's the way it stays. This motion starts off talking about home ownership but ends up demanding that government owns people. You should be ashamed of yourselves for putting this motion up. I will quote from The Economist.

Ms Claydon interjecting—

You need to listen, because you need to hear this.

Opposition members interjecting—

No, that's how they end up in this policy cul-de-sac where they believe that they're right and everyone else is wrong, because they don't listen to anyone else. This is from an earlier edition of The Economist:

But just as pernicious is the creeping dysfunction that housing has created over decades: vibrant cities without space to grow; ageing homeowners sitting in half-empty homes who are keen to protect their view; and a generation of young people who cannot easily afford to rent or buy and think capitalism has let them down.

…   …   …

The soaring cost of housing has created gaping inequalities and inflamed both generational and geographical divides. In 1990 a generation of baby-boomers, with a median age of 35, owned a third of America's real estate by value. In 2019 a similarly sized cohort of millennials, aged 31, owned just 4% … In Britain areas with stagnant housing markets were more likely to vote for Brexit …

…   …   …

The Economist suggests that the number of new houses constructed per person in the rich world has fallen by half since the 1960s. Because supply is constrained—

that's the issue: supply is constrained—

and the system is skewed towards ownership, most people feel they risk being left behind if they rent. As a result politicians focus on subsidising marginal buyers, as Britain has done in recent years. That channels cash to the middle classes and further boosts prices. And it fuels the build-up of mortgage debt that makes crises more likely.

I point out at this stage that the most indebted household sector in the world is here in Australia. It does not have to be this way. Not everywhere is afflicted with every part of the housing curse.

In Tokyo, there was no property shortage between 2013 and 2017. It put up 728,000 dwellings—that's more than England did—without destroying quality of life. The number of rough sleepers has dropped by 80 per cent in the past 20 years. Switzerland gives local governments fiscal incentives to allow housing developments and helps people buy houses by increasing supply. This is what this country needs. This is what Australians need—not more social housing or more planning by central government. What this country needs is more Australians owning more of their own houses. It needs planning reform. It needs to move from stamp duty to land tax. We need to have value sharing, as the member for Bennelong pointed out, so that we align infrastructure with where we're making developments.

In 2020, the Reserve Bank commissioned Keaton Jenner and Peter Tulip to do a study on the cost of housing in Australia. They found that 68 per cent of the cost of an apartment—and I'm looking at you two, the member for Macnamara and the member for Dunkley, about this—is due to zoning laws. It's not due to a lack of social housing. It's not due to a lack of subsidies. It's due to zoning laws. Where is that in your motion, Josh? Where? It's nowhere. The fact of the matter is that this woke, regressive conspiracy is nothing but a giant vampire squid wrapping its tentacles around the face of humanity. All you want to do is suck us dry.

Ms Murphy interjecting—

And you laugh, but that's all you really care about.

Trent Zimmerman (North Sydney, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for Mackellar will come to order. I call the member for Dunkley.

Peta Murphy (Dunkley, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I might suggest that the speaker before me, the member for Mackellar, runs for council with his obsession with zoning laws. Here in Australia today, it is harder to buy a house than ever before. It's harder to rent than ever before. There are more homeless Australians than ever before. And the fastest-growing cohort of homeless Australians are older women—that is, women over the age of 55. The government's response in this budget has been minimum help and maximum hype. It's something that doesn't just make me angry but makes me so deeply disappointed on behalf of the people in my community who are working, day in and day out, to provide for their families.

Jason Falinski (Mackellar, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Then stand up for them and make a difference. Your policies—

Peta Murphy (Dunkley, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Mackellar can interrupt me when I'm talking about real people as much as he likes, but—

Jason Falinski (Mackellar, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

So, when you were interrupting me, that was okay?

Trent Zimmerman (North Sydney, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order!

Peta Murphy (Dunkley, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You weren't talking about real people. This is a speech about people from my community. This is a speech about Lisa from Langwarrin, who emailed me. I've spoken to her. She's 49 years old. She's a single mother of three. Her youngest son is 14. Lisa has two jobs. She works full-time for the council and she works between 10 and 20 hours a week as a disability support worker. A divorce bled her savings dry. By the time the divorce was over, she had no savings and the house that she'd bought in 2003 was gone. Her husband owes her tens of thousands of dollars in child support but they can't obtain it because he's self-employed and his tax returns say he doesn't earn enough money. She has to pay $2,000 a month in rent to have a home near her son's school in Langwarrin that's decent enough that she feels she can be proud enough to bring them up in it.

She has said to me that she's at the mercy of her landlord all the time. The landlord can change their mind and say they don't want to continue the lease. And she's at the mercy of her job continuing. If something happens with her job, she is one month away from being homeless. The only safety net she has is her long service leave. She cannot save enough money for a mortgage. She cannot buy a house. That's what she wants for herself, for her retirement, and for her sons and her family. That's what my speech is about: Lisa from Langwarrin and all the other Lisas out there, who are hardworking, decent people who cannot afford to live decently in this country at the moment because of the cost of housing and the cost of rent.

My friend and colleague the member for Macnamara recently published a report with McKell called The crumbling Australian dream. One of the things he talked about in that report which is fundamentally important is that we don't consider housing a human right in this country.

Jason Falinski (Mackellar, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That's not true.

Peta Murphy (Dunkley, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We do not have a charter of rights. The member opposite says that's not true. I'd like him to point me to the federal charter of rights. We are signed up to international conventions that say housing is a human right. We do not have a federal bill of rights in this country which people can rely on in order to make their government provide housing as a human right. Other jurisdictions around the world do this but Australia doesn't.

There are many things that we need to fix in this country so that people like Lisa and her sons can have security now and so Lisa can have security in retirement. Raiding her superannuation, as Lisa said to me, is not one of the responses. In Lisa's own words, that will leave her retiring without enough to live on. There are structural things that we need to do. We need to invest in social housing and we need to treat housing in this country as a basic human right. It's part of the reason why in my first speech and at every opportunity I have pushed for the need to have a charter of human rights at the federal level in this country so that rights and responsibilities are more than just words; they are things that governments have to uphold.

Andrew Laming (Bowman, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What an important topic here. It's hard not to agree with each speaker. It's also a shame that we can't come to some agreement on the important matter of emergency housing, because obviously it involves every level of government. I want to acknowledge the mover of the motion today, who has probably thought more deeply about this problem than anyone in the chamber. I congratulate him on the recent work that he has done. He did promise to send me a copy and I'm still waiting to receive it.

The previous speaker, from the other side of the chamber, makes a fair point about the human right to housing, which I think at a grassroots level, certainly in my electorate, is fully understood, but she is right to point out that this should perhaps be more clearly pointed out. As is someone on my side of the chamber, who makes the very obvious point that, ultimately, supply of housing is the long-term solution but we can't rely on that in isolation to solve the problem, because it is so complex. In the end, three levels of government have to do what they can in their own remit to fix the problem.

It's sad that this debate is so ideologically lignified, because we need to admit that each one of us can do more and all governments can do more, as should every MP. In my own electorate of Bowman I have committed that no resident should live without a roof over their head. It's a fundamental acknowledgement of the human right to housing. But in reality what can a federal government do apart from the financial reforms that make lending more possible to those who need it most?

It was August 2018 when Caroline Rozario, a former staffer of mine, walked into my office and asked, 'What is this coalition government doing to make home ownership an aspirational and possible goal for young Australians of my age?' She put it to me to write a one pager on a deposit assistance scheme, which was submitted to Treasury and the Assistant Treasurer in August 2018, and a few months later announced by the Prime Minister as the only significant flagship policy for the 2019 campaign launch. On that Mother's Day weekend, the Prime Minister made the obvious point of the power, security and certainty that home ownership confers. It should be an objective of all levels of government. Since that time, the initial 10,000 has grown to 30,000 Australian families who would otherwise be renting but now own their own home and have been delivered what the previous member, the member for Dunkley, was crying out for: certainty not just for vulnerable parents but for their children to know that they cannot be evicted on the whim of a malicious landlord.

That certainty through home ownership is important, but I'm not going to stand here today and say it's the complete solution. I will certainly say that an extension of my deposit assistance scheme policy announced last night in the budget, conferring upon 10,000 single parents, for up to a certain sized mortgage, the ability to borrow 98 per cent of the cost of a home, liberates a huge cohort of Australians who otherwise could never dream of having their own house to have one. I tell you what, this cohort will demonstrate exactly what the previous 30,000 have in the First Home Loan Deposit Scheme: an extremely low rate of loan failure. That rate, below 0.5 of one per cent, is not really different to the overall market as it stands at the moment.

This deposit assistance scheme was I think a big change, but I'm never going to stand here and say that it's a solution for highly vulnerable, almost homeless families, who will always rely on the provision of social housing, That is something I'd encourage the Labor MP who moved this motion to take to Labor governments—not have a debate like this but just fix the problem with more social housing, and broaden their stock. I'm not going to say it's their fault. I'm going to say that they should go to all state governments so they can work on stock for those who are in and out of homelessness, just as this government works to bring the threshold of home ownership down to solve an equivalently important problem, and that is the challenge that those who can otherwise service a mortgage with their eyes closed are prevented from achieving the dream of home ownership, purely through mortgage insurance and the creation of a large deposit requirement that is otherwise utterly unnecessary.

I will stand here today and be measured on my words in 12 months time, that those single parents benefiting from the Treasurer's announcement last night of a two per cent deposit will be living in those homes—12 months from now, five years from now. That is something to which they could never otherwise have aspired without the policies of this federal government and the opportunities that we deliver at the Commonwealth level in order to do our part to ameliorate what is otherwise a significant housing crisis that has perennially been the responsibility of state governments.

Alicia Payne (Canberra, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise in very strong support of the motion by the member for Macnamara in relation to housing and also want to congratulate him on the excellent work he's been doing in this area. The great Australian dream is something that all of us have grown up with—the idea that one day, with a bit of hard work, we might own our own home. It's an aspiration that, no matter our political persuasions, no matter our background, we all share. It makes sense, too. Safe and secure housing is the basis for everything else. It should be seen as a human right in this country, and I echo the words of the member for Dunkley in her speech about this previously. Safe and secure housing allows you to have a sense of independence, a connection with your community and a place that is yours, in good and bad times. Nothing has brought that message home more strongly than going through COVID in the past 18 months. People's homes became places where they could be in lockdown, where they could be safe. The pandemic really highlighted, in a range of ways, the risk to people who don't have secure housing.

For our children's generation, though, I'm genuinely not sure that this great Australian dream will be achievable. In fact, with rising housing prices, it isn't achievable for most young Australians today. Australia is in the midst of a housing affordability crisis, one that this government have failed to act on in any way, and their latest budget, last night, is a clear example of this. Rates of home ownership continue to decline. Housing stock is at an all-time low and rents at an all-time high. We have enormous social housing waitlists, and on top of that a growing number of Australians are facing homelessness. For far too many Australians, the idea of owning a home is now completely unachievable. For 43 per cent of Australia's low-income earners, over 30 per cent of their income goes into paying rent and keeping a roof over their heads. When you're paying over a third of your income for housing you are officially in rental stress. When you're paying that much for rent, how are you supposed to even begin to save for a deposit, especially when the government has forecast no wage growth?

The problem here in Canberra is particularly serious. If your only income is a disability support pension, JobSeeker or youth allowance, there are no affordable private rentals in the ACT—none. Less than five per cent of accommodation on the market in the ACT is classified as affordable. Canberra is now the most expensive city in Australia to rent in—not Sydney, not Melbourne but Canberra. To its credit, the ACT government are working extremely hard to address these issues, but they can't do it alone. They're investing in more social housing, providing more rental subsidies to those in public housing and opening up more parcels of land for development. But it might be nice if the federal government could help out.

For all its spending announced in yesterday's budget, the government has done essentially nothing to address the housing crisis. Australia currently has a shortage of 400,000 social housing properties. The Treasurer could have stood up last night and said, 'The government will fund the construction of social housing Australia wide.' Did he do that? No, he didn't. Instead, the government are putting their fingers in their ears and screaming, 'I don't hold a hammer, mate'.

What did they actually announce when it comes to housing? The government announced the Family Home Guarantee, a scheme that will allow single parents to put down a two per cent deposit on a home loan. This entire policy will cost the budget a grand total of $300,000. Not $300 million, even—$300,000.

An honourable member: What a joke!

What a joke. There are a million single parents in Australia right now, yet this policy will only help 2,500 per year. The Prime Minister and all his ministers will each earn more than the entire yearly budget for this program next year.

Then we have people in here like the member for Goldstein who would have all of us raid our super accounts to put down a deposit. That is not a solution. It's just the creation of another problem where we allow people to rob their own retirement savings to try to have secure housing. We need to urgently address the worsening housing crisis in Australia. It's abundantly clear that the only way we can do this is to elect a bold, ambitious Labor government that's not afraid to take on the big issues. The Liberals have absolutely abrogated their responsibility to make our lives better, and they don't deserve your vote.

Julian Simmonds (Ryan, Liberal National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak against the motion, in particular the convoluted claims by my friend the member for Macnamara. I won't reach the rhetorical flourishes of previous speakers from our side of the chamber, but the member for Macnamara is absolutely wrong when he suggests that the Morrison government is not assisting Australians to buy their first home.

On this side of the chamber, we believe very much in lower taxes and supporting young Australians to enter the property market. The ability to purchase your own home is so vital to your future, to the future of your family and to your financial stability. When the COVID-19 pandemic hit, borders were closed, business revenue collapsed, many Australians lost their jobs and we were very conscious, as a government, about the handbrake this could put on young Australian families who are wanting to get into their own home. So the government acted swiftly and decisively to implement targeted measures to ensure that Australians wishing to buy their own home were not left behind.

I particularly want to pay tribute to the incredibly successful HomeBuilder scheme. It goes to show how those Labor MPs who have spoken on this motion absolutely have their blinkers on. They cannot acknowledge the success of this particular program. It has not just achieved what we said it would and what the government set out to achieve; it has been an absolute, runaway success in terms of generating construction, creating supply so that people can get into the housing market and creating jobs for tradies—so much so that it's almost hard to get a tradie at the moment, because they are so full up with work. In my electorate of Ryan we have a number of local construction businesses. I got to meet with a few of them, and one of them in particular with the Minister for Housing and Assistant Treasurer, Minister Sukkar. A couple of families had both received the $25,000 in HomeBuilder grants. Lloyd Payne, the general manager of Fresh Homes, a local construction business, gave us a tour of the new builds that were happening for these young families. Lloyd was quick to comment that HomeBuilder had changed the typical profile of first home buyers, and that there was a substantial increase in first home buyers approaching their business and utilising the grant to get into the property market for the first time—to get onto that very important first rung on the ladder to financial success. Lloyd said, as somebody who has been in the construction industry for over 30 years, that he has seen 'nothing better than this program, in terms of helping a first home owner get into their first home'. Due to its success, the budget includes a 12-month extension of the HomeBuilder construction commencement period for existing applicants. I think that should be warmly welcomed by both sides of the chamber. It's certainly welcomed by this side of the chamber. If those opposite, the Labor members we have heard speak, were genuine in their desire to see people in new homes, they would understand the challenge that has to be tackled in creating supply and they would recognise that the HomeBuilder program does that.

We believe in lower taxes to help young families get ahead. Previous speakers have talked about families' difficulties in saving deposits for their first home. Well, then, back our tax cuts, which allow them to keep more of the money that they have earnt in their pocket to spend on their first home. It's not rocket science. Yet those on the other side of the chamber will demand that more money be taken from young families by the government, because Labor always think they know how to spend your money better than you do. Yet at the same time they will decry the fact that it is too hard for these families to save for first home deposits. It's just another example of not only their hypocrisy but how they will have a bob each way.

Our budget will also increase the maximum amount of voluntary contributions that can be released under the First Home Super Saver Scheme from $30,000 to $50,000, again providing another opportunity for young families to kickstart their home deposit and get onto that important first rung. We are doing an enormous amount to get people into their first homes. I can't reject the member for McNamara's motion more, and I support the government's efforts on first home buyers.

David Gillespie (Lyne, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There being no further speakers, the debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.