Max Chandler-Mather (Griffith, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

CHANDLER-MATHER () (): My question is to the Prime Minister. Yesterday you said couldn't organise a national rent freeze, because of the Constitution, but, during the pandemic, national cabinet regulated rentals, with a moratorium on evictions. As well as making proposals to national cabinet, the federal government has the power to offer grants on the condition that states freeze rent increases. The government uses the same power to regulate health and education. With so many renters one rent increase away from eviction, will he finally take national leadership and coordinate a national freeze on a rent increases?

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for his question, which in part he answered himself. During the pandemic a range of things occurred with the support of everyone in this parliament. For example, there was a circumstance whereby we were paying people's wages; we don't pay people's wages today.

Sussan Ley (Farrer, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Women) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If you care about people, you should.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Deputy Leader of the Opposition, it's been a big two weeks. I'm just going to say to her she's on a warning now. If she interjects again, she will definitely be asked to leave.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There were a range of emergency measures put in place over workplaces and support for businesses. State government made those decisions. The idea that the national government has the power to impose a rent freeze—that is, essentially to nationalise the private rental market around Australia—is just not the case, and the member knows that. What we have is a real solution being put forward, and that is our National Housing Accord. That is the Commonwealth-state housing agreement, which is where the Commonwealth, together with the states, negotiates in a way in which states don't then say, 'Yes, we'll bank that money and withdraw our investment by the amount that the Commonwealth puts in,' which is why you need to have that negotiation.

This isn't an SRC; this is a national government, and what national governments have to do is put forward real solutions to issues. That's why we will also have our national homelessness strategy. That's why the Housing Australia Future Fund, which will provide 30,000 additional homes that are affordable or social, 4,000 of which will be reserved for women and children escaping domestic violence, will provide funding for veterans at risk of homelessness, will provide $100 million for emergency housing and will provide support to repair Indigenous housing in remote communities, should be passed.

Now, to those opposite: you can argue during the break if you want that you're against $10 billion of funding because you think it should be $20 billion or whatever figure you want to pluck out, but the idea that you will support zero, which is what opposing this legislation will do—we will let members in the electorate know that that is exactly the case. So I say to the member and his colleagues: vote for this legislation and support it. (Time expired)