Rob Mitchell (McEwen, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Housing and Minister for Homelessness. How does the Albanese Labor government's budget build on the government's commitments to address housing challenges for those Australians most in need, and are there any barriers to the government's plan to build more housing?

Julie Collins (Franklin, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Small Business) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I want to thank the member for McEwen for that question. He, like so many of us in this place, knows that many Australians are doing it tough when it comes to housing costs, trying to deal with increasing mortgages or increasing rentals. That's why we did even more in last night's budget when it comes to housing, whether it be through supporting people into their own home or through adding to supply.

We announced changes last night to the eligibility criteria for the Home Guarantee Scheme. From 1 July, siblings and friends will be able to join together to buy a home under the scheme. We're also allowing access to the scheme for people who have been out of the private housing market for more than a decade. People who have been impacted by financial or family breakdowns who have been out of the private housing market for more than a decade will now be able to access this scheme. These are sensible changes, and they reflect modern Australia. I have heard some commentary from the other side that they are supporting that. I hope that that is the case when it comes to this place.

We also moved to help Australians struggling to pay the rent with, as we've heard, the largest increase in Commonwealth rent assistance in 30 years. Indeed, we're talking about a 15 per cent increase. Last night we also announced support for build-to-rent projects, to encourage more private-sector investment to increase the depreciation rate on new properties. Of course, we're trying to encourage more international capital into investing in rental homes here in Australia. We're also adding to the supply of social and affordable housing with an additional $2 billion in financing to the National Housing Finance and Investment Corporation, which we hope will soon become Housing Australia. We anticipate that that will provide up to another 7,000 social and affordable rental homes. That is building on the things that we have already announced: our initial $575 million and, in our Housing Accord from the last budget, another $350 million for 10,000 additional rental affordable homes, to be matched by the states—another 20,000 in total. And, of course, the centrepiece of our housing policy is our $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund.

When you add up the Housing Australia Future Fund, the Housing Accord and the measures that we had last night, we're talking about 60,000 social and affordable rental homes from the federal government over five years. That is double the amount that the Commonwealth and all of the states together built over the last decade. It is incredibly ambitious, and it's ambitious because it needs to be, because too many Australians are doing it tough. I would say to members opposite and to the Greens: tell your senators to support the Housing Australia Future Fund Bill 2023, because too many vulnerable Australians are relying on that bill getting through and on the funding from it.

Rick Wilson (O'Connor, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Trade) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. S&P Global Ratings has said:

… we expect inflation to be stubbornly higher than the Reserve Bank of Australia's target until fiscal 2026.

Why has the Prime Minister brought down a budget which makes inflation worse?

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

I give the call to the Treasurer.

Jim Chalmers (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm going to do something unusual, Mr Speaker, and I'm going to give credit to the opposition tactics committee, who decided not to give that question to Angus—

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

Order! The Treasurer will refer to members by their titles or be warned.

Jim Chalmers (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

to the shadow Treasurer. Having heard the earlier effort, I think it's a good idea that the shadow Treasurer doesn't get any more questions about inflation. When it comes to inflation—

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

The Treasurer will pause. I will hear from—

Government members interjecting—

Order, members on my right! The Minister for Skills and Training will cease interjecting. I want to hear from the member for Petrie on a point of order.

Luke Howarth (Petrie, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Defence Industry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr Speaker. It's just on reflection on members. This man is supposed to be a leader—

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

Resume your seat—

No! The member for Petrie knows that's not a proper use of standing orders—

Luke Howarth (Petrie, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Defence Industry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Twice today—

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

Do you want the call again?

Luke Howarth (Petrie, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Defence Industry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm saying that twice today he reflected on the member for Hume—

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

You will leave the chamber under standing order 94(a). That is not an appropriate way to conduct a point of order.

The member for Petrie then left the chamber.

Order! The House will come to order. I want to hear from the Treasurer in silence. He has been asked a question and the person who has asked the question deserves an answer. I call the Treasurer.

Jim Chalmers (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This shadow minister asks questions about why we spend too much. This shadow minister asks questions about why we didn't spend enough. And I don't know what the reason for this last question was, but, in all seriousness, inflation is obviously the defining challenge in our economy, and that's why it guided our considerations of the cost-of-living package, the growth plan in the budget and also the fiscal restraint, which would be foreign and unrecognisable to those opposite.

Inflation is moderating, but not as quick as we would like. It will be higher than we'd like for longer than we'd like, and that's why we've got a targeted cost-of-living package in the budget which is carefully designed to take some of the pressure off people dealing with these inflationary pressures in the economy, without adding to those inflationary pressures. I read through before, in the response to the shadow Treasurer's question, the economists, including from some of the big private-sector banks, who have said that, at worst, the budget is broadly neutral but that when it comes to our energy plan it's actually putting downward pressure on inflation. And it's also dealing with the areas where the inflationary challenge is the most acute: out-of-pocket health costs, energy costs and rent costs as well. These are the big pressures in the inflation forecast, and that's why we've gone out of our way—in a responsible, methodical and considered way—to try and address these inflationary pressures.

The reason why the budget is in much better nick than it was under those opposite is that we've taken a different approach to the budget. When we've got these upward revisions to revenue, we've banked as much as we could to try and put the budget on a more sustainable footing. That's why the budget in 2022-23, when inflation is most acute, is a contractionary budget, and it's responsible after that as well.

So I understand the embarrassment of those opposite: this side of the House is forecasting a surplus, the first one in 15 years, and they have to try and concoct this outrage. The reality is that the budget position that we inherited is a consequence of a decade of a bin fire of rorts, waste and mismanagement. We have taken responsibility for cleaning up the mess that they left. We made a heap of progress in the budget last night and there will be more to do.

Libby Coker (Corangamite, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. How is the Albanese government's second budget building on the work done by the government in its first year and laying stronger foundations for a better future?

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

I thank the member for her question. Indeed, this is a budget that is providing for a stronger foundation for a better future, understanding, as the Treasurer just said, that we need to give support to take pressure off families while, at the same time, not adding to pressure on inflation.

This is a budget that provides the support where it's needed and when it's needed—right now—as well as building for the future. There's up to $500 of energy bill relief for more than five million households and boosting bulk billing, helping 11 million Australians see a doctor for free. We are halving medicine costs for more than six million Australians. There is $11.3 billion for a 15 per cent pay rise for people in the aged-care sector. There will be 250,000 workers getting a 15 per cent pay increase—no doubt opposed by those opposite. We are getting wages moving again. There are 300,000 fee-free TAFE places. We were told by the Reserve Bank that it is supply chain challenges we need to deal with. There is free TAFE, along with the National Reconstruction Fund, along with our plans for energy—all doing just that. There is the increase in JobSeeker of $40 a fortnight. We are expanding the single parenting payment; boosting rent assistance; investing in affordable and social housing; investing to prevent family and domestic violence; investing over $40 billion to make Australia a renewable energy superpower; and investing in advanced manufacturing, critical minerals and the digital economy. There will be a fund to help households and small businesses become more energy efficient, therefore reducing bills. We are supporting the instant asset write-off, to assist small business.

We're doing all that whilst we're finding examples of terminated funding, due to end on 30 June—child and youth mental health programs, family violence prevention and legal service providers, myGov, My Health Record, the National Library of Australia with its Trove program, the Office of the eSafety Commissioner. They are dropping off a cliff on 30 June. The Australian Radioactive Waste Agency is due to end, apparently, in December 2023. We've done all this while forecasting a surplus. Their only surplus was those mugs left in Josh Frydenberg's office!