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

I have received a letter from the honourable member for Wannon proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely:

This Government's failure to plan for the additional needs in areas such as housing, health and infrastructure that will result from 1.5 million migrants over 5 years.

I call upon those honourable members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places.

Mor e than the number of members required by the standing orders having risen in their places—

Dan Tehan (Wannon, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Immigration and Citizenship) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Two weeks ago, with much fanfare, the Minister for Home Affairs stood up at the National Press Club to give what she said was a very important speech. It was notable for three things. The first reason it was notable was the fact that, after the government has been in power for nearly a year, she was delivering a review which clearly showed that the government had done no work in opposition. They had no plan to deal with immigration. As a matter of fact, they had to outsource it and wait one year to get the recommendations of that review to know what their policy might look like.

The second reason it was notable was that the minister said that she wanted the immigration policy under this government to reflect Labor's values. And it does reflect Labor's values, particularly their value, their want, for a big Australia. That's what their values have always been and that's what the policy that was outlined is all about.

The third reason this speech was notable was the fact that there was no mention of numbers in the speech—none whatsoever. It was very curious that there was no mention of numbers because the day before we'd specifically asked the minister to go through the numbers, especially the NOM numbers. There was no mention of this.

What happened the next day was very interesting. The Prime Minister had to meet with the state and territory leaders and talk about the migration numbers. One of the state and territory leaders leaked the then NOM number, so the government at five o'clock on the Friday afternoon scurried around to the press gallery and said: 'This isn't anything unusual. This number isn't unusual. This is the normal way this all works.' Yet, once we found out what the number was, it became absolutely apparent that that was a complete and utter porky. As a matter of fact—and you won't believe this—but they were telling the journalists in the gallery that this isn't unusual because it happened during the Spanish flu.

Hon. Members:

Honourable members interjecting—

Dan Tehan (Wannon, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Immigration and Citizenship) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

At least we're getting a giggle. I haven't looked at what happened under the Spanish flu, but I have looked at what happened in Labor's October budget. They seem to have forgotten they handed down an October budget. In October they said that the net overseas migration number for 2022-23 would be 235,000. What the minister didn't want to confess to at the Press Club and didn't want to see leaked out of the meeting with the premiers and cabinet was that the net overseas migration number between October and May had gone from 235,000 to 400,000. Also, that 2023-24 number had gone from 235,000 to 315,000, so it has gone to 715,000. Once again it's really, really interesting because in the budget, did we hear the Treasurer mention the net overseas migration number? Just for the Treasurer's sake and the Prime Minister's sake I will mention it again, because when we've asked questions we haven't heard it mentioned either: 1.5 million over five years. Just to give people who might be listening to this as they're driving home in their cars—you never know, they do occasionally listen to the parliamentary network—those people sitting in their cars driving home should think about this: in the next five years a city the size of Adelaide is coming to Australia. And the thing about it is, as we saw at the Press Club two weeks ago, that there is no plan to deal with this. There is no plan to deal with the congestion, which is worse than it was before we went into the pandemic—no plan. As a matter of fact, as has been pointed out by many in this place, infrastructure spending is going down in this budget; it's being cut, so you are bringing in a population the size of Adelaide, and you are reducing your spending on infrastructure.

Housing—there is no plan for housing. Where are all these people going to be housed? There is nowhere to house them. As we have seen, the prediction is that we need an additional 200,000 houses. Where is the plan for the additional 200,000 houses? There is none. And what is it doing to rents? There is a rental crisis in this country, and we know that, for every additional 10,000 people that come in, rents will go up. We know 1.5 million will come in. What is that going to do to rents? Universities are saying to professors, to tutors, to lecturers, 'We want you to take international students in as boarders.'

Tony Pasin (Barker, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Billet them! That's a plan!

Dan Tehan (Wannon, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Immigration and Citizenship) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Billet them because they can't deal with the rents, they can't deal with the housing.

The Reserve Bank has warned that this is putting upward pressure on interest rates. And yet, what are you doing for these 1.5 million people?

Then think about the impact on the public health system. Think about the impact on those emergency departments. There has been no coordination with state and territory governments as to how to deal with the impact on the health sector, so those emergency departments will have more and more pressure on them. What will it mean for the doctor shortage if people won't be able to go in and see a doctor?

What we're seeing take place before our eyes is the result of doing no work in opposition. You had nine years to do your work in opposition—nine years to have a plan—but you come in here, and what do you do? I have to say that, sadly, it is typical for Labor. You lose control of the borders. It has happened before, and it is happening again—1.5 million with no plan.

I look forward to every member that stands up in response to this MPI mentioning the 1.5 million number. I dare you to mention that 1.5 million number that your budget figures show quite clearly. I've got a feeling that this 1.5 million number is going to be a bit like the $275 that no-one wants to mention. I might be wrong. I see the minister isn't here, and I see the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs isn't here, so maybe someone here will be brave enough to do it. I hope we will see a little bit more coordination between the Minister for Home Affairs and the minister for immigration. The Minister for Home Affairs gave her speech, where she wouldn't mention 1.5 million, while the minister for immigration was overseas. The poor old minister for immigration, when the budget was announced—do you know what? For someone who is normally tweeting about his fundraising with Dan Andrews and all that, there was not one tweet about the budget. He's gone into hiding; I don't know what's happened to him. And the Minister for Home Affairs has been put into hiding as well. Guess who are the two ministers who haven't had a question all week? There are only two of them. They've been through every one but two who haven't—the Minister for Home Affairs and the minister for immigration. Let's see you own up to your 1.5 million. (Time expired)

Matt Keogh (Burt, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Veterans’ Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's an amazing opportunity that the opposition have presented here today in their matter of public importance they raise. They raise the issue of a plan for housing. And they are right: having a plan for housing in this country is vitally important. In fact, our government understands how important it is to make sure that Australians have access to safe and affordable housing. In fact, we understand that it's central to the dignity and the security of all Australians.

We have had to bring in, as part of our commitments at the last election, legislation to establish the Housing Australia Future Fund—a $10 billion investment in safe and secure housing for the most needy Australians. And yet—have you heard?—despite the fact it is a matter of public importance to the opposition that we need to have a plan for housing in this country, over in the other place the 'noalition' of the Liberals, Nationals and Greens are opposed to the Housing Australia Future Fund. It is a $10 billion fund that will deliver 30,000 new social and affordable homes over only five years. That's exactly what we need to see in Australia.

I take the opportunity—I suspect I'll take it a few times over my speaking time—to call on those in the other chamber to look back and see what they've done just in the last 24 hours. They had the opportunity to support the establishment of that fund. But, instead, this 'noalition' of Liberals, Nationals and Greens decided to gang up in the Senate and remove from the Senate the opportunity to even vote on that legislation this week. They are further deferring, further putting off, the opportunity to establish the fund, to start earning interest on the fund, to start generating the revenue in the fund that would deliver $200 million for the repair, maintenance and improvement of housing in remote Indigenous communities and deliver $100 million for crisis and transitional housing options for women and children impacted by family and domestic violence and for older women that are at risk of homelessness. And they are denying the opportunity for $30 million to build housing and fund specialist services for veterans who are experiencing homelessness or at risk of homelessness. I make this point because there are nearly 6,000 contemporary veterans that can experience homelessness in any one year here in Australia. That is a national tragedy. It's one that, indeed, the opposition have spoken about. It is one they acknowledge we should be doing something about, to fix it. In fact, it might even be one of the things they're suggesting is a failure in housing policy. Yet, when presented with an opportunity to actually fix this problem, they oppose it going through this parliament.

It's curious, and I will tell you all why. In last year's budget reply, the Leader of the Opposition said:

The job of an opposition is not to oppose for the sake of it. We don't disagree with everything in this budget, and policy must be judged on its merits. If it's good for you, we will support it. If it's bad for you, we will stand against it. So we commend several good measures in Tuesday's budget: the extension of the childcare subsidy to more Australian families; the commitment to reduce the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme co-payment, to lower the cost of medicines; the support for housing for our veterans …

At the last budget reply, the Leader of the Opposition stood at that dispatch box and told this chamber, this parliament and the Australian people that that opposition—the Liberal Party and the National Party—would support the funding for housing for veterans who are homeless or at risk of homelessness. This is the funding that would be flowing through the Housing Australia Future Fund and this is the funding that would support the programs that are being proposed by organisations—for example, the Royal Australian Air Force Association of Western Australia, Vasey RSL Care in Victoria and the Tasmanian RSL—which all have proposals that this government could consider for funding that would come through the Housing Australia Future Fund. Some of those proposals are based on the very successful and already existing Andrew Russell Veteran Living centre in South Australia, a model for the Scott Palmer Centre, which we are funding as a government and we committed to at the last election, to be built in Darwin. This is also a great example of how we are already moving in this space, but we need to have further funding to support these additional programs. There are organisations waiting in the wings, complaining, and I know they are calling Liberal and National senators and telling them they should be supporting this legislation to establish the fund. We also have the Queensland RSL doing the work they do with the Salvos to support veterans experiencing homelessness as well.

We want to be able to support good proposals coming from good organisations. We can't even assess potential proposals because there's no stream of funding because this opposition, in noalition with the Greens, are not supporting it. I want to make a point about that. When it comes to the approach that has been taken here by this noalition of Liberals, Nationals and Greens, we have been hearing this consistent whine in this chamber. Anyone who pays attention on the social media certainly reads the whine that comes out of the Greens about this housing proposal.

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

How about you wait until I give you the call and then we'll hear the point of order. Member for Longman.

Terry Young (Longman, Liberal National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Speaker has already ruled that you cannot use the term 'noalition'.

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

I'm listening very carefully to all the discussion going on here. I will check on that ruling. I think that everybody in this debate should be mindful of being respectful to each other.

Matt Keogh (Burt, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Veterans’ Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would like to inform the member that I used the term advisedly as an adjective to describe a grouping of three parties, not a formal title ascribed to two parties. Coming back to that third party, the Greens, Australia very well knows how the Greens like to try and use an argument about saying that they are going to strive for something better, that things could be better, that we should be doing things better, that we should be doing it the Greens' way. The Greens' way has delivered a decade of inaction on energy policy—that's what they delivered to this country.

The Greens' way is now holding up housing funding for women and children fleeing domestic violence, older women who are experiencing homelessness, Indigenous communities that need to have proper housing afforded to them and housing for veterans that are homeless or at risk of homelessness. That is the approach they are taking. If they genuinely held the view that they thought we should be doing more or better—as they would say it—they would support this and continue to push us to do something else. But instead what they do is try and hold all of these people that would benefit from the Housing Australia Future Fund to ransom. How do they get to do that? Because they're in a noalition of the Greens, the National Party and the Liberal Party. It is absolutely shameful.

As I mentioned in question time earlier today, for all of the rhetoric you hear out of the Liberal and National parties about supporting our veterans—those people who put themselves on the line for our country—they undermined the Department of Veterans' Affairs, they failed to resource it properly, they talked up the new IT system and they didn't actually give it any funding. When given the opportunity to support funding for veterans experiencing homelessness, the first thing they do is stand at that dispatch box and say, 'We will support funding for housing for our veterans.' Then, in the proceeding nine months, they spend the whole time opposing the legislation that would do that very thing!

It is absolutely outrageous and it is hypocritical. You walk in here and try to say that we are the failure when it comes to housing policy. It is your failure! You didn't deliver over nine years, you didn't deliver over your time. You could have done this and then you didn't. We come in to clean up your mess and what do you do? You don't even support it happening! Instead, you try and talk the big talk. You go out and say, 'We're supporting veterans.' But, in reality, when it comes to what you're actually doing in this chamber and in that chamber in the other place, you aren't supporting veterans: you're undermining the support for veterans.

And you know it. I know that these organisations are calling you. They're calling their backbenchers and calling their senators. You are the failure for veterans and housing. (Time expired)

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

I might just remind everyone that the microphones are working perfectly well. I can hear you without you yelling at me!

Anne Webster (Mallee, National Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Regional Health) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Australia has a proud migration history. Migrants are the thread woven into the very fabric of our nation, blessing us with their variety in culture, belief, cuisine and, indeed, coffee and wine. Migrants have underpinned the economy and workforce in electorates like mine in Mallee, working long and hard to grow the agriculture, construction, research, technology, science, health and education sectors, and the same is true nationwide.

Australia's workforce shortage is most dire in the regions. We need migrants in the places where they can deliver the greatest value to our productivity and the Australian success story. That's why the Liberal-National government introduced the agricultural visa, which Labor scrapped. And we introduced the PALM scheme, which has been so valuable for Mallee. These are just two examples of how the coalition delivered targeted, measured policies, built to fix skills shortages and broader labour shortages in the industries that needed them most—and we still need them.

Labor's targets are very different. They aren't measured; it's just one big number. Those opposite want 1.5 million migrants over the next five years. I have questions—many questions—about that. As a nation, we are struggling to house the people we have in the country already. The national rental vacancy figure is 1.4 per cent and it's only slightly higher in the regions, at 1.58 per cent. I recently took the Parliamentary Joint Standing Committee on Migration, of which I am the deputy chair, to Robinvale in my electorate of Mallee. We toured the Rocky Lamattina & Sons carrot-processing facility—the largest in the lower hemisphere—as well as the Cordoma Group's great operations. Cordoma Group's general manager, Adrian Cordoma, and his sister Vanessa relayed to me a story about seasonal workers who rented a house while working in Robinvale. When the season changes they move on to other regions for that harvest season but they keep the house in Robinvale for the next season. If they didn't, they would not be able to find one when they returned. Labor's signature housing policy is floundering in the Senate and provides no certainty to alleviate any housing issues, let alone regional housing issues.

To have 1.5 million more migrants in the country will put an incredible strain on Australia's already struggling healthcare system, a system that in regional Australia is in crisis already—a crisis the government refuses even to admit is occurring. How many of the 1.5 million more migrants will be doctors, nurses and other allied health professionals who will head out to regional Australia and stay there? Thanks to Minister Butler's radical expansion to the distribution priority areas for doctors, an international medical graduate migrating here is now far more likely to move to periurban settings over a regional practice. Therefore it will not mitigate the dire situation country people face and will add further burden to those periurban areas for housing.

Tuesday night's federal budget threw money into Medicare, which made for great headlines but did not give any confidence that Labor has plans to alleviate the workforce issues stressing our health sector. This budget also failed to address other critical infrastructure, pushing projects out with reviews into the long grass, critical infrastructure to build and repair roads, hospitals and other critical infrastructure in the regions to support that 1.5 million new people. In addition, migrant families will have to find their own childcare arrangements, particularly if they migrate to the regions. Why would a migrant choose to settle in a childcare desert? Labor has thrown money at the childcare sector but prioritises urban subsidies over actual services, which create demand but do nothing to fix supply. It's about not just affordability but accessibility.

The coalition wants a better Australia, not just a bigger Australia. A better Australia means a sustainable Australia, one that maximises the economic benefits of immigration while managing the negative impacts on housing, congestion, our health system, the environment and communities. Communities in regional Australia, particularly in my electorate of Mallee, are already neglected and groaning under the despair of the health and housing crisis. (Time expired)

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

You have to hand it to the Liberal Party because it does not matter how many messages the Australian people send them; they just keep going back to the old Liberal Party methods. It doesn't matter how unsuccessful the Liberal and National parties are. It doesn't matter how many times the Australian people say, 'Do you know what? We actually don't want climate-change-denying dinosaurs, living in the past, constantly going out for scare campaigns and divisive politics.' It doesn't matter how many times the Australian people tell those opposite that that sort of Australia has no place in 2023. They keep going back to their old ugly playbook. And what have we got today? When the Liberal Party has run out of ideas, they go back to the bottom shelf. They go to the old dog-whistle 'look at all the migrants' playbook, complaining about all of the people coming into this country. It is the old John Howard playbook that we've seen time and time again.

Well, let's be clear. The reason that the member for Goldstein, the member for Higgins, the member for Mackellar, the member for North Sydney and, of course, the brand new member for Aston are no longer members of the Liberal Party is these gutter politics that those opposite are playing right now. Gutter politics. Those opposite come into this place and complain about housing, and yet they block the very thing that will get the federal government back into building affordable and social rental properties. Those opposite complain about the economy, but we are bringing workers back. I don't know if any of them spoke to a business after the pandemic, but the labour shortages in this country were extraordinary, so we brought skilled workers back to this country. We've also brought universities back to this country. What we've got is the old Liberal Party gutter politics, going after the other—anyone but the other; that's what they're pointing the finger at. What makes it even worse? Frankly, we can all sit back and watch the Liberal Party's demise—goodness; in Victoria, we've been watching it for a little while now! Just when you thought the Liberal Party couldn't get any crazier, they bring out something new.

Anyway, the Liberal Party might be a lost cause. But, if you're coming into this place to preach about caring about the welfare of those people in our society who are struggling with the costs of living and struggling with housing and you want to profess to be doing more for housing and housing affordability in this country, you should do whatever you can to get houses built right now. When the Greens abstained from the housing bill in this place, I thought, 'Do you know what? They're just going to try and negotiate; they're not going to stand in the way of housing.' But, in the other house, they have joined with the coalition, One Nation, Clive Palmer—and no-one else. The Independents, the teals in this place, Senators David Pocock and Jacqui Lambie, everyone else other than One Nation, Clive Palmer's bloke and the Liberal and National parties are sitting on the other side of the chamber saying, 'We actually want to get on with the job of building social housing.' And the Greens are sitting there with that unholy no-social-housing alliance. You'd think, if you were sitting there, looking around, going, 'I'm here with the Liberal Party, the National Party, One Nation and Clive Palmer,' you'd go, 'Maybe I should get on the other side of the chamber, with the sensible people who actually want to build social housing.'

I've heard arguments about tax cuts and all of this sort of stuff that is happening in the years to come, and those are legitimate debates that the country will undergo in the future. We do need to have honest conversations about tax policy. There's been really sensible tax policy implemented in the budget this year. But let's make the facts clear: right now, in this parliament, this week, we could get the construction of social and affordable housing started.

Dan Tehan (Wannon, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Immigration and Citizenship) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thought you were going to mention the 1.5 million.

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

I'm not going to take the interjection from the dog whistling from those opposite. We could get the construction of social housing started, which hasn't happened by a federal government in over a decade. The Greens, the Liberal Party and the National Party, together with One Nation and Clive Palmer, need to get out of the way and start building homes for Australians.

Melissa McIntosh (Lindsay, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Mental Health and Suicide Prevention) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on this really desperate issue for people in my community. I'm seriously concerned. Just last week, I met with charities and people in the community housing industry, and also local real estate agents, and they only confirmed my worries. One real estate agent told me that investors are pulling out of the housing market, leading to a reduction of rental stock, with a flow-on effect of raising rental prices. But this is only part of the problem. We're seeing things like the middle class homeless, the poor struggling to survive and food banks working on overdrive. The agency's rental stock has gone down 25 per cent. Rentals are tenanted within one week, and there are hundreds queuing to view each property as soon as it's listed. Tenants are becoming increasingly desperate. How on earth are we going to house 1.5 million extra people in this country?

We know where they're going to go. Sixty per cent of new migrants come to greater Western Sydney. Our roads are clogged. Congestion is huge. How are these people going to get to work and home again? Our hospitals are clogged. We don't have enough GPs. Where are they going to live? These are the big, very real, very serious questions.

Labor is bringing 1.5 million in their big ambition to create a big Australia in just five years, and 60 per cent will probably come to Western Sydney and other places like Western Sydney right across the country. That's close to double the number of enrolled voters in my Lindsay electorate arriving every single year, and it's 321,000 more people than forecast in the October budget. Under Labor, 5,750 people will arrive every week. We know, according to Western Sydney University, as I said, that 60 per cent that come to Australia settle in greater Western Sydney where we don't have the infrastructure, we don't have the public hospital systems in place and we certainly do not have the housing.

As a member of parliament, it is my job to represent the views and interests of my constituents in Lindsay. Our community deserves to be considered and consulted. We have not been consulted about big Australia. I often speak about my priorities for the areas of Western Sydney that I represent in this House and our fight for infrastructure, which is at threat of being dumped by this Labor government. The AMP chief economist, Dr Shane Oliver, has noted that the resurgence in underlying demand on the back of very high immigration and that 400,000 arrivals this year equates to demand for an extra 200,000 dwellings. I go back to my local real estate agent, somebody who is on the ground in Western Sydney, who is seeing the impact of a lack of rental stock. He is seeing in his work that people who have two incomes are now lining up at foodbanks to put food on the table for their families, and they are at risk of losing their homes.

In addition to that, there are the Australians from my electorate who have been stuck in traffic or crammed onto trains and buses this morning. There are 300,000 people who commute out of Western Sydney every day for a good job. Can you imagine when 60 per cent of new migrants come into Western Sydney—that 1.5 million people that Labor have committed to in their 'big Australia' ambitions. Labor's budget cuts to infrastructure and failure to address congestion, the housing and rental crisis and the liveability of our towns and suburbs in the not too distant future will play out in communities like mine. It's not fair and it's not right, but I will be continuing to fight and continuing to make a noise for people in Western Sydney.

Sally Sitou (Reid, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I agree with the member for Lindsay. Her community have been let down. They do not have the infrastructure they need for a growing community. They don't have the schools, the hospitals or the transport. But, instead of blaming migrants, I say to the member for Lindsay: turn to your former state colleagues and the former premier of New South Wales, Dominic Perrottet, and ask them why they couldn't deliver on infrastructure, why they couldn't build schools in these growing suburbs and why they failed to provide public infrastructure to these growing suburbs in your community. Don't blame the migrants; blame the Liberal Party.

I am glad to be speaking on this matter of public importance, because it is important. It's just a shame that this is the only tune that those opposite know how to whistle. I've seen this before. It's called 'blame the migrants'. When you need to get a headline before a budget week, blame the migrants. When you are behind in the polls, blame the migrants. When you need to distract from your own incompetencies, blame the migrants.

When you've got the member for Dickson as your leader, it's no wonder you return to this tired and terrible tune. When he was home affairs minister he blamed African gangs. When he was immigration minister he said it was a mistake to let Lebanese refugees into Australia. 'Blame the migrants' was a bad tune then, and it's a bad tune now. I'll give you two reasons why. The numbers contradict your stance. If we had stayed with the migration intake numbers that you had when you were in government, today we would have more than half a million people more in this country. Think on that for a minute. Under those opposite, a bigger Australia.

The second reason—and this is a reason that all of those sitting opposite should listen to—is that Australia is a multicultural success story. There is no better example of that than my electorate of Reid. We are a community enriched by our diversity and we, on this side of the House, embrace multicultural Australia. You only need to look at the members on this side of the House: the members for Swan, Holt, Tangney, Cowan, Higgins—the member for Higgins is with me today—Wills, Chifley, Hindmarsh and the list goes on. It is a government that truly reflects the diversity of our community. That's not something those opposite can say. That's probably why we have this utterly disgraceful matter of public importance today.

I welcome a discussion on infrastructure from those opposite. I'm very happy to take you to the problems in the electorate of Reid. I want to give you one example. Wentworth Point is one of the most densely populated suburbs in Sydney. But, under the Liberals, at the federal, state and local government levels, they were utterly let down. If you ask any resident in Wentworth Point what the major issue is, it's the intersection of Hill Road and Bennelong Parkway. It's dangerous and traffic banks up every day. So, before the last election, I committed $8.5 million to fixing that intersection. I'm happy to report construction has already started to fix that black spot. And that's what governments are supposed to do. They're supposed to make a commitment, then they're supposed to fund it and then they're supposed to deliver on it. That's unlike those opposite, who, when it comes to infrastructure, are very much like the Daily Mailall headline and no substance. I'm probably being a bit unfair to the Daily Mail there.

I welcome, too, a discussion on health. We on this side of the House will always be better on health than those opposite. We created Medicare, we strengthened Medicare and in this budget we have boosted Medicare. We've given it the biggest boost it has seen since Paul Keating was Prime Minister. We have tripled bulk-billing incentives to make it easier and more affordable for people to see a GP. We've halved the cost of medication for people with chronic illness and we're funding the biggest pay rise for aged-care workers to ensure our oldest Australians are well cared for in their final years. Let's compare that to your track record. You tried to trash Medicare, and when the now Leader of the Opposition was the health minister, he wanted to undermine universal access to health care. He was so bad, a poll of doctors said he was the worst health minister in Australia.

Russell Broadbent (Monash, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'd like to speak to the House about where the rubber hits the road on the issues that have been raised today by the member for Wannon. I have a situation in my electorate where, through domestic violence, a woman and her well-loved boys of the community were displaced from their home. I had some contacts, and I went to the local estate agent in this small town—I won't mention the town—and said: 'Look, can you help me? I have this woman who has had to leave home.' And the best we could offer her was two caravans with a tent over the top. I considered that, and I didn't know what to do.

With the help of the local Manna Gum Community House, we wrote to the whole community in that area and said: 'Have you got a house? Have you got a farmhouse? Have you got this? Have you got that?' When I went to the estate agent, they said, 'Russell, we've got one house for rent, and we've got 15 applicants for that house.' Now, are they going to take the woman with her boys who have just been thrown out of a house, or are they going to take someone who's wealthy and who's going to pay their rent? So we went to the community house, and we wrote the letter, and, sure enough, we turned up some people who were prepared to rent this woman a house. She stayed in the town, her boys stayed with all their mates in the community and that was one situation resolved. But there are hundreds of those right across my electorate, and I know it would be the same for the member for Wannon, where we have no housing stock for workers, no housing stock for farmworkers, no housing stock anywhere for anybody.

This has been a most difficult issue because of the movement of people from cities to the country during the pandemic. I get asked quite often: 'Where have all the workers gone? Where are they? Where are the workers?' I have to tell you that in one health service in Victoria, they have 18,000 employees and 2,500 of them decided not to be vaccinated, so they all lost their jobs. Out of those 18,000 workers, they are 2,500 down. I don't know how many resigned and I don't know how many took early retirement, but 2,500 are missing out of that one health service. Where are the workers that we need? I'm looking at the proposal before the House and importance of that proposal, but housing has been an issue for a long time—outside of what the pandemic caused—in every electorate, and especially for those who are least able to look after themselves.

There are other areas where we're missing workers as well. For instance, I read this week that in the US actuaries and insurance companies have predicted an emerging medical and economic crisis caused by a workforce disabled by the vaccines. It's happening in the US.

Talking about workforce constraints, why are Services Australia wasting time writing officious letters to vaccine injured people demanding that they only speak to the one appointed contact? Take Debbie's case—not her real name. Debbie said their contact officer, Bernadette—not her real name—has written to Debbie about new ways to interact with staff in the vaccine claims scheme. I'll share the highlights of the letter:

How you can contact us has changed.

You now have one person you can contact to do business with us. Your contact person is Bernadette—

not her real name.

They will help you with referrals and information about our services.

That's fine.

What this means … You can only contact us by (1) Calling Bernadette or (2) Calling/writing to Services Australia.

The letter goes on:

You can contact Bernadette and they will explain the decision.

They—'they'—will explain the decision. I don't mind what Bernadette is; I just want the public servants to—

Ross Vasta (Bonner, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! I call the honourable member for Bennelong.

Jerome Laxale (Bennelong, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's been just under a year that the Liberals and Nationals have been sitting on those benches over there in opposition, and we know it's been a tough year for them. In that year, they have tried to land a blow on the cost of living, and in response we've delivered not one but two budgets that will help families and those doing it tough. Our budgets have driven and will drive down the cost of medicines. They'll make it cheaper to see a doctor. They'll make early education cheaper for Aussie families. In that year, the Liberals and Nationals have also tried to land a blow on renewable energy and climate change, ridiculing what Australians voted for at the last election. In response we've legislated a net zero target and unlocked billions of dollars of investment into cheaper energy. In that year, they have tried to hold on to one of the bluest of their blue seats, the seat of Aston, and in response we have become the first government in over 100 years to win a seat off the opposition—and what a fine member she is and will be!

They've tried everything. They've tried it all and they've failed. And now, in an act of absolute desperation, they've broken the emergency glass case in the party room and reached for that shiny Liberal Party dog whistle, and with this motion they're whistling it loudly. They're blaming new migrants for the failures of their government. All their other tactics have failed, so they have now decided to try and convince the Australian people that migrants, new and old, are to blame for their 10 years of inaction. They have decided to attack the people in my electorate and blame them for the Liberals' cuts to Medicare and for their 10 years of inaction on providing affordable housing.

Shame on them for returning us to the worst years of the Howard government—the former prime minister who turned migrants and immigrants into political footballs. Well, in case those over there need reminding, Bennelong doesn't like it when the Liberals reach for that dog whistle. Bennelong kicked out Howard, they kicked out Morrison and they elected me to this place to stand up for them. They elected me to speak out against dog whistling on migration—to speak out when Chinese Australians and Korean Australians and Indian and Armenian Australians are attacked by their governments.

This motion claims we have no plan to fix the former government's mess. We know that in this budget and the last budget we have invested game-changing amounts into health care. This budget delivers more than $6 billion into new investments to strengthen Medicare, as well as an indexation boost to the rebates of more than $1.5 billion—the biggest increase in 30 years. This budget continues to clean up the mess left by the former government.

It's not just in health where those opposite are loudly dog whistling; they are also here today blaming migrants for a housing crisis. They're blaming migrants for the Liberals' underinvestment in affordable housing. They're blaming migrants for the Liberals' underinvestment in infrastructure. They're blaming migrants for the Liberals' 10 years of dysfunction and missed opportunities. What makes this motion today so extraordinary is that months ago, here in this room, they voted against a plan to build 30,000 new and affordable homes across Australia. And today they are siding with the Greens and that other famous anti-immigrant, Pauline Hanson, to block a vote on the biggest investment in social and affordable housing in a decade.

Instead of supporting our plan, they're in here blaming migrant families, new and old, for their own 10 years of neglect and failure. Shame on them, because I think they all need to hear this loud and clear—and I'm glad the member for Wannon, the mover of this motion, has walked back in; this time you need to hear this, member for Wannon—migrants make Australia stronger; migrants make our country more prosperous; migrants make our communities more inclusive and more diverse; migrants grow our economy; and migrants make Bennelong and Australia better. For as long as I am in this place, I will always call out disgusting tactics like this and stand up for migrant families in Bennelong and across Australia.

Jenny Ware (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on this matter of public importance, and I commend the member for Wannon for bringing this matter to the House's attention. It's particularly concerning to read that we're going to have an additional 1.5 million migrants, but this is in conjunction with, in the other place, the Greens rejecting the Albanese Labor government's housing plan on this very day. We'll have 1.5 million additional immigrants, and where are they going to live? I listened to the member for Bennelong's comments that we are blaming migrants for this problem. We are not; we are trying to ensure that the 1.5 million migrants that you are bringing into our country will have somewhere to live, but the government has announced this increase on a day when it has been confirmed that the Labor Party's housing policy is in tatters.

Sensible increases in migration are supported. Migration provides tremendous economic benefits, tremendous social benefits, and Australia is the most successful multicultural nation in the world. But there has been no discussion about the impacts of an additional 1.5 million people on congestion, on infrastructure, on housing, on government services, on the environment or on our regions. With the number that has been presented, which is roughly 1.235 million people after four years, that's the population of a city the size of Adelaide. The number climbs to 1.495 million after five years. That is the average population of a city the size of Wollongong arriving every year. The Albanese Labor government would have to build 10 Tasmanian football stadiums a year to seat the additional arrivals. My home state of New South Wales is forecast to hit a population of more than 8.7 million people, an additional 1,669 people per week in my home state of New South Wales. Where will all of these people live?

The government's housing policy was heralded in with such fanfare and triumphalism last year. Last October Minister Collins stated $10 billion for housing: one million new homes. I turn briefly to what key stakeholders have said about Minister Collins's housing policy. AMP chief economist, Dr Shane Oliver, has noted the resurgence in underlying demand on the back of very high immigration, and that the 400,000 arrivals this year equates to demand for an extra 200,000 dwellings. The Grattan Institute noted that increasing the annual migrant intake by 40,000 a year will increase rents by up to five per cent over a decade, so when this Labor government talk to us about being serious about affordable rentals, they cannot develop a policy that has significant intellectual rigour. Not even the sycophantic Greens—not even your best friends in the other place—can bring themselves to support this policy. It's not the business of the federal government to build houses. It's never been the business of the federal government to compete. This policy has revealed you do not understand the basics of what drives the housing industry. You don't understand the building and construction industry, and you do not understand how to develop sensible policy that will address the chronic shortage of housing in this country. I mention the honourable member for Griffith, with whom I have barely ever agreed. Even he said today that he could not support it. It's not even a good enough policy for the Greens party to be able to support!

While speaking about other ministers, the Assistant Treasurer and Minister for Financial Services said on Sky, on 29 March, that more people does not mean more pressure on housing and infrastructure. That's unbelievable—from the assistant minister! The Assistant Treasurer said that.

Cassandra Fernando (Holt, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Albanese government's principle of delivering a better future for every Australian was proudly reiterated in this week's budget. I might say this budget stands in stark contrast to a typical Liberal budget. In fact, there were no—once again, no—zombie measures like those that featured in Tony Abbott's budget. This budget will provide targeted relief to various sections of our community who are doing it tough. It'll do this while producing a modest surplus—something those opposite never achieved in the last nine years. The irony is not lost on me that, as we speak in this chamber about housing and health care, the Liberals in the other place of voting against our signature Housing Australia Future Fund. I am continually amazed by the hypocrisy displayed by those opposite. They are actively blocking the creation of 30,000 new social and affordable rental homes in the fund's first five years. I, once again, encourage all senators in the other place to join Labor in creating more desperately needed social housing across the country.

Luckily, it doesn't stop there. We have increased Commonwealth rent assistance by 15 per cent, and we've provided a further $2 billion in financing for more social and affordable rental housing through the National Housing Finance and Investment Corporation. We are offering new incentives to boost the supply of rental housing by reforming arrangements for investments in build-to-rent accommodation. Further, the budget will help more Australians into homeownership through the significant expansion of eligibility criteria for the Home Guarantee Scheme. Under these positive changes, family members and friends will be eligible for joint applications under the First Home Guarantee and the Regional First Home Buyer Guarantee. This will increase the purchasing power of ordinary Australians.

Importantly, part of our housing package is committed to our veterans. There is $30 million of the Housing Australia Future Fund that is dedicated purely to supporting veterans housing. We know this is vital, as nearly 6,000 veterans find themselves homeless every year. This is why our Housing Australia Future Fund is so vital, and why I can never understand how any member of this parliament can vote against putting roofs over the heads of our veterans and our most vulnerable.

I am also pleased to report that, unlike the last nine years of Liberal government, we are actually investing in our health system, instead of gutting and privatising everything in reach. We have also invested in the largest increase to the Medicare system in 30 years, in the form of a $3.5 billion package to triple the bulk-billing incentives for GP visits. I am proud to have been in this chamber when the Treasurer announced the largest-ever increase in bulk-billing. This translates to a 30 per cent increase in the payments to bulk-billing GPs in our major cities and an increase of around 50 per cent for bulk-billing in our regional and rural areas. This historic investment means three out of five visits to the GP will be bulk billed. Further, we are making medicines cheaper for six million Australians living with chronic conditions by allowing 60 days supply of common medicines and, therefore, halving the number trips made to the GP and pharmacy. All these investments, and more, will support the Australian people and secure our economy into the future.

Only Labor governments have care and the economic skill to deliver responsible and targeted relief to those who need it. I must admit that I thought those opposite would have learned by now that immigrants are not enemies. Some of the hardest-working families in our nation are immigrants, old and new. I know this for a fact because my family—that's correct, my family—is one among them. People like me know that the opposition does not care about people like us, and they never will. That is right: they will never care about people like myself or my family. Unlike those opposite, Labor will continue to support Australian families with humane and measured policies to make sure that no-one in this country is left behind.

Ross Vasta (Bonner, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the honourable member for Holt. The discussion has concluded.