Fiona Phillips (Gilmore, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I want to thank the member for Higgins for bringing forward this very important motion, which I'm very happy to support. It doesn't matter where you go on the New South Wales South Coast; the lack of affordable and social housing is at a crisis point. Every week, I hear from more and more people that are homeless or at risk of being homeless. And it doesn't discriminate. Families are at risk. Older people suddenly find themselves with nowhere to live.

We took our $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund plan to the 2022 federal election. It's a plan that will provide 30,000 homes in the first five years. Importantly, it will be set up forever, regardless of who is in government, providing a steady supply of affordable and social homes for those that need them most—older people, families, frontline workers, veterans. It's a plan that has widespread support from industry, community housing and homelessness providers.

But what is now blocking the Housing Australia Future Fund and more social and affordable homes? The Liberals and the Greens. It's hard to believe that anyone in the parliament could block affordable and social housing. But we're getting on with it. That's why the Albanese government is delivering immediate action, like the $2 billion Social Housing Accelerator to deliver thousands of new social rental homes across Australia, including $650 million in New South Wales. We have an ambitious housing agenda which will boost the supply of all housing with more social housing, more affordable housing, more homes to rent and more homes to buy.

We established the Regional First Home Buyer Guarantee three months early, helping regional people purchase a home with as little as a five per cent deposit and avoiding paying lenders mortgage insurance. We have widened the remit of the National Housing Infrastructure Facility, making up to $575 million available to invest immediately in social and affordable rental homes. We are working with the states and territories through the National Housing Accord and National Cabinet to support planning and zoning reforms to contribute to the aspiration of building one million new homes over five years from 2024; as well as investing $350 million in additional federal funding to deliver 10,000 affordable rental homes over five years from 2024 as part of the accord, matched by the states and territories. We have established the National Housing Supply and Affordability Council to provide expert advice to government on housing supply and affordability. We have provided an additional $67.5 million of funding to the states and territories to help tackle homelessness challenges as part of the one-year extension to the National Housing and Homelessness Agreement. The list goes on.

Recently I visited two local disability providers, Yumaro at Moruya and Jindelara at Ulladulla, that are crying out to build more independent living for people with a disability. I attended the opening of the Southern Youth and Family Services opening of accommodation for young people at Warilla, which is a fantastic project that looks amazing. But there is already a thirst from Southern Youth and Family Services for a similar facility in the Nowra area. Then there are the many people who contact my office, needing help with somewhere to live—like Lee, from Ulladulla. Lee contacted my office in 2020, saying that she was homeless and had nowhere to go. It was a very sad and, unfortunately, common story. Lee was told that, if she changed her area of preference to another town, she would be more likely to get housing. But Lee had family and connections in Ulladulla. She was born and raised there and, understandably, didn't want to leave. I did all I could to help Lee, and, thankfully, she is now in housing in Ulladulla. But it shouldn't have been that difficult.

There is so much demand for affordable and social housing, but who are getting in the way? The Liberals and the Greens—that's who. The Liberals and Greens are now blocking more affordable and social homes, and every day of delay by the Liberals and Greens means $1.3 million is not being spent on social and affordable housing for people who need it most. So I say to the Liberals and Greens: get out of the way and back this secure, ongoing pipeline of funding for social and affordable housing. We'll keep delivering to ensure that more people have a safe and affordable place to call home.

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Shadow Minister for International Development and the Pacific) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I say to the member for Gilmore: you still had 25 seconds; you could have bagged the Greens a little bit more. But I digress. The social and housing situation, in terms of affordability and availability, is a major issue, but the Greens are using what is essentially and primarily a state issue to garner votes in inner-city electorates to win federal seats. I know the Prime Minister has called this out and, to that extent, I agree with him. These days, all too often, the difference between state and federal spheres of government is diluted by people who should know better and who do know better but who use situations and policy areas, such as housing, to get votes. They know it is a state issue, yet they push on with federal seats in mind, and more's the pity.

We do need more houses available for people who are doing it tough. They're doing it tough for a number of reasons. It's not only because we've got a Labor government in power and cost-of-living issues are going through the roof, and people are finding it so difficult to pay their power bills, their grocery bills and their rents, which are going up and up. But it's not the federal government's prerogative, responsibility or remit to put freezes in place on rents or to put situations in place whereby people who are quite rightly, honestly and accountably putting in place such things as negative gearing, which has been in place since the Hawke government. These are things which enable people to get into the housing market. These are things which enable people, quite rightly, to make the most of their own finances. What the Greens would do, if they had control, would be to have this parliament run everything, and that's not how it works. The states can't be let off the hook.

I note that the Premier of New South Wales is in Wagga Wagga today on his first visit since he took charge of the state. I note that he has indicated, via Twitter, that he's having a bit of a crack at the fact: 'I might be in Wagga Wagga right now, but that won't stop me cheering on the mighty Matildas—let's bring this home!' I don't know why he feels he needs to have a whack at Wagga Wagga, which is the largest inland city New South Wales. It's a very progressive and very forward-thinking city, and he's making out that he's in some remote backwater. I note that yesterday he visited Gavin King's Prefabulous in Wagga and talked about that as part of a solution to the housing crisis. To that extent, I agree with him; they're doing a very, very good job.

It's not just about making funds available; it's also about having the resources and the workforce in place to build these social houses and housing in general. I note that Metricon last year was doing it very tough. Queensland firm Solido Builders, a small company specialising in luxury houses, appointed administrators last year. Perth based Home Innovation builders went into liquidation on the same day as another Western Australian company, New Sensation Homes, was placed in the hands of administrators. Condev Construction in Queensland specialised in multiunit residential constructions. It went into liquidation. ProBuild, a major construction company, was placed in administration. Other homebuilding companies going belly up included two Tasmanian based firms, Hotondo in February last year and Inside Out Construction in November 2021. They're doing it tough. Dennis Family Homes, Melbourne based, is scaling back its regional operations.

What's this government doing about this? Very little, making it so tough, not addressing the major issues. You all go around, Labor members, and talk at your constituents instead of listening to them, talking about the things that quite frankly they're not discussing around the barbecues, around the sporting fields and around the weekend events. Start to get a little bit in touch with the electorate. Yes, we do need more social houses. What are you doing about it, apart from reading from your Labor dirt and talking points?

Louise Miller-Frost (Boothby, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Albanese government has a broad agenda for safe and affordable housing. It's focused on providing security and dignity for all Australians, and I'm proud to be part of a government that knows a secure home will give more Australians the foundation for a better future. Our comprehensive strategy will create thousands of social and affordable homes across Australia. The housing sector is a complex one, so one strategy is not enough. The Minister for Housing is implementing a raft of strategies to address the housing and homelessness issues across the spectrum. Our strategy aims to increase housing supply sooner but also to provide a pipeline of secure funding for housing developments into the future, because this is an ongoing problem.

We know that homelessness numbers jumped between the 2016 and 2021 censuses. We also know housing, both rental and for purchase, is increasingly unaffordable for many Australians, so the responses need to be urgent. But they also need to be effective and evidence based. Ultimately the one thing that ends homelessness is housing. What ends the rental rises is more rental supply—basic demand-supply economics. The Albanese government has a plan that incorporates a number of strategies to address housing and homelessness across the spectrum: more houses, more homes. We recently announced an additional $2 billion in funding, bringing the Albanese government's investment in housing and homelessness to more than $9.5 billion in this financial year. This additional $2 billion needs to be spent or committed by the states and territories within two years and result in a net gain in social housing properties. This is real dollars, driving real change, building more homes.

But that's not all. This commitment builds on the actions we've already taken immediately to address Australia's serious housing shortages: $575 million in funding unlocked in the National Housing Infrastructure Facility and a widening of its remit, with houses already under construction across the country; and the Housing Accord we announced in last year's budget, which includes federal funding to deliver 10,000 affordable homes over five years from 2024. The Regional First Home Buyer Guarantee is already helping thousands of Australians into homeownership. We're delivering new action to help Australian renters, expand opportunities for homeownership and bolster frontline homelessness services. We're delivering a $67.5 million boost to homelessness to states and territories over the next year, and this funding will assist frontline homelessness services across the country through the $1.7 billion National Housing and Homelessness Agreement currently being renegotiated.

In my career working in the homelessness sector I saw firsthand the inaction by the former Liberal-National government. Their inaction has left Australians with significant challenges across the country. I recently went back to Catherine House, an organisation I led prior to coming to this place, and saw their plans to rebuild and expand. Catherine House, in Adelaide, is a women's homelessness service that provides crisis accommodation and support services for women experiencing homelessness across South Australia. They have plans to expand their homelessness service so they accommodate women currently, right now, sleeping rough on the streets of Adelaide, homeless in the middle of this cold, cold winter. Their plans for Catherine House will directly result in expanded crisis accommodation but also in social housing. I saw their plans, which are ready to go—shovel-ready. All they need is the Housing Australia Future Fund legislation. They need certainty of funding.

And that's not just for this development. Social and community housing providers need to be able to plan for the future, for developments next year and the year after, and that is what the Housing Australia Future Fund does. So I'm appealing to the Liberals and the Greens to stop their posturing and do what is right for the Australian people. The HAFF is backed by homelessness services, community housing providers, Shelter Australia, the building industry, developers—the people who actually know how the sector works and what works for homelessness. What makes a difference for homelessness is social housing. When I talk to the sector, they tell me that what they need is certainty of funding going into the future. They are ready to go, shovel-ready; they are waiting for the Housing Australia Future Fund; and they are watching us—watching what happens here in this place and watching those opposite block solutions. So again I say to those opposite: stop standing in the way of more housing.

Helen Haines (Indi, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Higgins for this motion. But, while members of the government like to list the ways in which they're addressing the housing crisis across Australia, I want to draw attention to what is largely missing from this debate: housing for regional, rural and remote Australians. The member for Higgins's only mention of regional Australia is the Regional First Home Buyer Guarantee, but what the member fails to mention is what the take-up of the guarantee's 10,000 places actually is. People in the electorate of Indi don't talk to me about this guarantee, and I wonder if one of the reasons is that there simply aren't many homes to purchase.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: in rural and regional Australia we were told, 'Build it and they will come.' Well, they've come and we haven't built it. Regional Australia grew by 70,000 people in the first year of the pandemic. The combination of increased regional migration, rising rental prices, a decline in affordable housing supply and a rise in living costs is having devastating effects. According to the national campaign Everybody's Home, 61.4 per cent of mortgage holders in my electorate of Indi are experiencing mortgage stress. On top of that, 40.6 per cent of renters in Indi are experiencing rental stress. Homelessness rates are deeply concerning. According to the 2021 census, homelessness in our region has increased by 19 per cent since the 2016 census. This housing crisis is happening not just in the cities but in the country areas too, and the government must not forget this.

I'm the first to acknowledge that there is no silver bullet to this problem, but I've been consulting widely on what solutions there could be, and what I've heard is that we need funding for critical enabling infrastructure. I'm talking about poles and pavement, drainage, sewerage. It's not sexy, there's no ribbon to cut, but to build homes in rural and regional Australia we need this kind of infrastructure. Regional areas struggle to attract developer investment to build this infrastructure, and, with big geography and a small ratepayer base, local councils don't have the money to build it on their own.

In Wangaratta there's a perfect example of this challenge. The local council have earmarked a former technical school site to deliver social and affordable and key worker housing in a specialised precinct—to deliver the vision of 200 safe, quality, energy-efficient and beautiful houses for young people, pensioners and essential workers. But they need funding to clear the site, including asbestos removal. They also need to build water and sewerage infrastructure. They then can get going with the building.

That's why I've put forward a proposal for government to set up a dedicated regional housing infrastructure fund. This fund would unlock investment in new houses by building the basic infrastructure needed for new multitype developments—private housing, built-to-rent social housing and essential worker housing. It would have the flexibility to fund social infrastructure and provide local government assistance to fast planning approvals.

I've also called on the government to ensure their proposed Housing Australia Future Fund, the HAFF, delivers for regional, rural and remote Australians. I successfully secured amendments to ensure the Housing Supply and Affordability Council could have a regional focus when undertaking its work. So much more could be done to improve this bill for regional Australia, and, with negotiations on foot, we have the chance to do that. I introduced further amendments that would ensure an object of the HAFF is to deliver funding in regional, rural and remote Australia, including funding for the critical enabling infrastructure that I've described.

I urge my colleagues in the Senate to take up these amendments. Rural Australia makes up 30 per cent of our population, provides 90 per cent of the food we eat and brings in 50 per cent of Australia's tourism income. Rural Councils Victoria estimates that, if we don't build the extra homes we need, we could lose up to $1 billion in gross regional product over the next 15 years. That's a call to action if ever I heard one. I know the government is focused on delivering bricks and mortar housing, but funding for the roads, footpaths and streetlights is a key part of this discussion. It's a key part of the solution for regional Australia.

I call on the government, the Minister for Housing and the Prime Minister: help us on this fundamental piece of work that needs to be done in order to unlock housing in rural, regional and remote Australia.

Matt Burnell (Spence, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in favour of the motion moved by the member for Higgins. It is especially poignant to be moving a motion on social housing now that it is National Homelessness Week. There are a number of events being held within this place over the course of the week, and I'd encourage members to attend if they are able to. This is not to say that I think anyone is in an ivory tower, but, for all of us, it would be worth our time to learn a bit more about the what, why and how. It would give members a wake-up call as to why funding social housing is something that we need to start doing yesterday.

Most of us can see the overt signs of homelessness and unstable housing situations within the borders of our electorates. We know that homelessness isn't just those sleeping rough; it's people without a truly fixed address—those who couch surf, even though to those who don't have a stable housing situation due to short-term periodic leases. Whether visible or not, the effects are felt. It affects someone's ability to keep a job, to send their kids to school on time every day, to find a job and to participate in society.

In my state of South Australia, we have a long and proud history of providing social housing, with the South Australian Housing Trust having been created in 1936. It was the nation's first state housing authority, created during the time of a Liberal government in South Australia. Over the long course of history, social housing hasn't been a partisan issue, though—over the course of our history—the extent of its importance has been. Having more stocks of social housing and affordable housing should be an aim of any government, but we know that growth in social and affordable housing certainly stalled over the previous nine years.

I don't want to necessarily put the causation before the correlation—I doubt we would see any degree of remorse from those opposite when the numbers were put to them, in any case. However, last week we saw the member for Deakin, in his contribution to this debate, ride out of the gates to attack Daniel Andrews. Premier Daniel Andrews may be a mortal, but he is someone who, in the heads of the members of the Victorian Liberal Party, appears to live rent free, even during a rental crisis. I suppose there is room for that now, given the vacancy in their heads now the Greens are again frenemies with the Liberal Party and the National Party. Blocking the Housing Australia Future Fund legislation in the other place with new friends—new old friends—I'd like to hope they aren't blocking the legislation for the same reason, but it does make for a very confused coalition of ideals. One side cares about the issue; the other, displayed over nine years in government, could not care less about social and affordable housing. I remember a time when a Liberal MP could say the words 'Labor-Greens coalition' three times, turn around and expect to see that they had summoned a pair of Birkenstocks; now the footwear of their partnership will more closely resemble boat shoes, I suppose. Whatever the footwear in question, it'll be what they are wearing whilst they run away from their responsibility to the Australian people by blocking much-needed funds into social and affordable housing.

Putting a fund in place that provides funds for social housing is important, given we cannot always rely on the better angels of future governments. This is clearly evidenced by the previous government and its lack of care in funding social housing. It had a missed opportunity with HomeBuilder and instead ignored social housing completely. A fund, much like our Future Fund, lasts the test of time and helps to fund unfunded public sector superannuation liabilities. Sovereign funds are not some alien concept. I know the Greens would portray this as playing the market, imagining the Prime Minister in front of his laptop in the wee hours of the morning exclaiming that some kind of digital coin is going to the moon—ludicrous.

We know that, by having a fund which generates a baseline funding level for social housing, no matter the party in government, those funds are earmarked for this purpose so we can avoid what we have seen under nine years of Liberal-National government. We can futureproof social housing against the whims of a future Liberal-National government or Liberal-Green government—who knows. There is always going to be a mechanism allowing for a steady level of investment in social housing, and this can only be a good thing. Every penny beyond that will depend on the economic climate at the time and—as history would suggest—whether there is a Labor government in power at the time. I thank the House.

Kylea Tink (North Sydney, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In rising to speak to the motion moved by the member for Higgins on the critically important topic of the nation's housing policy, I want to offer the observation that Higgins and North Sydney have a lot in common. Like North Sydney, in 2022 Higgins voters felt that the then government wasn't listening to them and in turn they voted to see politics done differently. What this should mean is genuine, transparent and non-politically motivated debate on how to get better outcomes for communities, but, sadly, this has not been the case. In an area as complex as housing, we all need to admit that we won't find perfect solutions overnight, but this should not stop us from being ambitious and having the debate.

In North Sydney many are facing extreme frustrations in finding an affordable and suitable home to rent or buy. The reality is property prices and lack of availability mean that most people who work in the electorate don't actually live there. Most notably, essential workers, including those in the health and aged-care sectors and teaching sectors, are literally having to travel sometimes up to an hour just to get to work. As a result, not surprisingly, many are taking roles in other communities.

Housing has become a fundamental issue of equity between homeowners and renters, between workers and residents and across generations. As I've previously stated in this place, the Housing Affordability Future Fund is a step in the right direction but it's a very small and very unambitious step. Revitalising our public and affordable housing stock is critically important and we need to commit more public and private sector funding towards the challenge over the longer term, but that's just one piece of the puzzle. Other parts of the puzzle include rental property quality and security. In a recent survey we conducted on the rental experience, one of my constituents said:

Our rental has no heating or cooling, it is damp and we had a mould problem for months. We are often feeling unwell due to the cold. But we can't move because it is too hard to find rentals.

Another constituent told me:

We are afraid to bother our landlord with simple repair tasks, such as faulty storage, for fear of reprisal.

This government has proclaimed that it is working with the states' housing ministers to help develop more aligned rental laws that address tenancy rights. However, there is little transparency over this process. Consequently the people of North Sydney remain in the dark about whether those discussions will result in tangible improvements to people's current living situations. I receive complaints from people regularly about substandard rental quality. In this context I ask the government to let the people of North Sydney know how much of this new funding, whether it be via the HAFF or via the housing accelerator fund, will go towards basic maintenance of our existing social housing stock. In the end, efficiency can be just as important as availability and affordability, as we seek to build true equity.

There are 51,000 people on the waiting list for social housing in New South Wales. I am yet to develop any true assurance that this government's policies are going to make a meaningful dent in that number. Building more homes won't be easy. The level of building approvals for new homes is now lower than it has been in 10 years, and home building costs are the highest. We don't have enough skilled tradespeople to meet demand. We must provide the right training to address these shortages and ensure our immigration system brings the workers that we need into our country. These issues are systemic and go beyond the current housing crisis debate.

For these reasons, housing policy experts have been calling for strategic long-term planning for housing for many years. But this complex ecosystem is full of vested interests. Every time we look at more ambitious changes—be they reviewing tax settings, better aligning transport and service infrastructure planning or raising expectations on developers to guarantee affordable housing—vested interests swoop in and throw their weight around, often leading to a poorer outcome for our community.

With all of this said, I do support the HAFF Bill and getting the Housing Supply and Affordability Council up and running so that they can look at a range of out-of-the-box solutions and help break the current gridlock. I do not underestimate the size of the challenge ahead. We need to have an honest discussion not dominated by political posturing. Housing policy should be about a safe and adequate home for all, not a political football.

Brian Mitchell (Lyons, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for North Sydney, the member for Indi and other members for their contributions, and I thank the member for Higgins for bringing on this debate.

I want to address a couple of issues mentioned by the member for North Sydney. Yes, it is complex but it's also simple. When you build more houses, you increase supply. When you increase supply, you bring down the pressure on prices and rents. You also increase the capacity for the quality issues that you mentioned, Member for North Sydney. When you've got more choice in the market, tenants suddenly have more power in the market. Tenants can say to landlords, 'Unless you fix the lighting and the damp, I'm moving down the road to the other rental that has become available.' You can only increase choice by increasing supply, and that's what will be before the Senate: a fund to increase supply by 30,000 new homes in the next five years. It is a fund that will fund housing forever, a perpetual fund. Ten billion dollars is the biggest single housing investment proposed by any government in more than 10 years. Ten billion dollars is nothing to sneeze at. That's in addition to all the other things the government's doing through record rent relief and the help-to-buy and help-to-rent schemes, including across regional Australia.

I note that in her contribution the member for Indi called for an expansion of the HAFF, and I think she has foreshadowed some amendments to the bill. To be honest, I'm a bit concerned by what she said—although I think she has good intentions—about expanding the remit of the HAFF to include support for infrastructure like drainage and sewerage. That would chip away at it. We want the HAFF to build houses.

Hon. Members:

Honourable members interjecting—

Brian Mitchell (Lyons, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Well, if I'm mistaken I'll take that on board, but that's what I heard.

I don't pretend to know what goes on in the electorate offices of the opposition or the Greens, but I suspect that it's similar to what goes on in my office, where every single day my staff and I are talking to constituents who are desperate for safe and secure housing. This has traditionally been an issue for state governments. It is increasingly coming to our orbit, and we are determined to tackle it head-on.

In the past few months I've spoken to working families, older women, single parents, grandparents caring for grandchildren, students, and women and children escaping domestic violence. All have stories of spending years on public housing waiting lists—some on emergency housing waiting lists—and making do in the meantime by sleeping rough or relying on friends or family for a roof over their heads. The answer is to increase supply, to build more houses.

My office staff and I do all that we can to assist each and every one of the people who come to ask for help, but the stark reality is that there are just not enough houses to house people. We've got 4½ thousand people on the housing waiting list in Tasmania alone. The member for North Sydney says there are 51,000 people in New South Wales. We can argue till we're blue in the face about the reasons we got here. I can tell you it's about decades of underinvestment by successive state governments across the nation. But the federal government are not willing to sit idly by. We have a plan of action backed by a $10 billion fund. It's a plan of action we took to the election.

I simply cannot fathom how members opposite, particularly the Greens members on the crossbench and the Greens members of the Senate, are blocking the bill. They blocked the last bill. We've reintroduced it. We want it to go through. Tasmanian Greens senators Nick McKim and Peter Whish-Wilson need to look homeless Tasmanians in the eye in Homelessness Week and explain why they have been blocking the building of 30,000 homes over the next five years, 6,000 of them to be built in Tasmania, that will put roofs over heads. They say they want cheaper rents. You get cheaper rates by increasing supply. Tasmanian Liberal senators Jonathon Duniam, Wendy Askew, Claire Chandler and Richard Colbeck need to explain why they were happy for billions of dollars to be rorted under their government but they aren't prepared to support billions being invested for vulnerable Australians.

There is a very real human cost to the political parlour games being played by the Greens and the Liberals. It's a cost borne by people who have no roof over their head or who are stuck in a violent home because there is nowhere else to go. This week politicians of all stripes will be going out for Homelessness Week and sleeping rough. That doesn't build houses. It's a nice symbolic gesture. We don't need symbolic gestures. We need the Housing Australia Future Fund passed by the Senate.

Debate interrupted.