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

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

The government's failure to address Australia's deteriorating housing crisis.

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

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

Michael Sukkar (Deakin, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

() (): On Tuesday night, in the budget, what we saw from this government on housing was no new money, no new homes and no new ideas, just the same old Labor housing crisis. And we see today in question time this very self-satisfied group of frontbenchers talking about Labor being the champion of new homes. It's inconvenient to remind the government that they have been in government for two years. What do we find from the ABS? We find that, under this government, the number of loans provided for the purchase or construction of new homes is the lowest since records have been kept, since 2002. In the last 22 years we have not seen a worse outcome for new homes then we have under this government. There are no new homes and no new money in the budget, and we see fewer homes being built than we have seen in at least 22 years—and, if the ABS had kept longer records, I suspect it would be for decades more than that. We have a failure at the hands of this government, with fewer homes being built.

What's the one thing you wouldn't do, as a government, if you had record low numbers of homes being built? From the collective wisdom around the cabinet table, what do you think is the one thing you probably would not do? You would not ramp up migration to the highest levels we have seen in our history. In the 18 months to December, under this government, we've seen 265,000 homes built. It's important to mention that, among those 265,000 homes, there's a portion—it's hard to calculate, but it's anywhere from 15 per cent to 25 per cent—that are not net increases in homes; they're just knockdown rebuilds. It's a new home, but it's replacing an old one. There have been 265,000 homes built in the first 18 months of this government, and how many migrants do you think this government brought in over that period? About 900,000. Where on earth does the government think those people are going to live?

What do we see? We see vacancy rates now at lower than one per cent in some of our capital cities. What does that mean? We all see the videos that go around online of the people queueing up, around the block, when there's an 'open for inspection' for a rental. What do we see? We see it becoming more and more difficult for people to find a rental in the suburbs in which they are living, especially for families with children at a local school. There are people in this country who just cannot find one and, devastatingly, end up homeless—and we've seen homelessness spike under this government—or who have to move a long way from where they're established, where their children go to school and where their community is. What do we see from this government? We just see a group of ministers grinning and talking about how wonderfully well they're doing with housing. Well, the truth is, as I said, we have fewer homes being built. We have first home buyers at their lowest level since the last time this mob was in government. They have completely waved the white flag on first home ownership. When I was the housing minister in the former coalition government, we got the number of first home buyers in a year up to 180,000. There were 180,000 first home buyers in 2021. It was not by accident; it was through programs like our Home Guarantee Scheme or the HomeBuilder program or the First Home Super Saver Scheme. What do we have them running at this year? This financial year thus far we are at 90,000 first home buyers, about half as many as under the former government. This government is failing on building homes, it is failing for renters and it is failing for new home buyers.

I have some bad news for the House and for Australians. If you think we are in a housing crisis now, if you think it is intolerable that you can't get a rental, that your children may never face the prospect or have the opportunity of owning their own home, it is about to get worse. The latest housing approval data we have seen has approvals down even further. That means over the next 12 to 18 months, over the next two years, even fewer homes are going to be built. You will have fewer homes built over the next 18 months to two years. You have to take the government at their word when they say, 'We are going to reverse our form from the last two years. We are going to reduce migration. We are going to have a stunning form reversal and we are now going to now reduce migration.' Well, as the shadow minister quite rightly pointed out in government, let's look at what they promise versus what they deliver.

In their first budget, the government only missed their forecast in migrants by a rounding error of 297,000 people, just 297,000 people out. There is nothing at all in the budget on Tuesday night that will give any Australian comfort that this mob even understand the problem. The truth is you have to accept that you have created a problem. You have to put your hand up and admit that you have caused untold damage to this country before you can get to fixing it, and we don't see any of that from this government. We see nothing from this government. The only policies assisting first home buyers in this country are those policies that were put in place by the former government.

We see no new ideas from this government. What did they announce in the lead-up to be budget? They announced $11.3 billion of extra money. That was the announcement. That was what the media release said—$11.3 billion of extra money. What did we find out? Of the $11.3 billion of so-called extra money, $9.3 of it was to continue an agreement already in place for 15 years. So it is an agreement that has been in place for just a lazy 15 years that, through their good graces, they are going to renew and that is somehow new money.

Then we saw there was another billion dollars for the National Housing Finance Infrastructure Facility, a facility that I established and created as minister—a very worthy policy. But if you then look at the fine detail, the minister announced that money on 31 October last year. What forced her to do that? It was the dirty deal they did in the Senate with the crossbench. They are now trying to rehash old announcements, bundle them together, which, again, highlights that they do not get the problem. They do not appreciate they have created an unprecedented housing crisis in this country.

As a product of migrants, I love migration. I am a great beneficiary of it. But it has to be planned migration. You have to have an idea of where on earth the people will live, because we have a duty to the Australians who are here now. We have a duty to the people who live here now that they can get a roof over their heads. If you're bringing in 900,000 migrants when there are only 265,000 homes being built, which does not even keep our head above water for our natural population increase, it is an absolute stain and a shame that this government will never live down, because they're selling out the next generation of this country.

We will not wave the white flag on homeownership on this side of the House. On this side of the House we believe that every Australian should have the opportunity of homeownership, like generations before us. We are very proud of our policies to support those first home buyers. As I said, whether it's helping people get a home with a deposit of as little as through the Home Guarantee Scheme or getting access to their own money in superannuation to buy their own home—because that is their money. If they choose to leave it in their superannuation, good luck to them. But they should have the choice to use that to supplement their savings for a deposit to get into a home. There's a generation of Australians this government and this Labor Party have left behind. They want big corporates owning all the houses. They want lifelong renters. We want Australians who have that opportunity and we'll fight for them. The Leader of the Opposition will be fighting for them tonight.

Stephen Jones (Whitlam, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It takes a lot of courage for the member for Deakin to come to the dispatch box saying he's in support of a motion on housing affordability, because there's not a person in this House that has done more to make housing in this country more unaffordable for Australians trying to get into the housing market. On his watch the average price of housing went up 30 per cent. There is not a person in this House who has done more to make housing less affordable for young Australians who are trying to get into the housing market than the member for Deakin. I expected when he came to the dispatch box that he'd present at least an apology or, if not an apology, an idea—an idea that was going to do something to build more houses and make housing more affordable. There was lots of sloganeering, lots of negativity but not one new idea.

Their big idea to resolve the housing problem that young Australians are facing—particularly those who are either renting or who want to get into the housing market—is to bust the superannuation system. We know because expert after expert—indeed, coalition MP after coalition MP—have pointed out that this is a wrongheaded policy. If you want to make housing more affordable, you don't tip millions and millions of dollars into the demand side, pushing up the prices. You don't have to take it from us; have a look at independent research that has looked at this. The consequence of their policy is to drive up median house prices over $75,000. The member for Deakin wants a pat on the back. He already drove house prices up 30 per cent over the three years when he was housing minister. He wants to add another $75,000 to the median price of a house. And he says this is going to do something about housing affordability? These blokes have got rocks in their heads! They call themselves responsible economic managers; they don't know the basics about economics. They don't know the basics about supply demand. Not one new house will be built under their policy.

You don't have to take my word for it. Look at what members on their own side have said about it—because this is not a new policy. It's been recycled every three years for the last 30 years. Leader of the Opposition Peter Dutton had this to say: 'It's not good policy.' The Deputy Leader of the Opposition said:

Young people need their super for retirement, not to try to take pressure off an urban housing bubble …

The member for Deakin himself had this to say when he was housing minister:

If all a government does is try to pump further liquidity into the residential housing market, inevitably all you do is push up housing prices.

From his own lips. Thirty per cent. When he last had an opportunity to do something about the housing crisis, their singular policy wouldn't have built one new house. It'll put a few more people in the queue at every housing auction on a Saturday. There'll be more people in the queue bidding up the price by $75,000 for an average house at auction—$75,000 more unaffordable under their policy—but not one new house. Not one new house will be built under this policy.

I'll be interested to see what the shadow finance minister has to say after the Leader of the Opposition makes his speech tonight. They've been out briefing the gallery that this is their singular big idea to resolve housing prices—wreck the superannuation system. Senator Jane Hume, when she was asked this question said, 'I would imagine in the short term you might see a bump in house prices.' So, young people who are thinking about whether they're going to be able to afford a house at the housing auction or the sales next Saturday will know this: as hard as things are right now, if this mob get their way then there will be $75,000 extra on the price of the median house in any auction they go to around the country. That's a hard number: a $75,000 increase in housing. You don't have to take it from us. Take it from the Leader of the Opposition: 'It's not good policy.' Take it from Senator Jane Hume, the shadow finance minister, who still has some sway in their show, I understand. She imagines—and she's right—that you'll 'see a bump in house prices'.

We are faced with a stark choice. There is the policy of the government, which is to build more houses and to assist young people into the housing market. Then there is the policy of the opposition, which is to fulfil their long-held desire to smash the superannuation system. It won't build one new home, but it will smash the superannuation system. There is the policy of the government, which is to make housing more affordable, and the policy of the opposition, which is to make housing more expensive. There is the policy that is about helping Australians, particularly young Australians, to buy a home, and there are the policy proposals of the opposition, which will make it even harder.

The government has an ambitious agenda to build 1.2 million homes by the end of the decade through our Homes for Australia plan—in this budget an additional $1 billion to get homes built sooner and a new $9.3 billion five-year national agreement on social housing and homelessness. The shadow minister, when he was minister, couldn't even utter the word 'homelessness', could not even speak the word 'homelessness', did not think it was a part of his portfolio responsibility. Under our policies, there is record investment in social and affordable housing, including the additional $2 billion that was provided to state and territory governments last year to ensure that we could get urgent investment into social and affordable housing.

The member for Deakin mocked this policy, but it's actually working. He seems to think there is something wrong in going to a stock of public housing that is currently unfit for human habitation and renovating that housing to ensure that it can be used. You've got an empty building, empty units, unfit for habitation, and you invest in renovating and upgrading that, and you can move more people into it, including homeless people—and that's somehow a policy failure? Well, I see that as a policy success, because it gets more houses into the market sooner and gives more people who are currently homeless a roof over their head.

This is the sort of approach we are deploying. The member for Deakin thinks it's something to laugh at. We think it's a good thing that we're putting roofs over the heads of people who need it the most. We're putting in place new provisions to incentivise the boost in supply of rental housing by changing arrangements for investments to ensure that we can boost build-to-rent accommodation, because we understand that this is an entire ecosystem. Yes, we need to ensure that we've got more social and affordable housing. Yes, we need to ensure that we've got build-to-rent housing, because there will still be a strong demand for rental accommodation, particularly for key worker housing or for workers who are temporarily locating to a particular area. We need more rental accommodation, and our build-to-rent policies are designed to meet that need. We are not only ensuring that young Australians are not asked to give up on the dream of owning their own home but we are also ensuring that young Australians don't have to make a choice that nobody else in this parliament was ever asked to make.

Under the plan proposed by the coalition, young Australians are being asked to make a choice between whether they save for their retirement or whether they own their own home. There is not a person in this House who has been asked to make that choice. Our message to young Australians is that we want to ensure you can own your own home. We are putting in place the policies to ensure that you can do it, whether it's the Help to Buy scheme, whether it is the Home Loan Guarantee Scheme or whether it's our record investments in affordable housing. They are all designed to ensure young Australians can live up to their dream—that every generation prior to that has had—of owning their own home, but not at the expense of raiding their superannuation. We know what the cost of that policy is—devastating for young Australians. According to Treasury analysis, a 35-year-old median income owner who withdraws $74,000 will be $100,000 worse off, a 22 per cent reduction. The proposition is simple: we do not believe that Australians should have to make a choice between their superannuation and owning a home, and that is the difference between us and them.

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

Labor promised before May 2022 they would fix the housing crisis. What are they doing now they are in office? Pile in more people. Immigration is up to 1.7 million, up 200,000 from the last budget, because 'Chalmernomics' is not based on supply and demand; it is based on government and more government. Labor's central housing policy, the Help to Buy Scheme, is not a homeownership policy; it is a home nationalisation policy, a scheme passed using a gag motion, like we saw today when the government gagged debate on the national vehicle efficiency standard.

The Albanese government is an arrogant and secretive government hell-bent on delivering a big government agenda and avoiding any scrutiny while doing it. Labor gaslights Australians, saying, 'Things are getting better,' but they are not. The Australian public know it. They have figured this government out in record time for a first-term government. While the Australian dream of buying and owning your own home is disappearing, Labor is living it's best life, living its dream of big government, controlling people's lives. Now they are taking equity in people's houses.

Construction of new homes is in freefall under this government. The Australian Bureau of Statistics has highlighted the weakest two quarters of construction in more than a decade, with just 38,397 homes commencing construction in the December 2023 quarter, and 163,836 in the 2023 calendar year. Peak bodies have confirmed the government will miss its promise of a 1.2 million homes by 2029. The State of the Housing System report estimates that by 2029 just 943,000 homes will be built, while others say it could be as low as 800,000. The Centre for International Economics Modelling recently showed four out of five new homes that could have been built under Labor's housing policies will never see a shovel hit the ground due to productivity-sapping industrial relations changes and volatile conditions which will erode 80 per cent of the gains in projected housing stock.

Housing approvals for the detached homes are already at their lowest level since the Gillard government. New homes starts have sunk to an 11-year low. The Domain first home buyer report earlier this year indicated that it takes almost five years to save the 20 per cent deposit to buy a home. Under Labor, house prices are at record highs, with only 13 per cent of homes being sold considered affordable on an average income. Real disposable incomes have collapsed by 7.5 per cent per capita since Labor came to power through price increases outpacing wages, rising taxes and rising mortgage repayments. In the two years since the election, Australians have paid an extra $2,000 per month on an average mortgage, and lending for the purchase or construction of new homes remains at a 20-year low. Under the former coalition government, interest rates were cut nine times and only rose once, but, in just two years, rates have risen 12 times under Labor.

The fact of the matter is that Australians are being locked out of the housing market. Labor's federal budget housing announcements offer no new money, no new ideas and no new homes—nothing for first home buyers and nothing for renters. Labor is clutching at straws and completely out of ideas. By contrast, when the coalition was in government we created the Home Guarantee Scheme, which is now supporting one in three first home buyers. No matter how often Labor tries to take credit for it, it's actually our deal. Since 2019, the coalition's housing policies in government supported more than 300,000 Australians into homeownership. On our watch, there were 160,000 first home buyers in 2021, a 70 per cent increase on the average of the previous decade. The coalition is the party of housing affordability, private home ownership and supporting first home buyers, and we are proud of it.

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

There's only so much you can listen to of the nonsense of those opposite when they literally had a policy that they would not build a single home when they were in government. They were not interested. They said that social housing provision was the responsibility of the states. That's what the previous minister said—that it was the responsibility of the states. Under the Abbott-Morrison-Turnbull coalitions, they said that they weren't going to build social housing.

We took a different approach. As soon as we came into government, we established the Housing Australia Future Fund. True to form, when they were in government, they had a policy not to build social homes, and, when they were in opposition, they took that same policy and voted against the establishment of the Housing Australia Future Fund. They came in here and twisted themselves into a thousand different knots and pieces and put themselves into this absolute twizzle. The truth is that they voted against the construction of social housing homes in this place.

Round 1 of the Housing Australia Future Fund applications has closed, and, lo and behold, community housing providers right around the country have lined up to apply for funding and for the funding model that has been very carefully produced by the Minister for Housing. There is an oversubscription to the Housing Australia Future Fund, which I think is a fantastic endorsement of a carefully-thought-out policy that is going to, over the long-term, provide a consistent stream of funds and investment into social housing. That is just the first thing that this government has done since coming into government around the provision of housing, and it's all about ensuring that the federal government is at the table, working together with our states and territories to ensure that housing is a priority for this government.

Those opposite like to come in here and say, 'There's no new money in this budget.' I commend them on their laziness and their ignorance, because if you actually opened up the budget papers you would read that there is billions of dollars of new investments to go on top of the billions of dollars of investments that have already been made since coming into government. The first one that I want to mention is the $1 billion under the National Housing Infrastructure Facility for the creation of new housing for young people as well as women and children escaping violence. That's not nothing, in my book. A billion dollars for women and children escaping violence is not nothing. Those opposite should reflect on whether they say that that is nothing, because it is not. Nor is investing in the provision of housing for young people.

I've spent a lot of time with housing providers recently. I had the absolute honour on Youth Homelessness Matters Day to launch the April edition of Parity,which is a publication put on by those in the housing sector. It was at the Melbourne City Mission in South Melbourne, in my electorate. It is a publication by the Victorian Council to Homeless Persons. On that day, we heard from young people who had been in and out of the housing sector and in and out of the social housing sector. One of the things that is essential is that for young people to have a home it can't just be any home. It needs to be one that is appropriate for young people; it needs to be one where, for people under the age of 18, there are levels of supervision and support. It needs to have all the wraparound services to ensure that schooling and education and health needs of a young person can be met.

One of the things this money will do is go directly towards those young people who have the needs and requirements of a young person so that they can get back on their feet, so that they can get their lives back in order and so that, whatever their circumstances were when they found themselves homeless, those young people know it is not their fault, but that they are often a victim of circumstances. This funding going towards those young people is something I am extremely proud of. I'm also extremely proud of the funding going towards the too many people turned away from crisis accommodation and domestic violence shelters.

There is new money. There is an ongoing pipeline of work that I am truly proud of. We will continue to invest in affordable housing and we'll continue to work hard to get more people and more Australians into safe and secure homes.

Pat Conaghan (Cowper, National Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In my electorate of Cowper is the township of Bellingen—they don't normally vote my way—and there is a group called Housing Matters Action Group. When Housing Matters and the Royal Freemasons, who own a dilapidated aged-care home in Bellingen, came up with a proposal to change that into 42 one- and two-bedroom units for women over 55, I thought it was a brilliant idea. I advocated and fought for it as hard as I could, as did the state member, the member of Oxley, and we both attained $5 million each to put towards changing this old aged-care home into 42 units. All the approvals went through. All the red tape was cut. All the green tape was cut. Nobody suggested it was pork-barrelling, because it was going towards something that would provide housing for women over 55. We know that women over 55 who are facing marriage breakdowns and domestic violence are those at the peak of danger.

As we all know, costs have gone up significantly over the past 18 months to two years. We see it in all the funding that has been through. When the RFBI and Housing Matters were getting final approvals and signing everything off, they came back to me and told me the costs had gone up by 30 per cent. That's not unusual. So we wrote to the minister, Minister King. We explained the circumstances. We explained the proposal. We said how important it was. Do you know what the response was? 'No more money. We're not giving you any more money for this project.' That meant the money that was there could only fund 21 units.

We went back to the minister and said, 'Can we work within the parameters of the agreement?' They said: 'No. If you're only going to provide 21 units, that is outside the 30 per cent within the agreement.' So now it's all up in the air as to whether or not the Royal Freemasons will go ahead. They're providing the land. They're providing the certainty that these units would get built. The former coalition provided the money—it's not costing any more in those Labor budgets. It has been put aside; it's a line item. Yet Labor comes in here and says how important it is to provide housing. Well, I'm sorry, but the response from the minister's office doesn't tell that tale. I call on the minister to review that. I call on the minister to provide that additional 30 per cent funding for this project, for those women who are facing homelessness in the Bellingen Shire and surrounds.

For Labor to come in here and say we don't care about homelessness! There's another project in Kempsey, where we fought for $6.5 million for 26 one- and two-bedroom units for mums and kids fleeing domestic violence and for those on the street—long-term accommodation. So, when you come in here and you accuse us of doing nothing, these are the stories you need to hear. What we don't want to see is division and political partisanship on these very issues. If the minister wants to listen and have a look at that proposal again, I would welcome her up to cut the ribbon. I don't even have to be there. Minister King, you can go up and cut the ribbon. All I'm concerned about is the 42 women over the age of 55 who will have a roof over their heads.

Tania Lawrence (Hasluck, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Liberal Party's descent into deceit knows no bounds—fabrication after falsification. Putting aside even the dubious grammar of this particular MPI, there very well may be genuine criticism or a difference in policy approach worth raising as a matter of public importance. But you would never know it from the utter nonsense the Liberal Party opposition put up in these debates.

Do the opposition truly believe, as they bring this motion, that there is anyone anywhere in Australia, from Leichhardt to Forrest, who believes that the housing crisis which the country is facing today and which this government, the Albanese government, is addressing in concert with the states somehow started yesterday? Housing doesn't happen overnight, nor does a housing crisis. The crisis that we now face was caused by the serial failure of successive coalition ministers over the nine too-long years of a coalition government. Where was the Abbott government on housing? Where was the Turnbull government? Where was the Morrison government on housing? In truth, none of these coalition governments could ever get their own house in order, so it's no wonder they weren't able to manage housing policy and left us with the issues that we now face.

Given that abject failure, you would think that a reasonable opposition would be just a little contrite and concerned for the people who need housing and would perhaps fall in behind the government's efforts. Instead we find the opposition trying to block this government's housing agenda at every turn. The Housing Australia Future Fund is a magnificent piece of legacy legislation. It was opposed by those opposite. They voted against it. The opposition voted against billions of dollars of investment in perpetuity for social and affordable housing. The Greens initially voted against it because they saw that they could get some political mileage out of doing so. That has meant that every dollar that comes out of the fund will be delayed by six months. That's the Greens' contribution: delay in affordable housing—disappointing. But the coalition's position is much worse. The opposition voted against the Housing Australia Future Fund. We took it to the election. We had a mandate for it. Those opposite love talking about mandates when it suits them. They voted against it. They voted against affordable housing in perpetuity. In other words, when people who need housing access it through programs funded under the Housing Australia Future Fund, they will not be able to thank the coalition. They'll be able to thank the Greens for the delay and they'll be able to trace the existence of that housing policy back to Labor policy, but they won't be able to thank the opposition for it—not a bit. Thanks for nothing in perpetuity.

I think that was a mistake. I don't just mean a policy mistake. Of course they got the policy wrong. I mean I think it was a big political mistake. I think people are going to judge the coalition quite harshly on it, especially those who need housing. You'd hope that, having made that mistake, the coalition would actually learn from it. They've had some time—we passed the Housing Australia Future Fund legislation in September last year. But, no, they've learnt nothing, because now we have the coalition opposing the Help to Buy legislation. The states are all waiting on it. It is abundantly clear that those on the opposition benches feel particularly uncomfortable in budget week. They should feel even more uncomfortable when speaking on housing policy. Who voted against the Housing Australia Future Fund? Who opposes the Help to Buy scheme? When we've got funds out to the states through the Social Housing Accelerator, who is complaining? Only the coalition. Time and time again, they have voted against our efforts to implement sensible housing policy aimed at increasing supply and affordability. They have obstructed progress at every turn, choosing instead to prioritise their own narrow interests over the needs of the community. And what do we see them doing now? They're talking up the raiding of super accounts for housing, a policy which they all said was a bad idea just a few years ago. The member for Dickson said it was a bad idea in 2017. Senator Hume, then too, said it would push up prices. The raiding of super accounts was roundly criticised by the West Australian last week as a 'really dumb idea'. We are grateful and fortunate to have an Albanese government to fix the housing crisis.

Keith Wolahan (Menzies, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is an element of theatre to question time and to matters of public importance. I'm sure I'm not alone in recalling emails or calls where the public have wished there was a little bit less theatre. The title of what we're discussing here is 'matters of public importance'. After the day-to-day stresses of cost of living, there is no more important matter to the public right now than housing. I hear it from grandparents who are worried that their children and grandchildren won't have the opportunities that they had. They'll say: 'I know I've done well. I own my house. I have one or two'—or more—'investment properties. Something's got to change.' I hear that again and again. On social media, young people will often express themselves through satire and parody. For those of you on X, I ask you to go and look at the account Reserve Bank of Property. It's humorous but it's cutting. On YouTube, there is a person called Biko Konstantinos who speaks about this every few days, with passion and concern. They do so because the extent of the problem is so bad.

The average Australian earns $95,000 a year. The median income is $65,000. Let's look at professions that we care about that take a lot of education and practice. Nurses start off at $62,000 in Victoria, police on $75,000 and teachers on $77,000. We value them and care for them. But, right now, looking at my home state of Victoria, in my home city of Melbourne, for them to save a deposit of 20 per cent it's going to take 21 years. That's the median. Then, assuming they do that or they are fortunate enough to come from a family where their mum and dad or grandparents can bankroll them—and not everyone has that opportunity—the disconnect with those average and median wages that they earn means that, in the entirety of the 321 suburbs of Melbourne, on the average income there are three where they can afford the median house price levels. If you take all the prices on realestate.com.au or domain.com.au and you pick the middle price of that suburb, at that price they can afford only three of the 321 suburbs. With units, it's 21. That's on the average income, which includes billionaires—and we've heard a lot about billionaires this week. On the median income—you pick 10 Victorians and take halfway through their incomes—people can afford zero houses out of the 321 suburbs. There is no home for them. With units, it's zero. Some may say: 'Who buys a house on their own? Who buys a unit on their own? They're usually part of a couple or a household.' We have that data. On the median household income with the median price in the 321 suburbs of Melbourne, that household can afford zero houses and can afford a unit in 15 of the suburbs. That's as good as it gets. That's where we are right now.

What does that mean? That means young Australians are giving up on the very dream that their parents and grandparents perhaps took for granted and the very dream that drives migrants to move heaven and earth to come here, like my family and so many in this chamber. What will it mean for generations to come? It will mean that Australia will be a place that is less about hard work, intellect and taking risk and more about whether you are born into the right family and whether you are from a landowning family. That's not the sort of Australia people move heaven and earth to come to. That's not the sort of Australia we pride ourselves in.

No government is perfect. There is a lot of whataboutism in this debate, but we have to start by recognising the scale of the problem. It matters to Australians of all generations, and it must matter to us here in this place.

Steve Georganas (Adelaide, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is nothing as important as housing. It is the first tick in the box when you want a family or a human being to feel secure. You need a roof over your head. That is one of the aspirations of just about every human being around the world. As governments, we are very responsible and have a responsibility to ensure that we can provide, through the policies in this place, for people to be able to buy affordable housing or to rent or to get a roof over their heads.

I was quite surprised when I sat here and heard the shadow minister, the member for Deakin, open his speech. He started off with something like, 'No new money for housing, no new ideas, no new programs, no new money.' For a moment, I thought he may be making a confession about the last 10 years of the former government where there was no new money, there were no new ideas and there were no new programs. We remember the minister and others back in the Abbott-Turnbull years saying that it was not their responsibility. This was a government wiping their hands of housing, saying it was not their responsibility but the responsibility of state ministers. After 10 years of inaction, they want to come in here and move a matter of public importance such as this. It's shameful. You look at their actions for 10 years—wiping their hands of housing and saying it's not their responsibility but the responsibility of the states. They do nothing for 10 years, then, as soon as they're in opposition, they want to talk about housing.

We saw the cost of housing in the last 10 years rise by approximately 49 per cent and by 30 per cent in the last three years of their government. There was absolute inaction by them then. What did they do? They came up with a botched plan about getting people to use the savings of their superannuation to spend on housing. Not one single house would be built through their proposal, but it would destroy superannuation. It would destroy people's retirement funds, and that's the real reason they want that policy, because they've always been against superannuation. They've never liked it, because it assists workers to retire with dignity. This is a backdoor way of absolutely destroying workers' accumulated funds for their retirement.

They voted against the Housing Australia Future Fund again and again, and now they're blocking the Help to Buy scheme. They've done nothing to boost supply but are now planning to increase demand with policies that all experts say will make housing less affordable. In fact, we heard the Assistant Treasurer say that, through their policies, all that will happen is that approximately $79,000 will be added to each property that's sold and there will be a longer line of people competing for housing, which will do nothing for one new house. Absolutely nothing. It's a policy which won't build a single house, a policy which will push up prices and a policy which will ruin people's retirement. That's the plan from those opposite—a plan they themselves have roundly criticised. We heard other speakers quote the Leader of the Opposition, the then housing minister and others.

We know that, as I said, housing is so important. Since coming to office, the Minister for Housing on this side has brought the state and territory housing ministers together seven times because we know it is a real issue and an issue that needs the attention of government to do all that we can. They never brought the housing ministers together at any point in time. The former government's legacy of inaction and poor policies saw housing construction costs increase by 49 per cent in the decade up to 2022 and over 30 per cent just in the last three years. The HomeBuilder program is a case in point. This poorly designed policy, which cost five times what was originally planned, brought forward a surge in construction costs and renovations that stretched supply chains already impacted by the pandemic back then. As the Reserve Bank government pointed out, the results were spiralling construction costs and growing delays.

To quote the Leader of the Opposition:

I'm good at the sort of pulling down and wrecking part, and then I need to get the builder to clean it all up.

They were the words of the Leader of the Opposition. (Time expired)

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

It's my pleasure to rise to speak on today's matter of public importance:

The Government's failure to address Australia's deteriorating housing crisis.

Homeownership has always been the great Australian dream, and history, of course, tells us that the coalition has always been the party of homeownership, leading the way with policies that make it simple and affordable for all Australians who want to own a home to do so.

In contrast, history also records that homeownership and rent affordability are always worse under a Labor government. Regardless of the spin, the numbers and data don't lie. Under this Labor government, the number of loans provided for the purchase or construction of new homes is at the lowest level since the data started being recorded in 2002—even worse than the lowest previous year, when another Labor government was in power in 2008. The data also shows us that just 38,397 homes were started in the December quarter last year and just 163,836 were started in the entire 2023 year—both the lowest figures in over a decade. The future also looks even more bleak, with approvals on new dwellings in 2023 the weakest since 2012, another year when the Labor government was in power.

Why is this so? There are many factors that contribute to this. First is the crazy immigration policy that has seen immigration reach unprecedented levels. In February alone there were 100,000 immigrants, all of whom need a place to live. This, coupled with the last 25 years of telling our young people that, if they didn't have a university degree, they were stupid and a second-class citizen, has caused us to have massive trades shortages. Let's not forget the 12 interest rate rises that this Labor government has presided over. They have forced the Reserve Bank to use the only mechanism it has—interest rates—to mitigate the poor economic decisions and mismanagement of the Australian economy by this Labor government. Make no mistake: this crisis is due to no other reason than this government's poor handling of the Australian economy.

These interest rate rises, of course, flow on to those who rent. Most rental properties are owned by everyday Australian mums and dads as an investment to help them in retirement. Many of these homes have a mortgage that they pay with a combination of the rent they collect and a top-up from their own earnings. When the average mortgage increases by $400 a week, how else can these everyday Aussies meet their mortgage commitments apart from putting up the rents to some degree and then tipping in a few more dollars from their own earnings. I doubt they're going to get a $400-per-week pay rise to cover the increased mortgage payments, so mortgage holders and renters both miss out.

The law of supply and demand doesn't stop there. We know that, if there are 500 people looking for a home and there are 200 homes available, the price will be higher as demand outstrips supply. If there are a thousand homes available for those 500 people, the price will be lower as there'll be competition as supply is greater than demand. So we need to ensure we are building more homes faster than the population is growing. This means curbing immigration and ensuring we are doing all we can to get people to take up trades.

The budget was so disappointing. There was nothing for new home buyers but a rise in rental assistance, which in the main, of course, will go into the pockets of landlords. Even community housing providers, in the main, take the entire rental assistance payment of their tenants plus, in some cases, a top-up. So a rise in rent assistance will go straight to them and not to the tenant. Public housing is a joke as well. In the six-year period from 2015 to 2020, the federal government provided $1.7 billion to the Queensland state government for social housing. In that same period, we saw a net increase in public housing of just 241 dwellings. That's an average of over $7,300,000 per home, which is a complete joke and a waste of taxpayers' hard-earned money.

For solutions, what should we be doing as governments around the country? First, address the supply-and-demand issue. Reduce immigration until housing supply catches up to the demand. Second, incentivise and encourage young people to take up a trade so we have the workforce to build the homes to meet the demand. Third, stop giving state and territory governments money for housing, and instead give it to not-for-profits like Salvos, BlueCare, Lifeline or the like, and clearly state how many dwellings we expect for the taxpayer funds we provide. Fourth, stop foreign ownerships so only Australian citizens and permanent residents can purchase a home here. Fifth, state and local governments ensure that land is released in a faster manner to ensure we have supply. Sixth, get the economy back under control so the Reserve Bank can lower interest rates and make homeownership more affordable again. And, seventh, allow Australians to use their own super—their own money—to use as a deposit for their first home.

Tracey Roberts (Pearce, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Just two days ago, we sat in this place to listen to our wonderful Treasurer, the Hon. Jim Chalmers, deliver a carefully considered, effective budget; therefore, I want to say that the use of the words 'failure' and 'government' in the topic matter of the MPI today is laughable. If those opposite had actually read the budget, they would know why I am compelled to be on my feet today responding. The Albanese Labor government understands that many Australians are facing serious housing challenges after a decade of neglect by the Liberal-National government.

It is clear that Australia doesn't have enough homes. This is why the Albanese Labor government is intensifying the construction of new homes right across the country, including in my electorate of Pearce, which is one of the largest and fastest-growing areas in Australia, and we welcome this news greatly. We are building more homes for homebuyers, more homes for renters, more homes for Australians in every single part of the country. The 2024-25 budget includes $6.2 billion in new investment to build more homes, more quickly, bringing the Albanese Labor government's new housing initiatives to $32 billion. My electorate of Pearce has nearly 50,000 families who call our fabulous community home. Compared to singles or groups, my Pearce families comprise 80 per cent of our population, compared to 70 per cent Australia wide.

We know that Australians need more affordable housing, and for that we need more homes. The Albanese Labor government has a definitive and decisive plan in the budget for this. The Homes for Australia Plan will help meet Australia's ambitious goal of building 1.2 million homes from 1 July this year. Constructing homes requires significant time and effort; it's not an instant process. We know this. However, increasing supply stands as the most effective and constant solution to Australia's housing deficit, and the Albanese Labor government doesn't shy away from hard work and supporting fellow Australians. We're also providing relief for renters, who are under increasing pressure.

The $6.2 billion in new investment in the budget will rapidly increase construction, with a $1 billion boost for states and territories. We'll provide 20,000 fee-free TAFE and pre-apprenticeship places to enable more tradies to build the homes that Australia is so desperate for. It will help nearly one million Australian households with the cost of rent by delivering $1.9 billion for the first back-to-back increase in Commonwealth rent assistance in more than 30 years. Let me repeat that: it will be the very first back-to-back increase to Commonwealth rent assistance in more than 30 years. It will provide up to $1.9 billion in concessional finance for community housing providers and other charities. It will deliver additional funding for the new $9.3 billion national agreement on social housing and homelessness, which will begin on 1 July. This includes a doubling of the Commonwealth homelessness fund to $400 million every year, matched by states and territories. It will improve conditions and address overcrowding through an additional $842.8 million investment in remote housing in the Northern Territory. The budget will also include $1 billion in the National Housing Infrastructure Facility towards crisis centres and additional accommodation for women and children experiencing domestic violence, which is incredibly sad.

Our Homes for Australia Plan is working across the board to deliver more help to build, to rent and to buy. The Albanese Labor government understands that we cannot afford to aim low or lack ambition, which is what those opposite continue to do. They continue to say no. They laugh. This is why our housing reforms are the most significant in a generation and are so incredibly important.

To finish off, all of the above signifies the failure of those opposite, who are missing in action. Not only are we building houses; we're building infrastructure right around the country. The Albanese Labor government is clearly doing what we do best: looking after our fellow Australians who have chosen to call our beautiful country home. Whether you were born here or you're an immigrant, you deserve to live somewhere, to be a part of a community, to be loved, to be cared for and to be supported. I am so incredibly proud to be a member of the Albanese Labor government, who care about community and who don't look at words on a piece of paper and effectively look people in the eye and say, 'We don't care,' which is what those opposite appear to do on a very regular basis.

Ian Goodenough (Moore, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The discussion has concluded.