Jan McLucas (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Mental Health) Share this | Hansard source

() (): I present the report of the Economics References Committee Out of reach? The Australian housing affordability challengeand move:

That the Senate take note of the report.

I am very pleased to speak to the tabling of the committee's report entitled Out of reach? The Australian housing affordability challenge. This is an important report, which documents the current state of affordability of housing in both the home ownership and rental-housing markets in our country.

The majority report finds, based on the evidence, that a significant number of Australians are not enjoying the security and comfort of affordable and appropriate housing and that, currently, Australia's housing market is not meeting the needs of all Australians.

We know that people who experience poor housing affordability are put at a higher risk of experiencing poor outcomes throughout their life. Poor housing affordability damages economic productivity, employment opportunities and increases risks to the stability of the financial system.

Families in housing stress struggle with their family budget, keeping food on the table, keeping their children engaged at school and maintaining their employment. So with this background the majority report calls for national leadership when it comes to housing and homelessness policy and programs. To achieve national leadership this government must change its approach. Firstly, there must be a minister for housing and homelessness. Witness after witness coming before our committee bemoaned the lack of a housing minister and the lack of engagement on housing policy by this government. Further, many argued that the minister responsible for housing needs to have an economic focus rather than just a welfare-based approach—that is, to be a housing minister, not a housing welfare minister.

Secondly, national leadership requires serious engagement with both local government and the states and territories—engagement that is not happening at present. This government has abolished the institutional architecture that facilitated good, cross-government planning and negotiation on service delivery. The National Housing Supply Council—gone! The COAG Select Council on Housing and Homelessness has also gone. The Prime Ministers Council on Homelessness has also gone. Gone are the governance structures that could and should exist to work across the complexity of intergovernmental responsibilities that naturally exist in housing policy. Access to safe, secure and affordable housing affects every Australian, and, as such, all levels of government need to be engaged.

Thirdly, the committee consistently heard that we need a national affordable housing plan. We heard this from right across the sector: from academics and researchers; from housing peak bodies like National Shelter, the Community Housing Federation of Australia and Homelessness Australia; from ACOSS; and from local governments, but also from the development sector—from the UDIA and MBA, to name just two. The City Futures Research Centre's submission detailed the attributes of a good national plan, and I commend their submission to the Senate; we quoted from it extensively in the report. The report also says:

In the committee's view, the Australian Government should be the driving force behind the development and implementation of—

such a plan.

So it was with significant disappointment that we saw that the government senators' dissenting report has reverted to the tired lines that we have heard from Liberal governments for a very long time. Over and over, they responded to the report's recommendations with: 'Not supported—is a matter for state and territory governments,' or, 'Not supported—is a state and territory issue,' or, 'Not supported—inconsistent with government's red tape reduction agenda.'

Mr Acting Deputy President Edwards, you know that government senators attended these hearings. They read the submissions. They heard, as did we, the calls for bi- and multipartisanship; of the need for certainty in land use and infrastructure planning and in decisions about population policy and taxation policy. They heard, as did we, that decisions taken by one government—or, indeed, even one part of a government—can and do impact housing affordability, albeit mostly unintentionally. So that is why Labor senators were keen to find areas of agreement, to reach the bipartisanship that was called for. It is disappointing, to say the least, that that was not achieved—or, in fact, even attempted.

Our majority report canvasses state and local government taxes, fees and charges, and zoning, planning and development approval processes, and recommends, in part, that the state and territory governments phase out conveyancing stamp duties, and notes that the ACT's recent stamp duty reforms provide a template or a starting point for others to consider. The committee heard from many submitters about the need for the Australian government to engage in decision making about our major cities, about urban regeneration and the use of transport corridors, about timely and coordinated infrastructure delivery, and so that is why the committee has recommended the re-establishment of the Urban Policy Forum.

Many witnesses and submitters discussed the effects of negative gearing and capital gains tax on affordability. In order to encourage an informed public debate on these contested issues, the committee recommends that if these issues are not addressed in the government's tax white paper then Treasury should prepare and publish a study on the influence of negative gearing and CGT on affordability of housing. It was disappointing that Treasury was unable to quantify the effect of the negative gearing arrangements on housing prices or rental affordability.

Time does not allow a full discussion of all of the considerations and the 40 recommendations of the committee, but that does not diminish their importance. I do, however, want to highlight one further issue.

In December last year, the government terminated the Housing and Homelessness Program in the Department of Social Services from June 2015. This resulted in the withdrawal of funding to National Shelter, to the Community Housing Federation of Australia and to Homelessness Australia, and a change to the funding arrangements for the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute, AHURI. I want to record my concern about the evidence from the department that was vague about the reasons that decision was taken. One can only come to the conclusion that the decision taken was a political one.

Finally, I want to place on record Labor senators' thanks to all 231 organisations and individuals who submitted to this important inquiry. I thank those who presented evidence to the hearings, including witnesses who provided extra material for our consideration. I thank the Parliamentary Library staff who undertook some research at my request. And, most importantly, I want to thank the secretariat of the Senate Economics References Committee, Dr Kathleen Dermody, Dr Sean Turner, Ms Morana Kavgic and Ms Ashlee Hill, for their professionalism, for their patience and for their good humour.

I conclude by quoting from the press release from the UDIA that was released on Monday welcoming the tabling of this report. Mr Michael Corcoran says:

The Senate Inquiry into Affordable Housing report makes a valuable contribution to the national discussion on housing affordability …

And he concludes by saying:

We now well and truly know what the problems are; it's high time all levels of government engage with industry to identify and take the necessary actions to solve the increasing lack of affordable housing.

I commend this report to the Senate. I commend the report to the government. And I encourage this government to start to engage with housing and homelessness policy, for the good of all Australians.