Doug Cameron (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Human Services) Share this | Hansard source

I must say, having to implore those opposite to reach a saving of $16.3 million beggars belief. This legislation, the Treasury Laws Amendment (Housing Tax Integrity) Bill 2017 and the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Fees Imposition Amendment (Vacancy Fees) Bill 2017, is an absolutely minuscule contribution to dealing with any housing issue. It goes nowhere near dealing with the problems that young families have. It goes nowhere near dealing with the problem of first home buyers having to front up against wealthy investors. It goes nowhere near that. Labor will support this, but it's more out of pity for a government that just does not get it, a government that does not understand the issues facing young people trying to get into a home, never mind those at the bottom of the housing market, who can't access social housing, who can't access public housing, who are left on the street every night in this country—105,000 at the last census. We will see far more when the most recent census announces the homeless figures in this country. Senator Hume tries to paint this as a core aspect of the budget—$16.3 million over the forward estimates. What would that buy? It might buy a couple of houses in the eastern suburbs of Sydney. That's about all. It's not going to help families in this country.

What Labor is proposing is to deal with the fundamental issue of disadvantage: capital gains tax and negative gearing allowing wealthy investors to outbid young couples trying to buy their first home in this country. What we are proposing would deliver $32.1 billion over 10 years and $565 million over the forward estimates. That is $32.1 billion currently going to wealthy investors predominantly to outbid young people trying to get into their first home. That's where Labor sees the core issues. Senator Hume stands here and talks about the coalition being committed to improving housing affordability. 'This is the core of the budget plan on housing affordability,' says Senator Hume—$16.3 million, an absolute pittance. For any senator to get up here and say that this is a really good thing on housing affordability shows just how out of touch the Turnbull government is, not only on housing affordability but on living standards for the working people of this country. To give us a little lecture about the quarter acre block—I don't think there are many quarter acre blocks left around where I live, in the lower Blue Mountains, or out in the western suburbs of Sydney. They're all getting chopped up by investors to make more money for builders, more money for investors and more money for those that fund the coalition's re-election campaigns.

Senator Hume talked about the scourge of communism—what a load of rot we have just heard! If this government were really interested in dealing with housing affordability, it would adopt the policy that we have said the alternate government—I think the next government—will implement: negative gearing and capital gains tax changes. Senator Hume talked about this being an important part of the suite of policy measures. What did the experts on this in the Grattan Institute say about the coalition's housing policies? They said that you would need an electron microscope to see any difference from all of their housing policies combined, including this one on housing affordability. The government just doesn't get it; it just doesn't understand. And the reason that they are so supportive of continuing the rort that is negative gearing and capital gains tax is that most of the money goes to Liberal electorates—to wealthy professionals and high-end income earners. That's where this money goes to. I say, and Labor says, that that $32.1 billion is better off in government funds, being spent on the issues that are important for the working class in this country, instead of continuing the inequality in this country that this type of policy delivers, the policy supported by the coalition.

Senator Hume talked about the imperative of budget repair. Well, the budget has gone out of control under this mob. They have not improved the budget one iota. They just live in fantasy land on the other side of this chamber. The Turnbull government are so out of touch, so arrogant, so unconcerned about the real issues that face Australians. They say that they're sending a strong message that people can't pay for their holidays by this change that they're proposing. We agree. But don't stand here and say that $16.3 million over the forward estimates is some fantastic gain, some fantastic fix for those who can't afford to ever think about buying a home in this country. She spoke about the ATO. One of the first things that the government did was cut the funding for the ATO. They cut the funding for the tax office so that their wealthy mates who put the money into their election coffers can continue to rip the tax system off in this country. What a pathetic rabble of a government this lot are. Senator Hume said that they understand the issues. Well, if this is how they understand the issues—and this is what she calls deep diving in to fix the problem—this is just complete nonsense. And they said they're going to target the whole continuum, meaning that they're going to deal with public housing, social housing, rent, private rentals, helping people to buy a home. This will not make a mark on that.

We think that this is appropriate to do this, but, as I've said, we do it more out of pity for a government that's completely lost its way. We will support these. But, if you really want to know what's going on, go out and talk to young people that are fronting up at auctions in the majority of the major cities around this country and see what they would think of this. My view is they would not think much of it at all. Go out and talk to the young couples that are moving down the housing chain for rentals so that they can try and afford to put a deposit together. As they move down that housing continuum, as Senator Hume talks about, they are pushing the working poor and pushing social security recipients out of housing at the bottom and onto the streets. That's what is happening under the government—a government that in the budget made all these proposals about how they were going to reconstitute the national housing agreement. They renamed it, they have met with the states and they are delivering nothing on reform. We're nearly at the end of the year. From May till now, they have not delivered one agreement with the states on how to deal with housing affordability or the crisis that is there for young people and many older people getting into housing.

What did they do? In the first budget, supported by every one of the Liberals that are over there who were in the chamber at the time of the first Liberal budget, they took $44 million a year out of support for emergency housing for disadvantaged people. They took that money out and made sure that women threatened with domestic violence would get less access to support, comfort and security. That was their first thing. We didn't hear Senator Hume talk about that. We didn't hear her talk about that first Liberal budget. We didn't hear her say anything about the austerity budget that was going to rip away security and support from some of the poorest people in this country but hand over $65 billion in tax cuts to multinational corporations and businesses, including the banks, which are making massive profits and sacking thousands of workers. Did we hear anything about that from Senator Hume? Not a word.

Let me tell you about the other area that many working people in this country depend on to ever be able to access their own home or even to be able to afford rental accommodation—the growth area for accommodation in this country—and that is access to penalty rates. I needed my penalty rates to be able to buy my first house. If I hadn't had access to penalty rates, I would never ever have been able to get on the housing ladder. My penalty rates and my capacity to have a decent job with a decent union that provided decent rights on the job gave me the capacity to access the first house that I ever bought. But this mob want to cut penalty rates. They support cuts to the penalty rates of 700,000 Australian workers, most of whom are the working poor, the real battlers, and those that need their penalty rates to actually put food on the table and a roof over their heads. We never heard anything about that from Senator Hume.

If we're really talking about doing something in relation to housing and homelessness and housing affordability, we are saying, 'Yes, we'll cop this—this miniscule proposition. We'll cop it. We'll support it.' But what we are saying is that you actually need to do something about negative gearing and capital gains tax. You also need to do more than mouth off, which is basically what the government have done about doing anything more substantive. What we are saying is that we will deal with negative gearing, we will deal with capital gains tax and we will also make sure that there is a plan in place to try to increase housing stock in this country. The Productivity Commission recently came out with a report that said that one of the ways that you can deal with in regard to housing is to give people in public housing a choice. We have a situation where 4.4 per cent of housing in this country is public housing and social housing. How can anyone ever get choice if that's the level of public housing and social housing that we have in this country? It's a nonsense.

In Glasgow, where I come from, I was brought up in what were called the prefabs. In Scotland, they were basically big caravans without wheels. That was the transitional housing after the war until a major government investment went into housing. They were stinking hot in the summer—and it does happen in Scotland; now and again you it gets hot—and freezing cold in the winter, which was most of the time. I can tell you that that is not the way forward. We need decent housing. We need environmentally sustainable housing. We need to do what the UK government's doing. It is a conservative government that is looking at how it can increase the stock of public and social housing. It has undertaken what's called the Farmer review. The Farmer review is looking at how they can actually create an industry in the UK with fabricated off-site homes of high quality and high environmental sustainability, create jobs and make it cheaper to build quality homes and erect them around the country. They need to look at these issues rather than trying to come in here and say that $16.3 million over the forward estimates is a great example of the coalition doing something about housing. It is absolute nonsense.

The coalition refuse to reform negative gearing and capital gains tax. They closed the National Rental Affordability Scheme that provided 38,000 new affordable housing units and was on track to achieve its target of 50,000. They scrapped the first home saver accounts scheme, which was helping people save for their first home, and they're trying to put a copycat proposal in this non-delivery of their budget proposals. They closed their ears and their eyes to the growing evidence of a housing affordability crisis by abolishing the National Housing Supply Council, and the Prime Minister's Council on Homelessness. That is their record on the other side with housing and homelessness—absolutely pathetic: a pathetic government, a pathetic budget, a pathetic response to housing and homelessness. They cut $44 million a year out of capital funding for homelessness services. That meant that young kids, coming out of home care, ended up on the streets, and that is why the NGOs are telling me that one of the key issues that has to be dealt with is young people coming out of home care, especially young women, ending up on the street and being groomed by some of the hard-heads out there. It's absolutely ridiculous. They cut out $44 million a year. Older women who end up with no superannuation, lose their husband and have nowhere to live have nowhere to go on housing and homelessness under this government.

The speeches those opposite were making a couple of years ago suggested that this was not a federal government responsibility; it was the states' responsibility. But Labor sees putting a roof over people's head as a fundamental responsibility of a federal government. That's why we will have a housing minister, that's why we will have someone there dealing with the states in a proper way. That's why we will reform the housing agreement nationally and why we will be saying to state governments and local governments that inclusionary zoning should be considered. If the business community is going to make squillions out of housing, some of it must go back into housing for the poorer people in this country. This mob do not have a clue. They think that two or three or four per cent inclusionary zoning will fix it. They think a bond aggregator without further government support will fix it. They have rocks in their head, they are an absolute rabble and they just don't get it.