Paul Scarr (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I'm delighted to have the opportunity to rise to speak in favour of this bill, the National Housing Finance and Investment Corporation Amendment Bill, this afternoon. In doing so, I note that this is the delivery of another Liberal-National government commitment made at the last federal election.

At the outset, I'd like to address a number of comments that have been made in relation to this bill by some of the previous speakers. Firstly, in relation to my good friend Senator Bragg from New South Wales: he is absolutely right when he says that homeownership, the right of every single family in this country to own their own home, was part of the philosophical basis of the establishment of the Liberal Party, and we're honoured to be in Canberra this week to celebrate the anniversary of the establishment of this great party.

Menzies, in his 'Forgotten people' speech, spoke about the importance of the family home—not just the bricks and mortar, but the spirit of the family as it's encapsulated in that home to engender that sense of family which is so crucial to our country. I should note that over the course of Menzies' time in parliament, homeownership materially increased in this country—more Australian families had the opportunity to own and live in their own home than was previously the case. And that is the aim of this legislation that is being considered here today.

In relation to the comments made by Senator Faruqi, I must say that I am always impressed with the sincerity Senator Faruqi brings to any debate, and there is no question whatsoever that she has a genuine concern for those in our community who need more support, be it from the government sector or non-government sector, and I do admire that. On this occasion, however, I must disagree, with respect, with a number of points raised by Senator Faruqi. I don't believe that the housing system in this country is broken. I think the evidence to that is to the contrary. There is no question that everyone—government at all levels, so federal government, state government and local government; non-government organisations; and people in the community—has an interest to make sure that every single person in this country has the opportunity to have a permanent roof over their head. I absolutely agree with that.

The government does, in fact, have a number of initiatives where it is supporting measures to assist the homeless in our country, and I'd just like to run through a number of these as part of this discussion. As I said, the government understands that having a roof over your head is crucial to the welfare of all Australians. The government is contributing more than $6 billion a year to support states and territories in that regard, and that includes $4.6 billion annually through the Commonwealth Rent Assistance program, more than $1.5 billion per year through the new National Housing and Homelessness Agreement, and $620 million over five years from 1 July 2018 in dedicated funding for homelessness services. So there are measures being taken by the federal government to address homelessness in this country.

The other point I'd like to make in relation to the issue of homelessness in this country is that, and I believe this passionately, we should not bring ideology to this topic. It's a question of solutions to try and assist people the best way we know how, to give them the benefit of that homeownership. In my own home state of Queensland, the previous state Newman government had introduced what was called the Logan Renewal Initiative—one of the most disadvantaged communities in my home state of Queensland. Under that project, 2,600 units of public housing were being transferred to a non-government organisation—a community, not-for-profit organisation. Through that, it was expected that an additional 2,300 homes would have been constructed by that non-government, not-for-profit organisation to provide homes for those people who are on the public housing waiting list that Senator Faruqi referred to. Unfortunately, it was scrapped on ideological grounds by the Palaszczuk government when it came to power. And what was its replacement? The construction of 70 public housing units. That's it!

So there was a system where the not-for-profit sector could have been used and mobilised in this country. The local community in Logan and the good people of Logan are passionate about providing housing for the local people in that area, many of whom are new Australians and many of whom have fallen on hard times and need assistance. It was going to have had 4,900 public housing units, and what was the state government's answer in my home state of Queensland? Seventy—on purely ideological grounds.

The reason I refer to that is to emphasise my point that ideology needs to be taken out of this debate. On an ideological basis, there would be some who would say that the government shouldn't be involved in this at all. But why is the government stepping in through this legislation to provide assistance? In this regard, I want to come back to a comment that my good friend Senator Brockman made earlier in the debate, and that is that we have an opportunity, especially in this low-interest-rate environment, to assist potential first home buyers to make up ground and to build up their first deposit to 20 per cent. That is what this legislation is seeking to do. You've saved and you've got your five per cent, but you need an additional hand. You need an additional hand to get your deposit up to 20 per cent. We know there has been no better time—certainly whilst I've been alive—to service a home loan in this country than today. There has been no better time, with historically low interest rates. But if first home buyers can be given just that bit of a boost to put their foot on the first step of the ladder of homeownership then they'll do the rest.

I note Senator Roberts's comments with respect to this scheme. I'd simply say that we should keep it in perspective. We need to keep it in perspective. Last year there was a total of 386,000 residential property transactions in this country. What we're talking about here is providing assistance, with respect to a guarantee to cover that five per cent to 20 per cent margin, for up to 10,000 first home buyers a year. That's 10,000 out of 386,000—or, hopefully, 10,000 out of 396,000, because there'll be some people who'll be able to buy their first home who were not able to do it prior to this legislation coming into effect.

To summarise, I think this legislation does a number of things. Firstly, it provides that well-needed boost for first home buyers to enter the market for the first time and to achieve that goal of owning the family home. As I said, the research indicates, the facts indicate, that we're only talking about 10,000 out of a potential 400,000 property transactions a year. So, while Senator Roberts raised concerns about what impact this would have on market prices, I think the reality is that we're looking at a marginal impact at best. I'm quite satisfied that this bill does not offend any principle in that regard.

Secondly, research is part of the mandate of the corporation, and I think that that is absolutely fundamental to this legislation. We need the research to continue to look at housing affordability in this country, so I'm pleased that research will be part of the mandate, as it will be enacted in this legislation if it's supported by the Senate today. Thirdly, I think the legislation is measured and moderate. We're talking about the increment between five per cent and 20 per cent—it could be between 10 per cent and 20 per cent in some cases—and we're only talking about 10,000 transactions out of a potential annual pool of residential property transactions of 386,000 or 400,000 a year. So this is a measured and moderate proposal.

Fourthly, it's responsive to the regions, and as a senator representing the great state of Queensland, which is the most decentralised state in our Federation, I must say we need to do more. We need to do more to assist first home buyers to buy their first home in the regions. We need to do more to actually attract first home buyers to move from Sydney and Melbourne, where the property market is more challenging, and to take advantage of the great opportunities in my state of Queensland, especially in regional Queensland.

Last week I attended a committee in Mackay that was looking at jobs in the regions, and we heard testimony from the Mayor of Mackay during that hearing. He emphasised to us that in Mackay at the moment there are something between 1,200 and 1,400 job vacancies. There are opportunities in this country, and I believe that we need to do a better job of marrying up those people who are seeking the opportunity with those places where the opportunities exist. Hopefully, when the mandate is considered, and consideration is given as to where people will be residing—when they can take advantage of this incremental benefit to help them to afford a guarantee—that will be considered as part of the mix, because there are tremendous opportunities in regional Australia, including, in my home state, in Mackay.

Lastly, I note that there is provision for appropriate reporting with respect to how this proposal progresses. The National Housing Finance and Investment Corporation will be reporting annually with respect to the take-up of the guarantee and all of the other material information that we need to know with respect to the performance of this legislative proposal, including with respect to the outcome of the research which is undertaken within the mandate.

In conclusion, I must say that I'm delighted today to stand up and support this legislation. I'm delighted to support the government meeting another one of its election commitments and delighted to be part of assisting those first home buyers aspiring to homeownership to achieve their dreams.